1          Background to response

2          General points

• Funding for implementing the Strategy and for dealing rapidly with newly-arrived problem species should be identified as a distinct funding stream to improve the delivery of the work and accountability of the budget.
• In the absence of a biosecurity agency (that would bring together all aspects of dealing with non-native species and diseases under the leadership of one organisation), the membership of the Non-native Species Programme Board needs to become more representative of the key sectors concerned, notably the non-governmental organisations and commercial interests as well as stronger links with those responsible for dealing with diseases.  When much of the Strategy is to be delivered by partnerships with these bodies (outside government) it is essential to involve them with the planning and decision-taking at the highest level (the Programme Board).
• A mechanism for resolving any disputes or conflicts of approach between countries or regions needs to be established to ensure that the devolved and delegated way of working has embedded within it a means of ensuring consistency and joint working at all levels.

• Non-native species issues in relation to climate change need to be clarified so that decisions are informed by an understanding of the effects of climate change without displacing concerns about addressing the adverse impacts of non-native species.
• Economic impacts and issues (problems of costing the impacts on human interests and biodiversity) require more work to give a realistic appreciation of the consequences of the arrival and spread of non-native species that can be clearly understood by policy makers and decision takers.  While these economic aspects are of much wider concern than for biodiversity conservation alone, placing biodiversity within a framework for assessing economic impacts is important to understanding the full economic costs of non-native species.  This is particularly the case for investigating the impacts of non-native species on ecosystem services.
• Biodiversity impacts of non-native species need to be better understood and responded to in GB.  While the impacts may be known in general terms, the effects of non-native species upon different ecosystems and their constituent assemblages need to be quantified and assessed for at least some case examples.
• More emphasis should be given to dealing effectively with non-native species in freshwater and marine ecosystems.  This could be addressed in the first instance by establishing working groups to report to the Non-native Species Programme Board that would have responsibility for developing work programmes in these areas to implement the Strategy.