Examination of Witnesses (Questions 580
- 599)
TUESDAY 18 JANUARY 2000
SIR JOHN
HARMAN, MR
ED GALLAGHER
AND MR
ARCHIE ROBERTSON
Mrs Dunwoody
580. You have urgently prepared a short paper
for the Government saying "These are the areas in which we
do not have enough muscle. This is where we could do with Government.
This is where you have to change"?
(Mr Gallagher) Yes, we have discussed these with Ministers.
There is a review of the barriers to integration concerning environmental
legislation going on at the moment. We have listed a number of
areas in our submission where we think we need some change. None
of those will be a surprise to the Minister when he gives evidence
and generally I believe he is sympathetic to the sorts of things
we are saying.
581. What timescale? It all sounds remarkably
leisurely. "A review of the integration", I am always
fascinated with reviews, they are very convenient things reviews,
they are like Royal Commissions.
(Mr Gallagher) I think one of the problems is that
some of the changes require primary legislation changes.
582. You have identified that and you have asked
for some urgent action?
(Mr Gallagher) Yes, we have. The difficulty is getting
parliamentary time. We are hoping that when the review of the
deregulation activities takes place so that our Act, the Environment
Act now will come under that, some of those changes can go through
Parliament without primary legislation. That would be a faster
track. A number of the things I have mentioned possibly could
go through that route.
Chairman
583. You took over a lot of responsibilities
from local authorities when you were created. Would it not be
a good idea to pass some of those back to local authorities who
perhaps did them rather more efficiently and better and they were
better understood by local people?
(Sir John Harman) As I said earlier, I am not wedded
to a particular institutional mix. I would need to look at that
on a case by case basis. As you know, my own background in local
government is very considerable so this is not something that
I have not said in the past as a representative of local government.
I am not aware that there is any evidence of reduced performance
in any of the things taken from local government, in fact I have
to say rather the opposite, particularly thinking there of waste
regulation which remains an area of difficulty, as you have heard
in the other evidence before you. I do not know if Mr Robertson
wants to say anything more about that but I think you were really
rather directing that thought to me. I do think that we have to
have an open mind and if there is evidence we have to consider
it.
584. What about air quality? You have still
got split responsibility there, have you not, between local authorities?
(Sir John Harman) Yes.
585. Should that split responsibility not be
sorted out?
(Sir John Harman) I honestly have an open mind about
that, Chairman. I would say that the number of duties and concerns
we share with local authorities is immense. If you were, so to
speak, to fix one, you would still be left with many others. We
have recently concluded, as I think you are aware, an agreement
on top of our Memorandum of Understanding with the Local Government
Association about the range of these. I think it is a dynamic
and I think both sides of that dynamic are (a) prepared to work
together to make the thing work and (b) prepared to use a rational
common sense in the give and take and the eventual destination
of some of these powers. I do not believe there is any pressing
need for change at the moment. Mr Robertson I think has some comments
about the operational interface with local government.
(Mr Robertson) I believe that on the waste regulation
side, we were set out to bring more consistency to this area.
As John said, we are not satisfied with our own performance so
far, we are working very hard on it. However, we have brought
consistency in systems to that area and I believe we are seeing
now better protected environment from landfill and such things
as a result of that. What I wanted to say was just a word about
air quality which is one of the media that is affected by industrial
activity. The way we operate with industry is taking a holistic
look at the way that industry works. It is very difficult to conceive
that we would regulate industry without looking at air quality
but equally it is difficult to conceive—
Mr Olner
586. On a region by region basis?
(Mr Robertson) The regulation of industry is on a
site by site basis.
587. I am talking about the enforcement. People
in different regions view industry differently and air quality
differently and so do your inspectors.
(Mr Robertson) What we bring to industry is consistency
through sound science and through listening to people's concerns
before we make a determination.
Mrs Dunwoody
588. As opposed to unsound science.
(Mr Robertson) The science is in this organisation
the element, the source, of the consistency.
Chairman
589. You should not have risen to that one at
all.
(Mr Robertson) What I want to say on air quality is
let us recognise that air quality is very important in the sense
of regulation of industry but equally it has nationwide global
implications and there are no simple lines that you can draw for
air quality.
Mrs Ellman
590. You are a Government Agency, does that
not mean that you simply take instructions from the Government
or do you ever tell the Government they have got it wrong?
(Sir John Harman) I shall not deny that we are a Government
Agency for a start, that is clearly the case. I think this is
a question really about our independence, about how that is exercised.
We take a completely independent judgment on those regulatory
episodes that we are charged with, from the least to the greatest,
within existing Government policy. We are absolutely independent
in that regard. When it comes to the question of taking a view
of the environment based upon our knowledge and data, and going
from that view towards ideas about how policy might be improved
or changed or practice might be improved or changed, then of course
we are in constant discussion with the Government and there is
a very free interplay of ideas and data between the Agency and
the Government. When it comes to the regulatory episodes then
we are completely independent.
591. In terms of environment policy, could you
give us an example of where you have influenced Government?
(Sir John Harman) I do not know exactly when Government
policy changes, who influences it. I wonder if, Mr Gallagher,
have you got any claims that you are aware of that it was our
influence that persuaded the Minister to change his line on something?
Mrs Ellman: Your opportunity for claims to fame.
Mrs Dunwoody
592. Are you not glad you came, Mr Gallagher?
(Mr Gallagher) Yes, thank you. I think as a non elected
body we do have to make sure that we follow Government policy.
We are not a lobbying group although we do put our points of view
forward. I think it would be quite wrong if we were to disappear
down a route which either local authorities, one of our major
partners, and the other large environmental regulator, or Government,
elected Government, laid out for the nation. That would be quite
wrong. That does not mean to say that we accept everything as
being incapable of change. I have mentioned already a couple of
areas where we think our influence on Government will change policy
for the future. With regard to the independence of our judgment
and the quality of it, as our Chairman has said, the way this
is supposed to work is we come to an independent view and if the
Government does not like it they change it. So far we have had
no direction from Ministers to change our operational decisions,
although there have been a number of quite robust discussions
about some of the results.
Chairman
593. You were asked whether you might persuade
Ministers to change direction.
(Mr Gallagher) I think you must ask the Minister how
well he has regarded our advice. I think it would be fair to say
we have influenced him and we have an agenda for change which
we believe he is sympathetic to and will be reflected in the way
environmental legislation is written in the next five to ten years.
If it is not I think we will all be very disappointed. To some
extent we will have to continue to work with rather cumbersome
disconnected legislation which will make our administrative costs
that much more difficult to control and the amount of negotiation
and discussion we need to have to get a result that much more
complex.
Mrs Ellman
594. If you felt through the expertise you have
got within the Agency that environmental standards the Government
had set were inappropriate and did not offer the public sufficient
protection, would you say so?
(Mr Gallagher) We commented on producer responsibility
in a way which has not been taken up by Government but I think
that was perhaps more around the edges than the fundamental concept.
I think one area where we have perhaps been most influential was
in the early days when the droughts rather than floods were the
issue of the day. All the new legislation, which hopefully will
be going through Parliament soon, on water abstraction, the abolition
of licences of right and things like that, was very much the Agency's
agenda. In fact, if we were to score ourselves out of ten on the
things that we put forward which are now part of Government policy
I think we could—and this is perhaps no time to be immodest—say
we got nine and a half out of ten.
(Sir John Harman) We believe also that we have had
a big influence on the IPPC legislation which went through last
year but it is difficult to know how much of that was us and how
much was anybody else.
595. Do you feel inhibited in maybe suggesting
that Government changes policy?
(Sir John Harman) Personally I do not, I do not believe
the Agency does either.
596. The Agency's structure is based on river
catchment areas, not on regional boundaries and local government
boundaries. Does that not present you with difficulties if you
are following guidance relating to regional development issues
and regional strategies?
(Sir John Harman) This has been a live issue since
the days of the Environment Agency Advisory Committee which considered
the set up of the Agency's structures. It was resolved then, and
I think well resolved, by the following formula. Inevitably we
must deal with environmental boundaries in the way we operate,
the way we think about river catchments. But for the public face
and for the face towards the elected bodies of the United Kingdom,
be they local, regional or national, and for instance you have
the case of the Welsh boundary which comes well across catchment
areas, it is our problem to internalise those difficulties and
to present our information and our decisions and our relationship
to the public on the political boundaries that exist. Now, the
political boundaries that exist have slightly changed in some
respects from those which existed when we were set up. It is a
map you must keep always under some review but I still take the
view that it is environmentally right for us to consider our operations
at environmental boundary level and to communicate with the public
and with the political world at a political boundary level and
try not to internalise any conflicts there may be.
597. It is not just about communication, surely
it should be about developing your policies.
(Sir John Harman) Yes.
598. The regional strategies being developed
must include in them sustainable development and environmental
issues. Now, in the structure you have, are you able to relate
to those powers in dealing with that?
(Sir John Harman) I will answer to begin with, and
I think Mr Robertson, in fact I think all of us might want to
comment. I have noticed no difficulty at all arising from our
structure in relation, for instance, to the emerging debate about
regional strategies, be they economic or otherwise. I wanted to
comment on this question partly because, as you probably know,
as part of my transition into this new post, I am extricating
myself from a number of other positions, one of which is leader
of the Yorkshire Regional Assembly, which I still am as I speak
to you today. I can say quite confidently, therefore, from the
other side of this particular fence that of all the bodies, be
they private or public, with which the Assembly and the Chamber
in my region are working, the one that has given most support
to the development of regional strategies and most support to
understanding and promoting the idea of sustainable development
has been the Agency. It has seconded staff to us and it has seconded
staff to other regions. It has provided grant funding for certain
activities and done it in all the English regions as well. This
sounds very self-congratulatory but I am speaking here from my
other point of view. The Agency have been well able to engage
with both the RDA in my region and the other structures, the Chamber
and the Assembly. I am sure that is the case across the country
that the Agency has made a big contribution, firstly, to the appraisal
of their plans from a sustainability point of view and, secondly,
the construction of their plans. It may be true to say, I think
it is, that within the Agency in the sustainable development unit,
which brings together and co-ordinates all these efforts which
are going on around the regions, there is probably the single
most comprehensive point of knowledge about how these dynamics
are working from a sustainable development point of view across
England and Wales. It is something I think ought to be made good
use of, both by the Agency and by Government. Mr Robertson may
wish to follow that. I answered from a non Agency point of view.
(Mr Robertson) I would think it prudent to keep it
short after an independent testimonial like that.
Mr Olner
599. From the Chairman.
(Mr Robertson) Indeed. We did set out this year to
see what we could do in working in partnerships with the emerging
chambers and agencies, to contribute to help them formulate their
sustainable development agenda. We did that with the engagement
of the leaders in our region, each of whom took a personal responsibility
for getting that on the agenda. It is the people who were in the
Agency who have made it possible for us to do that, helped, I
must say, by growing use of technology which allows us to interpret
our information and other people's information to whatever boundary
happens to be at issue at the particular time. I am confident
with such an illustration we can meet the challenges of public
consultation, public involvement and partnering.
|
