I guess one thing that strikes one as curious about your one recommendation is that, in a sense, you've almost invited a conflict of interest by putting in charge of the review the same department--let us say the Department of the Environment--that was responsible for the set of failed strategies in the first place.
Wouldn't that be a role better ascribed to somebody else, such as Parliament or this committee, than the department itself, which failed to undertake the work in the first place?