Joan Ruddock is Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Climate Change, Biodiversity and Waste. Her responsibilities include:

• Climate Change Bill


• Domestic Climate Change Adaptation


• Sustainable Consumption and Production


• Citizen Engagement


• Environmental Transformation Fund International


• Waste and Recycling


• Environment Council Deputy


• Sponsorship of Kew


• Biodiversity


• Ecosystems Services


• Environmental Regulation


• Domestic Forestry

Why is it still voluntary for businesses and households to recycle?

If they want to Local Authorities can make recycling by households compulsory. Some authorities, for example Barnet, are already using compulsory recycling. But we've made such progress in the last few years that I don't think we really need to force people to do their bit. Its much better to encourage them and help them to do things more easily, and the government tries to support Councils in trying to get the best possible service.

Is the government going to fine individuals for not recycling?

The Government doesn't fine people but Councils can if they run a compulsory system and people don't do their recycling. However, we are very keen to encourage more recycling and that's why we're going to allow 5 local authorities to pilot waste incentive schemes.

The experiments would include a charge for householders who recycled the least and money back for those who recycled the most. Any money raised through charges would be paid back to residents via rebates. These experiments will probably start next year but we will learn the results before we consider whether such schemes should be rolled out throughout the country.

What measures will the government put in place to curb the use of plastic bags and excessive packaging, for instance by supermarkets?

I know people are very concerned about too much packaging and there are existing laws to get the producers of packaging to recycle more and to reduce what they produce in the first place. There are some successes - twice as much packaging is recycled today than 10 years ago, but we still haven't got the reductions that we need.

Two years ago the majority of grocery retailers signed up to an agreement to halt the growth of packaging waste by the end of this year and we will soon be discussing with them what progress they are making. On plastic bags we have an agreement with major retailers to reduce the environmental impact of single use bags by a quarter by the end of this year.

People will have seen the results of this agreement in the supermarkets where the single use bags have got thinner and lighter and more and more long life bags have been made available. However, the government wants to go further to end the use of give away single use bags altogether. We will be meeting the British Retail Consortium and other interested parties to determine how and how quickly we can meet these objectives.

Is it not time for local authorities to be compelled to recycle more? Why is there so much variance between authorities on what they will and won't collect? Are authorities fined if they are found not to have recycled as advertised? (e.g. shipping overseas, burning, sending to landfill.)

Local authorities have been compelled to recycle more. The government has given them statutory targets and these have resulted in a four-fold increase in the amount of recycling in the last 10 years. Higher national targets have now been set so that we can go from the 31% today to 50% by 2020. New arrangements are being made with local authorities to drive up recycling rates and government is giving particular help to those authorities with the worst performance.

The government has also made it much more expensive to dispose of waste to landfill by imposing green taxes and this action will also increase recycling rates. The Environment Agency monitors waste reported by local authorities and takes action if they are found to be reporting incorrectly. Shipping overseas is tightly controlled and is only done for the purpose of recycling and saving raw materials which can be imported to developing countries.

Should the UK be investing more in innovative forms of energy production?

The government is investing in innovative energy production from research and development to demonstration and deployment. For example, the support schemes - like the renewables obligation - that we have put in place to support renewable energy, and pioneering work to build one of the world's first clean coal power stations with carbon capture and storage technology.

What can you say to reassure people that the next generation of nuclear power stations will a) be safer than the last ones; and b) meet our energy needs for the rest of the century?

While there can be no room for complacency the UK has a strong safety record and a recent review by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) concluded that our regulatory framework is mature, flexible and transparent, with experienced inspectors. Nuclear energy is covered by international obligations in operation and backed up by tough sanctions.

Nuclear alone is not expected to meet our energy needs. It currently contributes around 18% of our electricity, which is reducing as the old stations have to be closed down. It will be part of the energy mix which will include many new forms of renewable energy.

Why has the government farmed out the nuclear programme to private contractors?

All energy plants are provided by the private sector today and the government's involvement is limited to encouraging emerging technologies such as wave, tidal and wind power. Nuclear is an old technology and we believe it does not warrant public subsidy. The private sector will be obliged to find the money for cleaning up the nuclear waste arising from any new generation of nuclear power stations.

How can the UK pressure the US to do more to protect the planet?

We need to work with all countries to tackle climate change, including the US. Climate change is a global problem and requires a global solution.

For the first time ever all the world's nations agreed at Bali to negotiate on a deal to tackle dangerous climate change concluding in 2009. That's a truly historic breakthrough because it will take us forward to a comprehensive global climate deal that will take us beyond 2012.

Ireland recently announced a mandatory ban on the sale of incandescent lightbulbs. In contrast the UK is relying on the goodwill of retailers to remove them from the shelves. If efficiency is such a priority why doesn't the government impose legislation to force them off the shelves?

All trade is covered by EU law and Ireland is currently in discussions with the European Commission about these proposals. No law has yet been passed in that country, and so there is as yet no ban. Indeed any ban would have to be agreed by all Member States. The government is well aware of the difficulty of getting a rapid agreement within the EU and that is why we have decided to try to move ahead quickly with a voluntary agreement with the retailers. This has already started and I think everyone is aware that more and more energy efficient bulbs are appearing on the shelves and so the policy is proving successful.

Why has the Government created a situation in which it is more difficult to get rid of household waste? It used to be a simple matter. The bin men arrived on a specific day and took away your rubbish. Now the bin has to be placed in a certain spot, in a certain way and can only contain certain things. And in my neighbourhood it is no longer a weekly collection. Please don't blame local councils. Councils are following strict 'targets' set down by Central Government. And yes, we do recycle!

The government is doing everything it can to help local authorities to provide the most convenient service possible. However, we cannot go on putting all our rubbish together in holes in the ground and this is why the service has to be more focussed and materials have to be separated. If the Council is not to use more fuel and make more lorry journeys, they must move to weekly collections of different kinds of waste. I don't think it is too much to ask of each of us to do our bit and put our bins out with the right materials on the correct day. This small amount of effort is producing a big change in the management of waste and such actions are the only way that we can contribute to avoiding dangerous climate change.

Why is the government not giving more financial incentives to installing solar power to reduce heating bills in domestic properties?

Government money is being used to provide the most cost effective forms of reducing fuel bills in domestic properties. At the moment this means filling cavity walls and insulating lofts. While there is still scope to do these very basic things that is where we will put our biggest effort. There are some small incentives available to help with solar panels for hot water heating and we will revise our policies over time as markets and consumer demand change.

Would the Minister care to congratulate councils like Sheffield that have doubled their recycling performance in the last 4 years? What is government doing to help deal with the waste that comes from business and industry - where the large majority of waste comes from?

I am delighted to congratulate Sheffield and the other Councils who have doubled their recycling rate in the last 4 years - this is the average achievement across the country and is very welcome.

The government has concentrated on domestic waste because we have to meet a European Directive on reducing this waste to landfill. However, with the progress that is being made we are now able to pay more attention to commercial and industrial waste and are meeting with those who produce it with a view to improving the recycling performance across a whole range of sectors. There are also a number of agreements in place to reduce waste and improve recycling from commerce and industry and we have recently had very contructive talks with the construction industry, which produces a very significant amount of Britain's waste.

Is climate change and recycling high enough up the government's agenda?

The government has recently introduced the Climate Change Bill into Parliament, which will set a target for at least 60% reduction in our CO2 emissions by 2050. This is the clearest sign that climate change is very high on the government's agenda and the limits on emissions will apply to all aspects of our economy in due course. Tackling the emissions from waste is an essential part of tackling climate change and I hope that my answers to many of the waste questions already asked today will indicate just how much work and effort is going into this area.

Are wind farms ever realistically going to generate enough power to justify their expense and effect on the landscape?

Windfarms have their part to play in our energy mix and have added significantly to renewable energy production in other countries. While the UK has just 1800 wind turbines, Germany has 18,000. Real progress is being made in the UK and developers are mindful of the different views about their appearance - increasingly, wind farms will be offshore. But the gain cannot be underestimated - a major wind farm development in the Thames, for example, could power 1 in 4 of London's homes.

What is the point of individuals making improvements when governments globally refuse to accept they need to make a change?

It is true that Britain can't solve climate change by acting alone and the government has always tried to lead the international debate on climate change and to secure agreements. But unless we all make our contribution, the government will be in no position to try to influence others. The latest talks in Bali secured a truly historic result with all countries agreeing to work together to get a global climate deal that will take us beyond 2012. I think its also worth remembering that the global warming gases already in the atmosphere which are causing climate change cannot be removed. They are there as a result of our industrial revolution and the development of countries like our own. To date it has been impossible to involve emerging economies such as China and India because of the refusal of the US to join in the Kyoto agreement. That is why the success at Bali is so important, with all three countries now involved.

If as you say a wind farm by the Thames could generate power 1 in 4 of London's homes, why isn't the government urgently ramping up their development?

The government supports the development of wind farms through the renewables obligation and the development in London to which I referred called, the London Array, is indeed going ahead.

What pressure can be brought to bear on foreign governments failing to address planet issues such as deforestation?

We need to understand that in many developing countries forests have been seen to be a quick way of making much needed money, or their removal has been seen as a means to develop agriculture. The only way that we can assist such countries is by understanding and working with them to develop alternative ways to develop their economy and produce saleable goods and vital food supplies more sustainably. The British government puts great efforts into such dialogues around the world and also makes funding available to support re-forestation and the protection of existing forests. New agreements were struck on forests in Bali, which I hope will lead to a reversal of the very damaging deforestation of recent years.

Will the government ban the use of patio heaters this summer?

The government doesn't want to ban appliances or products, but we do want to see anything that comes onto the market having the lowest possible energy use. Although patio heaters account for a very small fraction of CO2 emissions attributable to heating, they are nonetheless, quite energy hungry. The European Commission is considering whether to introduce mandatory efficiency standards for patio heaters.

Is congestion charging the only feasible way of reducing traffic in town and city centres. When will it be imposed?

Road pricing can be very useful in tackling congestion, particularly when backed up by improvements to public transport. We want local authorities to explore whether this could be the right approach in their own area. That's why the Department for Transport is working with 10 areas to develop local schemes which can seek support from a £200m per annum fund available from Government.

How does the government expect people to ditch their cars for public transport when fares are so high? Train fares have risen again only this month.

Obviously the government does not expect people to ditch their cars, but we do want to encourage people to take public transport where they can, and to avoid very short car journeys where it is possible to walk or cycle. Although it may not seem like it, regulated fares today are no higher in real terms than they were at privatisation, even after the most recent rises. About 80% of passengers travel on tickets that have price increases capped by government or discounted by operators. For example, it is possible to travel between York and Cardiff for £16. The increase in fares is helping to pay for record investment in a railway system that continues to grow with new trains, refurbished stations, and at last, more reliable services. Even though people do object to fare increases, passenger numbers are a record levels and it is our intention to see continued improvements in Britain's railways.

What did you think of the Minister's responses? Add your comments using the form below.

Next page: Yorkshire Post interview with Mrs Ruddock »