| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Pleasure Boat Licensing
Mr. Anthony Coombs: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking to prevent duplication of pleasure boat licensing by public authorities on the same inland waterways. [39636]
Mr. Robert B. Jones: I am today issuing a consultation paper. This sets out the Government's proposal to amend the law to provide that no licence from a local authority under section 94 of the Public Health Acts Amendment Act 1970, as amended, is required in respect of pleasure craft on any waterway owned or managed by British Waterways or the Environment Agency. The legislative change would be made by an order under section 1 of the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994.
23 Jul 1996 : Column: 314
European Spatial Development Perspective
Sir Irvine Patnick: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the current position on the development of the European spatial development perspective. [39642]
Mr. Robert B. Jones: The Committee for Spatial Development continues to work, under the direction of informal meetings of European Planning Ministers, on collecting and analysing the basic information required for the development of an ESDP. This will be a non-binding document prepared jointly by member states and the European Commission. It is intended to identify areas of Europe facing similar planning challenges and raise awareness of the European scale influences at work. The Netherlands' Minister has indicated that the process of drafting the document will start during its presidency next year. Bearing in mind the likely significance of any ESDP at local government level, consultation will be carried out once a draft document is available. In the Committee for Spatial Development, the UK continues to stress the importance of the informal intergovernmental approach and the non-binding nature of the ESDP.
Green Belt (School Extensions)
Sir Irvine Patnick: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if planning policy guidance note 2 rules out any extensions to schools in green belts; and if development plans may include policies for them. [39643]
Mr. Robert B. Jones: PPG2 does not rule out the extension of schools located in green belts if other considerations clearly outweigh the harm to the green belt, or if the development is for purposes specified in PPG2 such as essential facilities for outdoor sport.
Very special circumstances are needed to justify development for purposes not specified in PPG2. Development plan policies should ensure that any application for such development would not be in accord with the plan. The plan's reasoned justification might, however, indicate the factors the local planning authority would take into account in considering an application for a school extension for purposes not specified in PPG2.
An application would also need to be considered against other relevant planning policies, for example on the visual amenities of the green belt (see PPG2) and on transport (see PPG13). The suitable re-use of existing building would not require very special circumstances.
The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 grants limited rights to erect small buildings in school grounds without the need to apply for planning permission.
Mr. Lord:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made with the implementation of the Special Waste Regulations 1996. [39663]
Mr. Clappison:
The Special Waste Regulations were made on 28 March 1996 and will come into effect on 1 September 1996. The regulations, which implement the EC hazardous waste directive--91/689/EEC--update provisions for supervising movements of the most difficult and dangerous waste and controlling its
23 Jul 1996 : Column: 315
management and disposal. In particular, the regulations provide for movements of such waste to be pre-notified to the environment agencies and to be tracked by a system of consignment notes. Guidance in the form of a circular to the environment agencies and local authorities was published on 13 June.
Since the regulations were made, some technical problems have come to light and we plan to make amending regulations in order to correct these before the regulations enter into force. We hope to make amending regulations by the end of the month and to lay them before Parliament shortly thereafter.
These are complex regulations and I believe that these changes will be welcomed by industry and regulators alike for the clarification and improvements which they will bring to the functioning of the new system.
In addition to these technical changes, we have looked again at the exclusion which applies to household waste. The definition of household waste does not include waste oils, clinical waste or asbestos. We intend to make an amendment which will ensure that waste oils, and clinical waste from households are not subject to the regulations. These changes will ensure that the regulations do not interfere with arrangements for separate collections of clinical waste from domestic properties nor add to their cost.
The definition of household waste includes waste from premises forming part of educational establishments, and hospitals. We plan to make an amendment to clarify that the exemption will not apply to waste from laboratories or to non domestic hospital waste. However, this amendment will not imply that all waste from such sources will be special waste.
The technical changes will include an amendment to the schedule which has to be completed for movements of special waste collected during a daily round of consignments--referred to as a carrier's round. An amendment will clarify that a single consignment note and schedule can be used for more than one type of waste for which a single fee will be charged for each such round.
The changes will also clarify and update cross references to the Chemicals (Hazard Information and Packaging) Regulations--SI 1994/3247--which are intended to assist industry in determining whether waste is special. They will introduce a simplified procedure for waste which is consigned by pipeline. Other amendments will set a time limit of two months on the payment of fees to the environment agencies, and will set the penalty for failure to pay at a level 3 fine.
Mr. Robathan:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to publish a discussion paper on the household projections. [39664]
Mr. Gummer:
I have been delighted by the substantial response to the widened debate I initiated at Brighton in June and which my right hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government, Housing and Urban Regeneration and my hon. Friend the Minister for Planning, Construction and Energy Efficiency have been taking forward
23 Jul 1996 : Column: 316
subsequently. I now wish to give careful consideration to the views and ideas that have emerged and to reflect these in the discussion paper. The paper and ensuing debate would also benefit from the outcome of a number of important research projects, being carried out both by this Department and by others, which have a significant bearing on this issue and some of which will not be complete or ready for consideration until the autumn. I therefore propose to publish the paper along with the main findings of the relevant research after Parliament resumes later this year.
Mr. Michael Brown:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has for a change in the Government office for Yorkshire and Humberside following the abolition of Humberside county council. [39669]
Mr. Curry:
From 1 October the Government office will become "The Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber" to reflect the recent changes in local government structure. The regional boundaries will be unchanged and the new unitary authority areas of North Lincolnshire and North East Lincolnshire will continue to be part of the Yorkshire and Humber region, reflecting the concerns of many interests in both private and public sectors that the Humber estuary and its hinterland is a key part of the economic fabric of the wider region.
Mr. John Greenway:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when the Government will respond to the eighth report of the House of Lords Select Committee on Leghold Traps, HL 73 of Session 1995-96. [39679]
Mr. Gummer:
The Government have today published their response to the Select Committee and copies have been placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Congdon:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the requirements on operators of trade effluent treatment plants to obtain a waste management licence. [39724]
Mr. Clappison:
On 25 July 1995, the Government announced the extension to 31 March 1996 of a transitional exemption from waste management licensing for certain operations which involve the biological or physio-chemical treatment of waste. In so doing, we confirmed that we would be prepared to consider whether a case could be made for some waste treatment plant to be exempted from licensing under article 11 of the amended EC framework directive on waste, and we invited representations from anyone with an interest in such plant.
Following that announcement, the Government decided that it would be appropriate also to review the application of article 2 of the framework directive. The transitional arrangements were therefore extended to 30 September 1996 in order to enable this to be done. We are now in a position to announce our conclusions.
23 Jul 1996 : Column: 317
The Government's conclusions are that the requirements of the framework directive on waste do not apply:
(a) to discharges of effluent which are covered by national legislation transposing the requirements of the urban waste water treatment directive; or
It follows that, where effluent is being subjected to biological or physio-chemical treatment in circumstances where these criteria are met, the operation of the treatment plant does not require a waste management licence under part II of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
(b) to discharges of effluent which are covered by national rules in force at the time of the framework directive's adoption in March 1991 which lay down regimes for discharges of effluent which provide an effective means of pursuing the aims of the directive, and which provide for rules and authorisations of the kind provided for in the urban waste water treatment directive. In the Government's view, national rules of this kind are discharge consents under chapter II of part III of the Water Resources Act 1991 or part II of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 in Scotland (pollution of controlled waters); and consents under chapter III of part IV of the Water Industry Act 1991 (consent for discharge of trade effluent into a public sewer).
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |