The spending review will provide an average of 2.7 per cent a year real growth in the resources of DEFRA and the Forestry Commission from 2002/03 to 2005/06, bringing the budget up to £2.9 billion.

Forum Response: Association of British Insurers

Mary Francis, director general of the ABI, told ePolitix.com: "Without sufficient funding to support effective change in these keys areas, the climate for future retail success will be jeopardised.

"We are pleased that the government has recognised the need for extra funding for flood defences. The ABI has argued that a step change in planned spending is urgently needed and, at first sight, the government seems to have listened. However, we will need to look at the figures very carefully to ensure that the new money is available when and where it is needed.

"We want to be sure that the planned spending will tackle unacceptable flood risks affecting our policy-holders and that decision-making procedures will be improved to make this funding effective. There are too many organisations involved in the provision of flood defences. We therefore welcome the government's commitment that the review of flood and coastal defence funding will be completed in the autumn. We will be discussing these issues with the government and the Environment Agency.

"The insurance industry has worked hard to persuade the government that more needs to be done to improve our flood defences. Insurance becomes unaffordable when properties flood repeatedly.

"The insurance industry wants to provide affordable cover to as many people as possible. That is why the ABI announced and observed a two-year agreement to continue policies for existing customers. As increased spending reduces the risk of flooding to reasonable levels, insurance can work effectively to mitigate the remaining risks. We will be able to say more about the industry's likely approach in the future when we have fully examined the implications of today's announcement for our customers."

Forum Response: Environmental Services Association

A spokesman for the ESA told ePolitix.com: "While there is a reference to a rate of "recycling and composting" to be achieved by the end of this Parliament, it is now clear that no fundamental statement on the UK's approach to funding compliance with the Landfill Directive will be made before the PIU reports in the autumn.

"To achieve the landfill diversion targets required by the Landfill Directive will require the UK at least to double to £3 billion a year the amount spent on managing municipal waste. ESA has for some years recognised that the government will wish significantly to raise the level of the Landfill Tax from 2004 and the main value of such an increase would perhaps be to make recycling more competitive. The difficulty the Government would need to overcome in using an increased Landfill Tax to fund the municipal waste stream would be to get additional money to local authorities without simply imposing an additional cost on British business.

"An independent discussion paper prepared by Ernst and Young suggests how transparent direct charging of householders could help to secure partnerships enabling the UK to comply with the Landfill Directive's requirements for diversion of the municipal waste stream from landfill without adverse impact on the public finances. This is not the model of variable charging which received widespread media coverage last week."

Forum Response: Biffa Waste Services

Peter Jones, director of external affairs for Biffa Waste Services told ePolitix.com: "Not much new here then! More fine words and promises but a lot now seems to be riding on the outcomes of the PIU report. Depending on where the leaks came from with regard to household charging, the cynics would suggest that anything extra to DEFRA on top of the £150m committed to flood and coastal defences will have to be self financing.

"Quite what they mean by "final decisions on additional resources" we will know about nearer the autumn budget statement. Such reticence is surely surprising given that Gordon is handing out an extra £60bn over 3 years and the entire cost of DEFRA is little more than £2.3bn annually.

"The figures released suggest a standstill in expenditure. Given that DEFRA's cost of delivering the Waste Strategy is around £460m annually, one would have thought a little more boldness in the fine print would be called for in an area that long term must have a significant effect on the growing expenditure tied up in flood and coastal defences.

"One can only assume that this administration - like many politicians before them - have failed to bite the bullet on a cohesive framework of environmental expenditure and policies because it is necessarily a long term payback at a time when this CSR is more about getting re-elected next time round by hitting issues closer to the voters' heart.

"This is a pity given that £1bn a year would probably produce substantive results in an area where the major industrial players are keen to invest against a background of greater certainty. That compares to the £20bn per annum committed to education and health where the general consensus seems to be that there are significant questions with regard to management quality and accountability."

Forum Response: The Woodland Trust

A spokesman for The Woodland Trust told ePolitix.com: "With regard to forestry specifically, we welcome the references made to sustainable forest management, community forests and restoration of native woodland. However the figures provided for the Forestry Commission do not seem to indicate the increased investment which has been described in the accompanying text and we would welcome further clarification on this matter.

"We would also like to have seen significant investment specifically in woodland creation since this is a great example of sustainable land-use and will enable us to achieve the sustainable countryside that the Treasury, DEFRA and the wider community would like to see, indeed 'area of woodland' comprises one of the Government's sustainable development indicators. We are also troubled by the references to rationalisation of environmental and rural agencies across the DEFRA family and to 'further analysis by DEFRA and the Treasury of the Government's role in forestry in England'.

"The Trust is disappointed that there is not more detail on the outcome of the cross-cutting review of public spaces. We would like to see more investment in greening our urban areas to help to re-connect people with nature as only by achieving this will we truly improve quality of life for those in urban and rural areas."

Forum Response: English Nature

Andy Brown, acting chief executive of English Nature, told ePolitix.com: "We will be working hard to ensure that the new money for flood defence will be spent creatively with nature as part of the solution to protect our vulnerable coastlines, homes and businesses."