House of Commons - Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs

Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Sixth Report

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

EXEMPTIONS FROM THE LANDFILL TAX

251. A number of activities are exempt from the Landfill Tax on the grounds that they contribute to material recovery: the two most significant are the spreading of wastes on agricultural land, and some types of landscaping. Again, there is anecdotal evidence to suggest that less scrupulous waste holders have been seeking to avoid the tax by channelling their wastes into such activities, although the environmental benefit of (for example) redesigning golf courses may be unclear.[465] The Chairman of the Environmental Services Association told us that the abuse of authorised exemptions from the Landfill Tax is "just as worrying" as fly-tipping.[466]

252. The National Farmers' Union and the Water Services Association raised particular concerns about the types of waste which may be spread on agricultural land.[467] Wastes which are considered to have soil conditioning properties include sewage sludge, waste paper pulp and abattoir wastes but, as we learned in our previous inquiry into sewage treatment, the guidance provided by Government to farmers and others about their safe use is not always satisfactory.[468] Particular care must be taken to ensure wastes are not over-applied, raising concentrations of heavy metals and phosphates to levels where they might pollute water courses or agricultural produce and thus endanger the environment and human health. As we stated in our previous Report, we are concerned that controls on the spreading of industrial wastes on land are inadequate to protect the environment or human health. We agree with the National Farmers' Union that these controls should be reviewed and further guidance issued in respect of pollution control during and consequent on waste spreading operations.

253. We are also concerned that the disappearance of large quantities of waste into exempt sites-which may not be monitored or supervised-is adding to the difficulty of trying to identify the types and tonnages of waste arising. David Beadle, representing the Local Authority Waste Disposal Companies Association, said that it is not possible to estimate how much waste is going into these exempt sites because they do not have weighbridges, but that the loss of engineering materials noted by landfill operators is "substantial".[469] He also questioned the degree to which exempt sites are supervised to ensure that only authorised materials are deposited.

254. The Environment Agency's new Waste Management Action Plan explains that there are 7,500 licensed waste management facilities in England and Wales and 14,000 exempt sites.[470] While we are sure that many of these sites merit their exempt status, we agree with Mr Beadle, and with Mr Coleman of the Environment Agency, that there is a need for greater monitoring and for the balance between licensed and exempt facilities to be re-assessed.[471] We are concerned that some activities and facilities currently exempt from waste management licensing, and from the Landfill Tax, are of questionable environmental benefit. We recommend that the Government commission a review of all such exemptions, and research the practicability of monitoring operations which will continue to be exempt.

Government

255. We now conclude our Report by examining the role for Government in devising a sustainable waste management strategy, and ensuring progress towards its implementation. Witnesses saw a number of roles for Government in the shift towards sustainable waste management. Firstly, they looked for leadership and direction; secondly for positive intervention. On the matter of leadership, Jane Bickerstaffe of Incpen told us that Government "are the only people who can give the public confidence" by ensuring they are educated about resource and waste management options.[472] The Environment Agency had three expectations: firstly, that the Government should set objectives; then, that it should establish a framework in which those objectives can be met; and finally, that it should lay out clearly what contribution it expects from other players.[473]

256. In our view, the reason why the existing strategy has largely failed in its objectives is because the Government did not provide sufficient practical support or leadership to those it considers to "have a much bigger part to play".[474] We have previously noted that this Government has demonstrated its willingness to intervene, for example, by securing voluntary agreements on use of recycled newsprint and increasing the Landfill Tax.[475] Yet there is a case for saying that the Government must be bolder in its interventions if it wishes to see real

progress made. While our recommendations for Government on issues such as education and producer responsibility are presented throughout this Report, in the two following sections we look briefly at remaining areas where we have noted growing support for Government action: fiscal measures, and procurement policies. We will conclude by establishing the primary considerations for development of the Government's new, statutory strategy.

FISCAL MEASURES

257. Environmental campaigners have long been pressing for a shift in the focus of taxation from taxing jobs and production to taxing environmental 'bads' such as car use and fossil fuel consumption. The Landfill Tax is one of the first modern taxes in this country designed specifically as a 'green' tax and we have commented on that elsewhere (see paragraph 142). While it is early to assess the tax's impact, witnesses did tell us that it "indicates the potential of such mechanisms" and "has concentrated the collective mind";[476] a fair number expressed the opinion that it needs to be higher in order to have a significant impact upon disposal practices.[477] David Beal of UK Waste assured us that most of industry would change its practices under the influence of fiscal instruments and, as we have previously noted, pointed to experience in the Netherlands where the cost of disposal is significantly higher than in the UK.[478]

258. Witnesses were inventive in their suggestions for future waste-related taxes: these included a tax on aggregates (which the Government is considering);[479] on virgin fibres;[480] on incineration;[481] on road use;[482] on resources not renewable within a generation;[483] and on solvents.[484]

259. Equally, however, we received complaints about the Landfill Tax: for example, it has penalised local authorities. [485] One lesson which witnesses drew from experience of the Landfill Tax was that in implementing new 'green' taxes the Government should take care to consult affected parties.[486] We agree that industry and local government must be able to plan for changes in taxation. We recommend that the Government consider the case for introducing further waste-related taxes but, wherever such a tax is to be introduced, the Government should express its intentions well in advance and indicate how it expects the regime to develop over at least five years. We have already discussed the case for an incineration tax and greater use of 'deposit-refund' systems.[487]

260. While we consider 'greening' the taxation system to be very important, we would also note that increasing taxation, alone, will not be sufficient to force a change in behaviour. It is a 'push' factor, and-as we discussed in some detail in relation to recycling-the push has to be balanced by a 'pull'.[488] Taxing disposal will stimulate recycling and reprocessing of material but, as David Boyd of UK Waste commented, "somebody must take [the material] off our hands" if that activity is finally to be constructive.[489]

GREEN PROCUREMENT

261. Catherine Martin of the British Retail Consortium noted that one of the most significant barriers to increased recycling is the perception "that recycled products are inferior": she added that to her knowledge "nobody ... has found the answer to that yet".[490] One answer which was pointed out to us by the Environment Agency, among others, is for the Government to lead by example in using its purchasing power to support the market in recyclables.[491]

262. On this point the Government appears to be giving out mixed, and rather downbeat messages. We were told that the DETR is "looking at" the possibility but "there are not necessarily the products you would want available and some of them are really not competitive on price at all, even when you allow a margin for the environmental benefit."[492] The Government's Panel on Sustainable Development released a Report earlier this year which expressed "serious misgivings" about the Government's stance on green procurement after it was told that guidance:

493

263. We sought two further memoranda as to the operation of green procurement policies in Whitehall. The first dealt specifically with the DETR and we were pleased to learn of progress made by the Department in instituting a paper contract specifying the supply of 100 per cent recycled paper made with at least 80 per cent post-consumer waste. Other initiatives implemented include: recycling facilities for paper, glass and aluminium; the requirement for contractors to print reports on 100 per cent recycled paper; and the development of "Green Guides" and checklists for use by other Departments.[494] We commend the work carried out by the DETR to encourage recycling through its procurement policies. We would expect the programme to expand to cover other products in common usage. Where recycled alternatives to existing products are not available, the Department should consider sponsoring research into their development.

264. The second memorandum concerned Whitehall as a whole and was less encouraging. It stated that:

495

Our predecessors were sceptical about the effectiveness of the Green Ministers in the previous Parliament;[496] we have yet to see evidence that they are proving more effective now. We consider that, in order to raise the profile of this policy, it would be legitimate for the DETR to keep formal details of other Departments' performance. We recommend that the DETR proceed with the introduction of performance monitoring systems to assess green procurement activity across Whitehall. A league table should then be published by the DETR annually, with details of individual Departmental performance being set out clearly also in the 'green housekeeping' sections of the relevant Annual Reports.

FORMULATING A STATUTORY STRATEGY

265. The evidence we have received has led us to the conclusion that the little progress which has been made in encouraging sustainable waste management has been achieved in spite of, rather than as a result of, Government policy. The DETR clearly has little confidence in its own powers to affect policy implementation: it told us that "It is possible to over-exaggerate what it is that we are directly capable of delivering"[497] but that it might see its way to "help to spread best practice or perhaps do a little benchmarking".[498] We, on the other hand, can see-and have noted here-a number of tasks which the Department, and Government, is capable of delivering. It must do so. Until recently, the Department had only really grappled with the first of the roles identified by the Environment Agency-the provision of information-but its slackness in data collection and management has rebounded and undermined its existing strategy and objectives. This is the first thing which must be set right.

266. The Environment Agency has already been charged with the handling of the National Waste Survey; the Government must ensure that the results are delivered on time. Procedures should be set in train for an analysis of the number, capacity and type of waste collection and management facilities currently available in this country in order that the "base-line" for future comparisons of performance can be firmly established.

267. Once the data has been collated, the Government will be in a position to start work on its future strategy and to set meaningful objectives for progress. While disparaging the existing targets, witnesses were very clear about the fact that targets can be a valuable incentive to activity, and that they may have a role to play in the future. This, they said, will be on condition that they are "realistic and have a reasonable prospect of being achieved";[499] they should take account of economic costs as well as environmental benefits;[500] they must be capable of actual measurement (using, for example, kilogrammes per household, or setting clear deadlines, and avoiding simple expressions of percentages);[501] they must be supported by Government action to enable their attainment;[502] and they must be clearly based upon "meaningful" data.[503] The criticisms we have noted previously about the poverty of existing data, in our view, are closely tied to the disillusionment we have heard about the value of the targets. As UK Waste commented:

504

268. The DETR was circumspect about the role which targets might play in the statutory strategy, anticipating an "enormous" debate about "what targets might appear ... and how they might be set". The Director of the Waste Directorate, Philip Ward, however, perhaps unintentionally revealed a slant to the new Government's thought on this issue when he continued to note that Ministers did not want a "shaving off" of the existing targets-yet.[505]

269. We agree wholeheartedly with the premise that targets are valuable only if they are justifiable and firmly based on reliable data, and it is difficult therefore for us to make a recommendation about the existing targets. The recycling target has pushed recycling in the right direction, although it has done so weakly and largely ineffectively. There is plenty of scope for progress within the targets set out in Making Waste Work. However they, and the Government's commitment to them, must be re-affirmed vigorously. These targets should be maintained until such time as they are exceeded or better targets can be justified on grounds of environmental benefit, practicality and proof. The Government must publish the proof underlying the targets, and guarantee continuing support for related initiatives, if the targets are to achieve any greater degree of acceptance in the future than they have now.

270. We must also note our concern that the present Government's enthusiasm to promote sustainable development should not run unencumbered by a proper sense of scientific rigour. Our reason for concern is the launching of the consultation on the new statutory strategy when, according to the Environment Agency, reliably collated and interpreted information from the National Waste Survey is still "eighteen months to two years" away, with the survey not even due to begin until this summer.[506] There will need to be several more years of the municipal waste survey before any valid assessment can be made of the trends which that study portrays. While we applaud the renewal of the debate which this consultation represents, we consider it to be imperative that the statutory strategy should be built upon current, reliable data. The Minister told us that he hoped the consultation would conclude "in the first half" of 1999.[507] In the long term it is surely better that the strategy evolve in accordance with the results of these surveys than that it is rushed in pursuit of the previous Government's timetable. We can see no reason for confidence in the statutory strategy's requirements if it represents no increase in understanding of waste management than is expressed in Making Waste Work.

Conclusion

271. In our opening remarks on Government we noted the Environment Agency's request that it define precisely the role it expects each contributor to take up in implementing the new waste strategy. The second half of our Report has been concerned to do just that: it is essential that the Government states its own view of these roles in its Response. In examining those responsibilities the Government must, first and foremost, identify the role which it will play itself. The experience of this decade has clearly shown that it is not sufficient for the Government to make a statement and then withdraw. It is easy to make a statement of principle about what should happen; far less easy to persuade householders, local authorities, industry and waste managers that putting that principle into practice will pay off in the future.

272. The size and complexity of the response we received to our consultation has firmly convinced us that there is sufficient goodwill and inventiveness in society for considerable progress to be made in developing a sustainable approach to waste and resource management: but if the Government will not act to harness that goodwill, why should anyone else?

465 Q83 Back

466 Q650 Back

467 Ev pp 218-219, 235 Back

468 Environment Transport and Regional Affairs Committee, Sewage Treatment and Disposal, Second Report 1997-98, HC 266-I Back

469 Q217 Back

470 An Action Plan for Waste Management and Regulation, Environment Agency 1998 p7 Back

471 QQ213, 83 Back

472 Q354 Back

473 Q69 Back