House of Commons - Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs

Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Sixth Report

THE ENVIRONMENT AGENCY

ACCOUNTABILITY

109. As required by section 12 of the Environment Act, the Agency has eight Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees (REPACs), one in each of its regions. These committees are concerned with integration of functions, identifying issues of special interest to the region and acting as a sounding board for policy initiatives for the Agency and other bodies.[206] They are each made up of around 21 members drawn from a balance of relevant interests as follows:

(b) Five members from regulated industry in the fields of pollution control, water resources, and producer responsibility;

(c) Four members representing interests in "air and land aspects" (covers issues such as agriculture, contaminated land, engineering, and air quality);

(d) Four members representing environmental interests (largely NGOs);

(e) Five elected members of local authorities;

(f) The Chairmen of the region's Regional Fisheries, Ecology and Recreation Advisory Committee and Regional Flood Defence Committee.[207]

Except for the Chairmen, candidates for nomination to these committees are put forward by the relevant interest groups and are appointed by the Agency on the basis of the Nolan principles.

110. The early stages of the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees' existence were characterised, in evidence to us, as "shaky".[208] Ian Bonas, Chairman of the North-East REPAC, told us, "To begin, with I think it would be fair to say that the Agency at national level was pretty defensive about REPACs. We were fed undigested papers, snow stormed with issues and information and there was a low point, probably two years ago, when it might be no exaggeration to say we were close to open revolt. We were pretty upset at that time about the way things were going."[209]

111. Since then, we were told, relationships with the Agency have improved, and the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees are now playing a very useful role as a link between the Agency and those it serves.[210] Ian Bonas explained to us how the REPACs add to the accountability of the Agency:

211

The REPACs have recently been asked by the Minister for the Environment to report annually on the Agency's performance: a trial run has already taken place, and it is expected that all REPACs will make such a report in the coming year.[212] We welcome this initiative, and we recommend that these reports be made widely available to the general public, perhaps by means of the Agency's website.

112. We received very little in the way of complaints about the make-up of the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees. The main exception was the Local Government Association, which argued in its written evidence for greater representation of local government, suggesting that the proportion of local councillors sitting on these bodies was "not sufficient [fully to] reflect the substantial interests of local authorities and the communities they represent."[213] However, the LGA representative who appeared before us in oral evidence appeared to go back on this, saying, "I think it is sufficient that five out of 20 is enough to give a fairly loud community voice to the REPAC."[214] We regard this request by the LGA as somewhat opportunistic in nature. Broadly speaking, the balance of interests on the REPACs seems about right, and should as far as possible be maintained in any new committee structure (see below). However, we note the suggestion that the representatives of "air and land" could be replaced by members co-opted by the committee itself for particular purposes, and we recommend that further consideration be given to this suggestion.[215]

113. Whilst we have no concerns about the balance of interests represented on the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees, we do have doubts about the appropriateness of the current structure of statutory committees and advisory groups. In addition to the REPACs, Regional Fisheries, Ecology and Recreation Advisory Committees and Regional Flood Defence Committees, the Agency has also established 26 Area Environment Groups (AEGs), one in each of its operational areas. These groups consist of members drawn from a wide range of local interests including local authorities, local industry, internal drainage boards, the farming community; fishing interests; conservation and recreation interests; environment groups, riparian owners and others. Their role is to advise the Area Manager on local issues and priorities for the Agency's work. As a result, there are around 50 different groups advising or directing the Agency in the performance of its functions.

114. It was suggested to us that the resulting large number of bodies, each making their own contribution to the Agency's work, was excessive. Ian Bonas, for example, told us, "In our region there are eight committees for the regional and area staff to refer to, that is four AEGs, one REPAC, two flood defence and one fish. This is just too many. It would give any staff indigestion to have to refer to eight committees."[216] We note also that both the Minister for the Environment and, to a lesser extent, the new Chairman of the Agency hinted that they thought that there were at present too many such committees.[217] We recommend that the current structure of 3 statutory committees in each region plus the 26 non-statutory Area Environment Groups be reviewed, with a view to creating a more streamlined and therefore more effective structure. A possible model for a new structure was suggested to us by Ian Bonas.[218]

115. Above all, it is very important that the advisory committees, however they are structured, are and are seen to be influential in the work of the Agency. We were told by both the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committee Chairmen who appeared before us and the Chairman of the Agency of examples of where the REPACs had had a direct positive influence on the work of the Agency.[219] However, others were more sceptical of just how influential the REPACs might be. The RSPB, which is represented on several of these committees, wrote, "members of RSPB staff represented on these committees invariably report that views represented at the meetings appear to have little influence over the work programmes and activities of the Agency".[220] Even Ian Bonas, who had a generally favourable view of the part which these committees have been playing, recognised that "the Agency still has a long way to go in terms of learning how to use its committees effectively."[221]

116. In this context, we welcome the Minister's insistence that he wanted to see the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees being given "a more positive role".[222] We also welcome the Agency Chairman's recognition that "it is very important that the Agency, both regionally and nationally, learns from [their] experience", and his suggestion that the Agency "would be talking about ideas to make them work better."[223] If the right people are to be encouraged to serve on these committees, they must be able to see that the hard, usually unpaid work which they put in is having a positive effect on the Agency's work. We therefore recommend that the Agency take steps to ensure that it takes full advantage of the experience and expertise of the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees.

Cooperation with Regional Development Agencies and Regional Chambers

117. The Agency, with its regional structure, has a very important part to play in encouraging sustainable development in the regions. We were very pleased, therefore, to be told by the new Chairman of the Agency, who at the time was also still leader of the Yorkshire Regional Assembly, 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."[224] Particularly in the light of the lack of performance indicators reflecting the contribution made to environmental sustainability by the Regional Development Agencies, noted in our Report on the RDAs of May last year,[225] we very much welcome the role which the Agency has played in encouraging the promotion of environmentally sustainable development by the Regional Development Agencies.

118. However, we believe that there is an opportunity which is currently being missed for closer contact and cooperation between the Agency's advisory committees and emerging regional government structures.[226] Whilst it is clearly very important that there be direct contact between the Agency and the Regional Development Agencies themselves, similar contact between the bodies by which all these agencies are held accountable can ensure that local concerns about both the effect of economic development on the environment and the effect of environmental regulation and management on the local economy are taken into account by all sides. We therefore recommend that the forthcoming Financial Management and Policy Review examine the relationship between the Environment Agency's advisory committees and the emerging regional government structures, with a view to ensuring the closest possible cooperation between these bodies.

119. This brings us to a further point, which is that of the relationship between the Agency itself and the emerging regional government structures. If there eventually emerges a tier of regional government in the English regions, comparable to the arrangements which are now in place in Scotland and Wales, it is certain to raise questions about the degree to which arrangements for the governance of the Environment Agency should be devolved to these new institutions (as responsibility for overseeing the work of the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency and the Environment Agency in Wales has been devolved to the Scottish Parliament and the National Assembly for Wales). We therefore welcome the Agency's recognition that "if regional government becomes a very serious part of political life then we will have to respond to that".[227] It is important that the Agency recognise that Regional Development Agencies are here to stay. Both the Agency and the Government must take account of the emerging regional government structures when making decisions about the future shape of the Environment Agency.

Engagement with local communities

120. It was suggested to us by Friends of the Earth, which has a network of community groups throughout the country concerned with environmental issues, that the Agency was not doing enough to engage with local communities in areas close to polluting industry. Mike Childs of FoE told us:

A lot of the work that we carry out [at] Friends of the Earth is looking at pollution from the larger industrial processes. The work that we have carried out over the last year shows that many of those processes, perhaps not unsurprisingly, are in the poorest parts of the country. Those are the areas where the Agency does not have good communication with the communities who live there. That is an area where I think the Agency should put increased resources in terms of trying to improve its communication with the people living in those areas.[

228

Later, he continued,

229

This criticism was to a certain extent borne out by the number of memoranda we received from individuals and groups complaining about the actions of the Agency in Westbury[230] and Ribblesdale,[231] the second of which was the focus of two inquiries carried out by our predecessor Environment Committee in the last Parliament.[232]

121. We were told by the Agency that it has, in response to those inquiries, been taking steps to improve its relations with local communities in areas where contentious licence applications have been made by means of its new 'selected licence application procedure'.[233] Following six pilot studies, this new procedure is currently in the process of further development, with consultation having taken place between July and November last year. The selected licence application procedure as it was envisaged in last year's consultation paper involves a three-stage consultation process, namely consultation on the application; consultation on the Agency's proposed decision; and publication of the Agency's final decision, with explanation. The consultation paper noted that there were a number of ways in which effective public consultation could be achieved, including public meetings hosted by the Agency; attendance at other meetings, eg. local parish meetings; exhibitions; open days; press announcements; use of the Internet; and written submissions.[234]

122. Part of the selected licence application procedure as it is currently envisaged consists of Agency personnel making themselves available for direct discussion with local people about issues which concern them. As Cllr Twitchen of the LGA told us,

235

123. The Chief Executive of the Agency told us, "We feel it is essential, on these difficult issues, that we are seen to respond fully to the views of everybody in an open and a public way."[236] We welcome the Agency's moves towards becoming more directly accountable to local communities by means of public meetings and the new Selected Licence Application Procedure. It is very important that where there is controversy over a site regulated by the Agency, or a new licence application to the Agency, that the Agency be active in meeting local concerns. The fiasco at Castle Cement in Ribblesdale must not be repeated elsewhere. Agency action in this area should therefore continue and be extended, particularly to ensure that mechanisms to consult and reassure the public are available for existing sites as well as for the new applications to which the Selected Licence Application Procedure applies. This should be an important part of the raising of the Agency's public profile and the gaining of public recognition and acceptance for the Agency which we recommend at the beginning of this Report.[237]

206 Environment Agency Annual Report and Accounts, 1998-99, page 5. Back

207 Provisions for the membership of the Regional Environmental Protection Advisory Committees are set out in Section 12 and Schedule 3 of the Environment Act 1995. Back

208 Q479 Back

209 Q519 Back

210 Q481 Back

211 Q526 Back

212 Q519 Back

213 Ev vol II p.110 (EA80) Back

214 Q479 Back

215 QQ537-539 Back

216 Q554 Back

217 Q673; Q648 Back