What this week's Spending Review means for the Environment

'The end of austerity' is how some headline writers have characterised the 2015 Autumn Statement and Spending Review.

It certainly didn't pan out quite how many commentators expected and - amid the barrage of clichés that invariably accompany these occasions - the consensus seemed to be that this was a very political statement by a very political Chancellor.

In fact, there was a very unusual reference to forests in George Osborne's statement to the House. He talked about protecting funding for National Parks and forests adding, 'we're not making that mistake again'. Proof, seemingly, that forests are now firmly regarded as a politically important issue – something that the Woodland Trust and its supporters should take pride in.

Of course (to use one of said clichés) the devil is in the detail. The £27 billion windfall identified by the Office of Budget responsibility does seem to have changed things in terms of the overall tone of the statement. This has meant that some areas have been protected from cuts. The environment is not one of them.

For Defra the result is a cut of 15 per cent in real terms by 2020. Given that cuts of 30 per cent plus had been projected this is either a bit of a result or rather a smart piece of expectation management depending on your point of view.

Either way, we should be clear that this is not good news as the Government embarks on the development of a 25 year plan for the environment. Also, whilst the public forest estate might be protected, further cuts to Natural England can only serve to further hamper ancient woodland protection. The Defra part of the Spending Review Report talks about the reduction of Defra admin costs by 27 per cent. Whilst the initial reaction may be one of relief at the seeming protection of front line services, it is unclear what kind of administration is being cut and what that might mean for supporting those who are trying to take positive action for the environment.

What else caught our eye in the announcement? Well, HS2 is now projected to cost £55.7 billion - up from the £50.1 billion estimate of a couple of years ago. This surely only serves to reinforce the argument that if the project must proceed then further tunnelling to secure better protection of irreplaceable ancient woods and trees is surely affordable as well as being the right thing to do.

Other things we are looking closely at are the impact on the Landfill Communities Fund (LCF) which is an important source of funding for woodland - and the impact on the Big Lottery Fund. – charity bosses had feared that it might be raided to prop up other departments which were being cut. The early feeling is that things may not be as bad as had been feared in relation to the LCF and that in relation to the Big Lottery Fund, the Chancellor has indeed listened – something which has been welcomed by the umbrella organisation for charities – NCVO.

One area which really stands out as a cause for concern however is local government. Our urban parks and green spaces are so important in providing people with the opportunity to experience nature close to where they live but the scale of the cuts projected in that area look ominous.

And of course no statement from the Chancellor would be complete these days without a reference to further reform of the planning system. The theme of the need to get building rang out loud and clear. But simply building homes is not enough. We need to create places people will want to live; places that promote healthier living and access to nature. This theme was addressed in the Trust’s recent report on trees and residential developments.

Finally, a rather unusual but one hopes significant sign was that of the Treasury tweeting pictures of trees– flagging up the Government’s plans to plant 11m trees. This is certainly welcome recognition from an unlikely quarter and hopefully shows that work carried out for the Trust by Europe Economics showing that trees deliver £270 billion worth of benefits to society has been noted.

Earlier this week at the World Forum on Natural Capital in Edinburgh, Nicola Sturgeon talked about wanting to see 200 million trees planted in Scotland by 2022. That’s more the kind of ambition that is needed if we are to truly realise the potential of woods and trees to deliver cost-effectively across a wide range of government priorities. A good place to start would be acting on the work of the Government’s own Natural Capital Committee, which has identified that the planting of 250,000ha of new woodland close to people could deliver £500m worth of social benefits per year.