Lord Haskins has set out plans for a radical overhaul of the way the government delivers rural services.

In a report published on Tuesday the Labour peer called for a radical restructuring of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

The report also called for a merger of the Countryside Agency and English Nature and the Rural Development Service to form a new "integrated agency" - a body into which the Forestry Commission could also be merged.

Caroline Spelman, shadow environment secretary, said: "The decision is a step backwards for wildlife conversation in this country.

"English Nature is a unique agency which is highly focused on its task, employ highly motivated staff and have a world wide reputation for excellence. After today's announcement biodiversity will no longer have its champion.

"English Nature has criticised the Government over its push for GM crops and the Government has huge plans for road and house building projects across the country. It is perhaps no surprise that the Government seek to abolish an agency that openly criticises and hiders them.

"The British countryside needs an independent body speaking for it. Mixing up English Nature into an economic delivery mechanism will leave biodiversity muted.

"Once this idea was known, the government should have thrown this out at once."

Forum Response: English Nature

Sir Martin Doughty, chair of English Nature said: "English Nature has an international reputation and operates effectively as an independent adviser to government.

"We are reassured by the secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs, Margaret Beckett's statement today that the proposed new arrangements will retain the ability to give independent advice to government, based on sound science and practical experience.

"We believe that this can only be achieved through a Non Departmental Public Body. At this stage, we are encouraged that the proposed body will have a remit across rural, urban, marine and coastal England so that the environment can be managed for the benefit of the public and future generations. We look forward to exploring these proposals and shaping the way forward with the Department in the coming weeks.

"The proposed changes must not dilute English Nature's current wide-ranging role or marginalise our marine and urban conservation responsibilities. We will continue to support the 32,000 owners and land managers of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) during any period of change. Any disruption to the services we carry out will make it difficult to meet national and international wildlife conservation obligations.

"Ensuring that the full potential of these proposals are realised is one of the key challenges for the government. The integration of certain functions from three organisations into one whilst avoiding any disruption to current delivery will clearly take time and careful planning. It is vital that the organisation has clear targets and is properly resourced.

"We recognise that our staff and the staff of the other organisations involved will have real concerns about their future. English Nature wishes to see an efficient and rapid transition to any arrangements agreed by government to minimise the uncertainty for all staff. We are keen to play our part in making this happen smoothly."

Forum Response: Local Government Association

Councillor Paul Bettison, chairman of the LGA's Rural Executive, said: "Councils are capable, competent and uniquely placed to provide strong community leadership and deliver rural economic, social and environmental well-being, alongside a range of partners. They are democratically accountable and best placed to understand the complexity of localities and offer local solutions.

"However, if local authorities are to achieve the best results possible, and in some areas if it entails taking on additional responsibilities, then they need to receive support and funding from central government to build capacity.

"The Association looks forward to working with such organisations as the Environment Agency and welcomes the opportunity to develop even more efficient ways of joined-up working. The LGA expects to engage in more detailed discussions with the government on the recommendations of the review."

Forum Response: Country Land and Business Association

Mark Hudson, president of the CLA, said: "While landowners and farmers are planting trees for the 22nd century, the government only seems to be sowing seeds for the next election.

"If government is serious about delivering to the countryside, it needs to go the whole hog and integrate economic with environmental policy. Instead Haskins is proposing a new agency that is little more than English Nature by another name.

"In all the scare stories about the loss of an independent environment body, people have forgotten that it is those living in the countryside who deliver the government's environmental objectives.

"Landowners and farmers not only manage the land, but have to find a way to pay for the conservation and regulatory requirements placed upon them.

"Yet again, policymakers have neglected the economic foundation underpinning environmental delivery. The objectives for the new land management agency should be to foster the social and economic well-being of rural communities, who in turn will deliver the environment people want. A flourishing rural economy pays for conservation - not the other way round.

"While we welcome Lord Haskins' efforts to improve rural policy delivery, his proposals appear to be unnecessarily complicated when they should be simplifying policy delivery and reducing bureaucracy and duplication."

Forum Response: Woodland Trust

Dr Hilary Allison, policy director of the Woodland Trust, said: "We fully support the principle of integrating all aspects of policy on land management within Defra and we feel that woodland would benefit from having a stronger policy voice within Defra.

"However, other proposals relating to integrated land management in Lord Haskins' report seem illogical and currently raise more questions than they answer.

" For example, the Haskins report makes great play of the objective of natural resource protection and the need for integrated land management yet fails to include the resource protection functions of the Environment Agency within the new integrated agency.

"In theory, amalgamating the existing agencies into one should allow for more joined-up management of the countryside, vital in planning for the future effects of climate change on our native wildlife, but this halfway house proposal could mean that this opportunity is lost.

"The report also hedges its bets as to whether the regulatory, grant aid and advisory functions of the Forestry Commission will be part of the new agency or not.

"Finally the report completely fails to make any recommendation at all about the future of Forest Enterprise, the executive agency which manages the 216,000 hectares of the Forestry Commission's public estates in England. To the Trust, this leaves a worrying question mark over the future of these forests.

"The need for primary legislation to implement some of the report's recommendations could mean three years of uncertainty and inaction on the behalf of the agencies currently responsible for protecting our environment at a time when urgency not inaction should be the order of the day."

Forum Response: Countryside Alliance

Simon Hart, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, said: "We are pleased to see that Lord Haskins has taken up many of the proposals we have made.

"We do however have some concerns about separating social and economic delivery from environmental issues. The role of the Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) in delivering social and economic development should not be subordinated to environmental protectionism.

"The interests of both rural communities and users of the countryside will best be served through policy driven by sustainable development, which brings together economic, social and environmental concerns. But this process can only work if it has the full participation and consent of the rural communities it affects."

Forum Response: National Farmers Union

Sir Ben Gill, president of the NFU, said: "We have always said that a thorough and objective review of delivery by Defra and its agencies is a good thing as it cannot be disputed that the range of services is sometimes confusing.

"We like the idea of an integration of agencies so a more unified view is taken of delivery. But, as always, it cannot be over-stated that the devil will be in the detail.

"For example, farmers will wish to ensure that there is a co-ordinated and consistent delivery across administrative boundaries.

"We particularly welcome the recognition of the problem of implementation of regulation and the endorsement of the "Whole Farm Plan".

"I am glad the report acknowledges there is a risk that this separation could result in "ivory towers" in Whitehall. We will need to ensure this does not happen."

Forum Response: Countryside Agency

Sir Ewen Cameron, chairman of the Countryside Agency, said: "The secretary of state acknowledges us as an effective champion for rural issues. We have made a substantial and positive difference for people who live in and who visit the countryside.

"Changing circumstances demand some change in structure. But within these, we will continue to be an independent voice on behalf of those people, advising the government and monitoring the effectiveness of its rural policies.

"The detailed arrangements will need much work over the coming months. The Countryside Agency's Board will play a full role in shaping the new agenda, helping to ensure that the outcomes will be the best possible for people living in and visiting the countryside.

"The Countryside Agency Board believes we are best able to contribute under the new arrangements by acting as a source of rural expertise, able to advise government and others on rural issues (rural advocacy, intelligence and expertise); eeporting on best practice in the delivery of government's rural objectives (rural watchdog); developing further the rural proofing agenda (rural proofer) ; and testing ideas locally (rural innovator) and ensuring that regional and local delivery bodies are aware of best practice.

"The Agency's Board is also concerned that the other new arrangements will be a success.

"In particular, the complex agenda for sustainable land use and the public benefits that flow from it, could benefit from the formation of an integrated body. Like everybody involved we want to ensure the changes are a success. Such a body will only work if recreation and access are as important to its vision as biodiversity - they must be given equal billing. That way, people and the rural economy can benefit from the investment, the nation makes in conservation.

"Equally, the clear challenge which the secretary of state has set out for Regional Development Agencies and others to deliver more to rural communities at local level is welcome. But, to make it work, capacity will have to be built at a local and regional level and there must be sufficient money made available to deliver the schemes we have pioneered in all the areas that need it. We shall want to ensure that the lessons of our pioneering social and economic programmes underpin best practice everywhere.

"The Countryside Agency shall of course continue its work for rural communities and the rural environment to our usual high standards.

"I want to applaud all of our staff who have continued to work with great professionalism throughout a time of real uncertainty. I have no doubt they will continue to contribute to the successful implementation of these changes. "