Examination of Witnesses (Questions 563
- 579)
TUESDAY 18 JANUARY 2000
SIR JOHN
HARMAN, MR
ED GALLAGHER
AND MR
ARCHIE ROBERTSON
Chairman
563. Good morning
to our witnesses and to everybody else. This is our final session
on the work of the Environment Agency. Could I ask you to introduce
yourselves for the record.
(Sir John Harman) Good morning. I am
John Harman and I am the new Chairman of the Agency. I am accompanied
here by Ed Gallagher, the Chief Executive, and Archie Robertson,
on my right, Director of Operations.
564. I do not know whether you are happy for
us to go straight to questions or whether you would like to say
just a few words to start with.
(Sir John Harman) With your permission, Chairman,
if I might make a few brief points to begin with. Thank you very
much. First of all, I would like to say on my own behalf that
I welcome the work of the Sub-committee. I am looking with interest
not only at the evidence that has been submitted to you but for
the report that you will eventually produce. It does come at a
very timely moment as far as I am concerned, as I am sure you
will appreciate. The Agency is currently in the process of looking
again and updating our environmental strategy in which we wish
to set out our long term integrated approach towards the environment
but, because of the proceedings here and the relevance that we
see they will have to that strategy, we do not wish to finally
agree that until your report so we can take account of your conclusions
when that happens. The second point I would like to make is that
we have identified in our written submission to the Committee
a number of areas where we are seeking changes to law or to practice,
mostly to law. You will recall we suggested environmental responsibilities
for company directors and we have suggested, for instance, a move
away from charges based on cost recovery to what we would call
incentive charging, i.e. charges based on environmental impact.
We hope that the Committee will have been interested in those
ideas and perhaps in discussing them with us this morning. Finally,
I would like to say that I want the Agency—as it already
is—to be a learning organisation and a listening organisation.
We have looked very carefully at the evidence submitted to you
by others and, particularly where they have raised cases which
we need to respond to, we have carried out thorough investigations
of what has been said to you and produced a short report on those
comments. That was provided to the Clerk I think yesterday, so
it is with the Committee. I do not wish to spend today simply
going back over the evidence of other witnesses. It has been placed
before you, Chairman. Thank you very much.
Christine Butler
565. The Agency has a whole list of functions
and that might be part of its problem, as well as hopefully its
eventual success. We will come to discover some of that later.
I wanted to ask you, Sir John, if possible, if you have a good
and coherent idea of the overall aim and direction of the Agency?
What is its role?
(Sir John Harman) That is a very wide ranging question
and I shall try and keep my answer as to the point as possible
but it is a very complex area. The purpose of the Agency in the
end is to protect and improve the environment of England and Wales.
It is my view, and I think that is a view shared by colleagues
on the board and indeed within the Agency, that the process that
we have been through to create the Agency out of its previous
constituent parts has been—is no longer to any great extent—a
process of transition. We are now much more able to think about
how what we do actually affects the outcomes in the environment,
measurable environmental factors, whether we are talking about
air quality or water quality. It is the difference we make to
the environment of England and Wales. I hope that you will see
that as we come to the review of our strategy, which I have just
mentioned in my introductory comments, we are able to demonstrate
more clearly how what we do directly, or more importantly in some
cases how we influence others, contributes to that. I think it
is important that we keep our eye on the externalities rather
than simply on maybe, if I might say so, some of the things we
are asked to do by statute that are very input driven, input orientated.
We do need to see beyond that to the effect we are having on the
external environment.
566. How would you like to push this direction?
How do you see the balance between statute and the Agency's own
vision?
(Sir John Harman) I would like to answer that question—this
is not a put off—when we have been through the debate which
concludes in the publication of a new strategy. My own view is
that is exactly a balance. We are charged with a range of statutory
requirements. It is important that we fulfil those. I think that
it would be of tremendous assistance—and this is a point
that perhaps we will come to later—if some of the legislation
that we are given, some of the regulations we are asked to apply,
are better integrated in themselves.
Mrs Dunwoody
567. What is so unique about your Agency that
it should be treated any differently from any other arm of Government?
(Sir John Harman) I would hope that all arms of Government
could be treated in the same way.
Christine Butler
568. The Agency must have its own vision of
where it wants to be. There have been problems, surely just because
there is a strategy not yet published it does not prevent you
from telling us about it. Obviously you have been working very
hard on it.
(Sir John Harman) Yes. If you are inviting me to give
you my view, which I will do, of where we should be going, there
are I think three points that I would make. I have said that I
am concerned that we should concentrate on externalities.
569. You should concentrate on those?
(Sir John Harman) Yes. We must measure our success
not by the institutional or structural measures but by what effect
we are having on the environment of England and Wales. That "we"
obviously means the Agency but it means the Agency acting with
partners as well, what effect can we help others to have. It is
not simply a matter of the direct application of our own functions.
The first point I want to make is that we are looking at externalities
I hope. The second point is that it is a matter of working with,
persuading, influencing others to have a positive effect on the
environment. I mentioned as an example of the way in which the
Agency is moving in that direction the work that we are doing
right across the country with voluntary agreements with industry
on pollution reduction, waste minimisation and so forth. In my
estimation that is a direction we should go further in. It would
be possible to portray that as a concentration on one thing to
the detriment of our statutory responsibilities. Our job is to
find the balance between doing the one and the other. My final
point, if I might, is that we have been learning over the whole
period of the Agency's life. You will realise I have been a Board
Member of the Agency since its inception so I can speak with some
confidence of the development path we have taken. Over that period
we have been learning how to integrate environmental assessment,
environmental protection. This is a learning process. There is
no textbook. I think it was always envisaged that the Agency would
develop ways of integrating its approach to the environment as
it learned from experience, and that I believe is what we are
doing. We are learning also how to address that part of our legislation,
Section 4, which talks about our contribution to sustainable developments.
One thing that I want us to be is increasingly aware, increasingly
able to understand and contribute to the economic and social aspects
of sustainable development as well as the purely environmental.
570. How are you going to let the public at
large as well as these partners know exactly what you intend to
do? Not in detail but when will you be able to let us all know
how you measure outcomes?
(Sir John Harman) The measurement of outcomes is not
something that we will be able to say on any set date—for
example on June 15 we will produce the answer, this is again a
learning process.
571. This year?
(Sir John Harman) But, I do not think it would be
sensible—I will come back to the question direct in a moment—of
me to anticipate that there will be any date on which we can finally
say that we know exactly how to measure all environmental outcomes.
I referred to the publication of a new draft strategy for the
Agency, and that will be in the next couple of months. Certainly
we will not be agreeing that until we have had the opportunity
to consider consultative responses from all and sundry but including
your own conclusions. If you are asking about the publication
of the strategy, this year.
572. I am thinking about your relationship with
the public, if you think that is good enough?
(Sir John Harman) How will we inform the public? Well,
there are many ways in which that happens. Obviously by publishing
what it is we think our strategy should be and listening very
carefully to what they say. Actually this Committee process is
also part of that exposure of our intentions. Also, as you may
have seen I think if you were on the site visit in the South West,
certainly you are welcome to see it at any time, we are doing
a great deal of work—and I mean a great deal of work—on
what I think is one of the key responses to this question of public
knowledge and that is opening up and making available a wide range
of reliable, scientifically sound environmental data in the way
that people can relate to and understand. I give you, for instance,
the postcode access to environmental information through the web
site. In my own view the question you ask is not a specific one
about a date but a general one about how one makes available to
an educated, intelligent public the information they need to make
up their minds about the direction of any Government Agency, including
our own.
Mr Olner
573. Can I ask quickly how this vision is going
to be shared? How is it going to be operated in all the regions?
(Sir John Harman) I detect a feeling that you might
have expected it would be operated differently in the regions.
My experience with the Agency suggests that is not a great risk.
574. Some of the Government Agencies have regional
differences.
(Sir John Harman) Yes. I reply that my own knowledge
of the Agency and experience of the Agency is that I do not believe
that is a great risk. I think it is important that a vision for
the Agency is well understood throughout the Agency, that is obviously
the case. We are going to have to make sure that work is done
to ensure that, yes, I accept that. I do not think that despite
the regional differences, which we celebrate of course in some
respects across the country, that there is any very high risk
of a lack of buy-in in any part of the country. I think that is
important though to recognise that the publication of a strategy
itself does not change anybody's mind, it is the process of adopting
and owning that strategy that we will have to concentrate on.
Chairman
575. Can I just take you back to this plea for
integrated regulations. Everybody believes that they can do regulations
better than the Government. Have you actually got an example of
where you can produce a regulation which you feel will work much
better than the existing ones?
(Sir John Harman) I think I would probably like to
ask Mr Robertson if he would take that one up.
(Mr Robertson) If you look at waste regulation as
one particular area—
576. Can I give you a nice way out. Could you
just give us a note setting out how the regulation could be changed
so that it would achieve a much better aim. With that note can
you let us know what representation you have made to the Government
to make those changes.
(Mr Robertson) Certainly we would like to do that.
Can I just comment that as Sir John has been talking about outcome
focused activity then I think there is an opportunity to look
at the legislation we have and the many pieces of legislation
we have to work with and to have them focused on the outcomes
together rather than in a bit by bit way, that would be the context
of the message we would give you.
577. Thank you very much. Right. Can I ask also
as far as the Agency is concerned, has it got too much power or
not enough power?
(Sir John Harman) I decline I think to recognise the—
578. All right, I will substitute responsibility.
(Sir John Harman) I think that we have a very adequate
range of powers to do that which statute has asked us to do. We
would like there to be, not necessarily in the Agency's armoury
but in the country's armoury, other powers, other modes of influencing
people's behaviour in so far as it affects the environment. I
have mentioned in my opening statement a power which we would
not exercise, but to do with company directors' responsibilities
to report on environmental performance, for instance. So it is
not I think a matter of saying the Agency does not have enough
powers but there is clearly opportunity for improving the armoury
of powers available to the UK as a whole.
579. You do not think you have got too many
duties in order to do any of them properly?
(Sir John Harman) I do not believe so. It will always
be possible to make a case that any particular body has too many
or too few duties. The only thing I would say about that is that
we are not wedded to a particular institutional mixture, if I
might say so, but what is important and what I think we are able
to demonstrate right across the piece is that the powers that
we have are not exercised separately but are exercised increasingly
in an integrated way; and I think whether you look at flood defence
or IPPC, for instance, you will see an increasing awareness, as
an example, of the effect of those powers and duties we have on,
say, conservation, which is something we are charged with looking
at. I think Mr Gallagher would like to add to that response.
(Mr Gallagher) Yes. I think our powers are very strong
in some areas and less strong in others. Integrated Pollution
Prevention and Control, for example, the way we apply that and
the legal powers we have there, I think are in the forefront of
anything in Europe. We would offer that up I think as a very good
example of powerful legislation. Some of the other things we have
to deal with are much less connected and joined up. If we look
at the number of European regulations coming towards us, there
is a vast number of them which are not necessarily well connected.
For example, if we are able to implement the Integrated Pollution
Prevention and Control Legislation alongside some of the Waste
Legislation for the large waste sites, we think we could save
several million pounds in eliminating duplication. I think if
we are able to join things up and deal with them in an integrated
way we will be able to be more powerful.
|
