Government taking ‘lax approach’ to climate impacts on infrastructure

Ministers have been accused of taking a “lax approach” to the impact of extreme weather events on critical national infrastructure (CNI).

The Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy has published a scathing report which raises major concerns about the UK’s CNI which it describes as being “very vulnerable to extreme weather and other effects of climate change”.

It calls for the creation of a ministerial post for CNI resilience and a team within the Cabinet Office to focus on the issue. It also urges regulators to oversee a rigorous programme of stress-testing against a range of risks.

The committee said it had “uncovered an extreme weakness at the centre of government on a critical risk to the UK’s national security”, and that it appeared no minister was taking responsibility for the topic.

Members of the committee were “astounded” when then Cabinet Office minister Michael Ellis refused to give evidence to a session in July, instead sending then water minister Steve Double, who had been in post for only 10 days. This was described in the report as a “dereliction of duty” on the part of Ellis.

While the report acknowledges that during the build up to the COP26 climate summit held in Glasgow last year there was “much-needed discussion” about cutting greenhouse emissions for the future, there was “little attention” paid to the existing impacts of climate change.

The two key challenges highlighted include the interdependent nature of UK CNI, as well as the need for regulators and operators to share intelligence across sectors.

The report highlights how last November saw large parts of the country faced with severe disruption due to the impacts of Storm Arwen, resulting in around 40,000 customers being left without power for more than three days and almost 4,000 facing disconnections for more than a week.

Storm Arwen, it said, illustrated the “cascading risks” generated by extreme weather events.

It added: “We concluded our inquiry in the midst of an unprecedented heatwave, taking evidence from government ministers and officials while the country faced significant rail disruptions, flight delays and power cuts.

“These events have moved climate adaptation more firmly into the public eye and demonstrated that poor adaptation poses a threat to UK national security, but they have also shone a light on an alarming lack of government action in this vital area.”

The wide extent of CNI interdependencies points to what the committee says is the “critical need” for operators to share information with each other—either directly, through their regulators, or via a central mechanism.

Furthermore, the fact the UK has a “vertical” model of CNI regulation means sectors are operated and regulated separately which results in a variety of approaches to climate adaptation, and a lack of formal connections between sectors.

During the enquiry the committee only found one relevant cross-sector forum, the Infrastructure Operators Adaptation Forum (IOAF). The IOAF meets approximately three times a year, membership is voluntary and it is coordinated by the Environment Agency, the Climate Change Committee and the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) to share best practice on reducing vulnerabilities and on synergy between infrastructure systems.

Another tool which could be used for encouraging collaboration is the Adaptation Reporting Power (ARP) which allows the government to direct certain bodies “with a function of a public nature” to provide information about the impact of climate change on their ability to function, report on their adaptation plans and timescales for action, and cooperate with other reporting authorities to produce their reports.

It is unclear however whether the government has ever made use of this joint-reporting power and the report further points to the fact the ARP was made voluntary in the latest two rounds held in 2013 and 2018.

“The Adaptation Committee has called for a return to mandatory reporting, and for the list of organisations to be expanded to ensure more comprehensive coverage of CNI,” it added.

The report’s numerous recommendations include the creation of a statutory forum chaired by a senior government official, at director general level, to formalise collaboration between CNI regulators on climate adaptation.

Key operators would be invited to meetings and the forum should publish an annual report to Parliament on key actions to address interdependencies and to enhance CNI resilience to climate change and extreme weather.

Furthermore, the government should also make use of the power to require CNI operators and/or regulators to report jointly under the ARP.

The committee further criticised the fact that the implementation of recommendations made by the NIC to improve CNI regulation in relation to resilience has been delayed until the government’s National Resilience Strategy (NRS) is published, which itself has been delayed several times.

In line with the NIC report, the committee recommended that the government should publish a full set of resilience standards every five years.

At a minimum, this should be for the sectors under the NIC’s purview (energy, water, digital, road and rail services); it should also examine how these could apply to other CNI sectors.

Regulators should require their operators to develop long-term resilience strategies. Furthermore, regulators should oversee a programme of stress testing against a range of risks that might affect critical services.

The government meanwhile should appoint a minister of state for CNI Resilience and a team within the Cabinet Office to focus on this issue. It further recommends the government re-establishes a ministerial committee on resilience, following the recent abolition of the National Security Council and its sub-committees

In response to the report, a government spokesperson said: “There are robust systems in place to protect critical national infrastructure from the effects of climate change. This includes work through the National Adaptation Programme led by Defra, and the National Infrastructure Commission led by HMT.

“In the Cabinet Office, we have created a standardised approach to help departments capture and mitigate risks to critical infrastructure.”

Meanwhile NIC chair John Armitt said: “The Joint Committee’s report is another reminder that getting the governance of resilience right will be crucial to the success of attempts to adapt and respond to growing stresses on our infrastructure networks.

“Parliamentarians have reached the same conclusion as us: the UK urgently needs a more strategic and joined up approach to resilience, directed by government and overseen by regulators.

“We hope this added pressure will lead to the rapid publication of the National Resilience Strategy, to start the process of providing that strategic direction.”