Examination of witnesses (Questions 520
- 539)
WEDNESDAY 14 JUNE 2000
SIR RICHARD
MOTTRAM, MR
JOHN BALLARD,
MR TOM
ADAMS and MR
ALAN EVANS
520. I am just offering you the opportunity
to tell me whether you have mugged up on it, shall we say.
(Mr Ballard) I hope I can answer any questions you
ask but time will tell.
Mrs Dunwoody: In your court. I think it is about
40-all at the moment.
Chairman
521. Are you confident then that these management
plans are really all up to date?
(Mr Ballard) I outlined before the steps that are
required in order to ensure that estates do prepare proper plans
and that they are monitored. If you have got examples where you
think this is not happening we would clearly like to know about
it. There are three safeguards. One is they have to produce an
annual account of their stewardship. The second is that is subject
to examination by the Countryside Agency and the Inland Revenue.
Thirdly, estates are subject to visits not less than every five
years. In practice it is much more frequent than that. Looking
at the figures of the visits over the last two years, given that
there are 151 estates that have tax exemptions, in 1998-99 we
had 63 visits and in 1999-2000 we had 65 visits, so the incidence
of monitoring on the ground is actually quite high. The other
thing that we are doing, which I did refer to before, is ensuring
that there is up to date guidance about the standards that we
expect and the Countryside Agency are in the process of producing
guidelines which will incorporate best practice both in relation
to the management and, indeed, access.
522. So where do I get the list of the 151 estates?
(Mr Ballard) As you know, Chairman, that list is not
available. What the Finance Act in 1998 did do was it did give
the Inland Revenue additional powers to allow for improved publicity
and, for any new tax exemptions given, the address and details
will be put on the website. That will be accessible progressively
in the future. What about the existing estates will be in your
mind. The Inland Revenue will be progressively going to existing
owners and seeking to reach agreement with them about putting
their details on the site retrospectively. They are doing that
in an aggressive way in the sense that they have got two—
523. I understand that but I am in a bit of
difficulty because you said to me if we gave you some examples
of ones that we were not happy with you would have a look at them.
(Mr Ballard) Yes.
524. But we do not have the list, do we, so
how do we know whether we are happy with them or not?
(Mr Ballard) I think I was assuming that you had details
of particular estates that had come to your notice and therefore
were not satisfactory in the arrangements they make. There is
a circularity here which is—
525. I understand that.
(Mr Ballard)—why the powers have been taken
to address this issue but it is just a question of time before
it is put right.
Chairman: Perhaps we had better move on.
Mrs Dunwoody
526. In a sense what you are really saying is
they have had the money, they have had the concessions, but it
is only gently as we progress that we shall insist on them complying
with the terms under which they got the cash in the first place.
(Mr Ballard) There is a commitment to put the addresses
on the website.
527. Yes, I understand all of that. What I am
saying to you is they have had the cash, they have not complied
with the terms, we do not know where they are and you are saying
over a gentle process of the next ten years if the Inland Revenue
get the agreement of the owners it is possible that you will change
that situation, is that right?
(Mr Ballard) Obviously before 1998 there were no powers
to do this.
528. I understand that, but are you saying to
me that you cannot just give us a list and say "we have not
got agreement necessarily with the Inland Revenue that these people
will open up because it is going to take them some time to negotiate"?
Is that what you are saying to us?
(Mr Ballard) Yes. I am saying that it is for the Inland
Revenue to determine the pace at which this goes.
Mrs Dunwoody: Okay. So now we know who we can
have a go at.
Mr O'Brien
529. On the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme, what
are you doing about the report published by the Guardian
on the investigations they carried out on the way the Landfill
Tax Credit Scheme was being used?
(Sir Richard Mottram) What we have been doing is we
have been investigating the specific allegations that were made
with others involved, other departments, other interests. That
investigation is almost complete. When we have completed it we
will consult ministers and we will think about what the lessons
from that are. Secondly, in relation to the two
exemption—
Chairman
530. On that point, will you be able to let
us have a copy of that?
(Sir Richard Mottram) Of which?
531. Of the investigation.
(Sir Richard Mottram) Can I take that away, Chairman?
532. You can, yes.
(Sir Richard Mottram) Either we will give you the
investigation or we will give you a detailed set of conclusions
of the investigation. I do not know the basis on which it has
been written and it may include material—
Mr O'Brien
533. In the meantime can you give us the views
of your Department on this?
(Sir Richard Mottram) I am slightly reluctant to do
this because we have not quite finished this investigation. I
think the view of the Department is that the issues that have
been raised, though important, are not quite as they have been
presented in some of the media reporting. I hope we will complete
this fairly soon so that we can then give the Committee these
conclusions.
534. What actions have you taken against people
like the Environment Agency and local governments who are being
charged? Have any questions been put to them?
(Sir Richard Mottram) Yes, that is what we have been
looking at.
535. What is your attitude towards the allegations
made towards them?
(Sir Richard Mottram) What I am saying is we have
not yet completed this investigation. I was talking to the people
involved in it yesterday. I have not seen the final report. Some
of the allegations we think are not correct. I do not want to
say what our conclusions are going to be in advance of seeing
the work that is being done. What I am saying is I hope this can
be done fairly soon and we can let the Committee have it.
536. Will you take note that we strongly appeal
for a copy of the report?
(Sir Richard Mottram) Yes.
Chairman: Teresa Gorman on this point.
Mrs Gorman
537. Thank you, Chairman. I am very interested
because I live in a land of landfill sites in my part of the world.
I have some famous ones. I have Pitsea, which is Pitsea by name
and Pitsea by nature, and that has some of the most toxic waste
licences in the country. I have Mucking Flats, which is a wonderful
name for a rather desolate spot. I have one at Aveley and so on.
I am really in the middle of this so I am into this in a big way.
I do not buy the idea that this landfill tax has had the wonderful
effect that it has because my country lanes still have loads of
fly tipping still brought on, I am told by the farmers, as a result
of the tax. I know that the official line is that things have
got better over dumping, so one day one of your officials can
come along and see all the tyres and all the rest of it.
(Sir Richard Mottram) Sure.
538. That is number one. Number two, the recycling
of this tax money, the inference here is that the industry is
twisting the rules and somehow diverting it to its own best interests.
(Sir Richard Mottram) Yes.
539. I do not want to say anything about that
but I want to say something about ENTRUST because I regularly
receive their literature and I regularly push it out to my area
and I regularly never get anything at all, money goes to lovely
rural areas in North Essex where people have got really good posh
schemes going for something or other and practically none of it
goes back into the recycling. For example, the roads in my part
of Essex where transport lorries come and go back and all the
bits fly off the back are filthy and they need planting. All these
sensible things about this tax are just not happening. We do not
see any benefit although it is our part of the world which contributes
a very large amount of this money. By definition an area with
a lot of landfill sites has a lot of urban problems that go with
that. I would like you to give me some answers as to how it is
that you, and then after that me, can make access to these funds
more available to the run down parts of the country which are
blighted by landfill. I feel very strongly about this and I want
your personal help.
(Sir Richard Mottram) The first thing I would like
to say is that ENTRUST is not, of course, the responsibility of
my Department, so I may have a lot of sympathy with what you say
but I do not have the capacity or the ability to determine how
they allocate their funds. I am not trying to duck your question,
I will come on to your question in a minute. ENTRUST is a body
that is a private non-profit distributing company appointed by
Customs & Excise. I can certainly go away and raise the issue
you have raised about whether the way in which ENTRUST is allocating
the resources available to it is meeting the requirements of your
area, and I will do that, but it is not something for which I
am accountable I am afraid.
| 
