Examination of Witness(Questions 620-635)
DR JOE
HOWE
WEDNESDAY 11 DECEMBER 2002
620. I think we need to explore this a little
bit more. I shall read your academic papers with interest. I can
see a paper coming on here.
(Dr Howe) I shall leave some with you.
Mr Mitchell
621. There is a bit of fear of the unknown about
this, partly because it is grandiose but diffuse and nobody is
quite sure what to expect, mainly because of the cost implications,
because people are worried about what the cost will be, who is
going to pay and how is it going to be apportioned. What are your
views on who should pay and how the costs should be apportioned?
(Dr Howe) It has to be a combination of public and
private sector, it has to be a combination of public and private
sector! Up front the public sector is going to have to take the
lead in the short term. Planners need educating about the implications
of river basin management plans and they need to be definitely
trained about the Water Framework Directive. You can see from
the limited amount of notes you have had sent to you regarding
the Water Framework Directive from planners they are not aware
yet of the implications a Water Framework Directive could have
on them and the implications of river basin management plans.
Inevitably there is going to be more training required by local
planning authorities, particularly in working across boundaries
and across borders, not just with adjacent authorities but perhaps
with adjacent regions. There is also to going to need to be money
invested from the public sector for the first round of stakeholder
participation. Up front it is going to cost quite a bit of money,
I would have thought, for the public sector.
622. Those should be paid by the public sector?
(Dr Howe) I think so. Yes, I do. In the longer term
it is going to be a combination of public and private sector money.
Here I think you are probably looking at your key stakeholders,
your utility companies and particularly your developers, to fund
much of the public participation and much of the issues relating
to perhaps development applications. You could have a development
act associated with development applications, could you not, to
try and get solution funding?
623. Would that apply to the stakeholders, to
customers, to all farmers, who would it apply to?
(Dr Howe) From my point of view, those who are putting
in planning applications to develop particular pieces of land
to change land use, if you will.
624. Right. How about the allocation of costs
for the continuous running of the thing once it is there?
(Dr Howe) Public sector and private sector, a combination
of the two. The public sector will have to continue to fund issues
into the longer term and to ensure that planners continue to formulate
and update their local plans and their river basin management
plans.
625. That is the cost of planning, how about
the cost of pollution?
(Dr Howe) As far as I can see the cost of pollution
is going to have to be borne through Polluter Pays under the legislation.
626. Let us look at one issue which is not quite
so specific and that is diffuse pollution by farmers or whoever,
diffuse urban pollution. DEFRA says we are having lots more households
being created as households break up and they are a challenge
for water use and quality, so there is going to be more diffuse
urban pollution, more transport, more construction, more sewage
disposals. (a) how will that be paid for and controlled? Let us
take that first.
(Dr Howe) Is there a (b) or do you want me to answer
(a) first?
627. Sorry?
(Dr Howe) You said (a) how will that be paid for,
is there a (b)?
628. (b) is how is it being taken into account
in the planning framework and policy development?
(Dr Howe) Inevitably there is going to be increased
diffuse pollution over the course of the next 20 years. There
is a prediction of four million new households, there is increased
transportation, changes in agricultural practice, etc., etc.,
and there is probably going to be an increase in diffuse pollution.
How do you treat that and how is that going to be paid? I would
argue that the way of treating that is to adopt more sustainable
ways of managing run-off. The Minister mentioned sustainable urban
drainage systems and I am quite a keen advocate of sustainable
urban drainage systems. How do we pay for that? Again, I would
argue that on issues relating to planning agreements with developers,
developers should be playing quite a key role in putting in sustainable
urban drainage systems and so forth. At the moment, however, I
work quite closely with a water company, United Utilities, and
I am aware that this issue is highly contested at the moment as
to who is going to take responsibility for ownership and delivery
of sustainable drainage systems. It is an issue that is going
to have to be ironed out, possibly through guidance, possibly
even through secondary legislation.
Diana Organ
629. To go back a little bit to my original
question, Article 14 of the Directive requires that there should
be public consultation and active involvement of interested parties.
Can we talk about the public consultation here because it is not
going to be good enough to just put out the odd consultation paper,
we have got to have a water parliament system or something like
that of the public within the area. Can you give me an example
of anywhere in the UK, or even in Europe, in the planning process,
in the planning system, where we have got a model that we can
move across and use to deliver what Article 14 asks us to do?
(Dr Howe) I cannot think of an example off the top
of my head. Nevertheless, there are some reasonable examples that
we could begin to look at in terms of good practice. I would encourage
you to consider looking for areas of good practice. I sit on the
Scientific Advisory Group of the Mersey Basin Campaign and we
are involved in a whole series of river valley initiatives working
very closely with many vocal organisations. Particularly there
are quite a lot of Groundwork Trusts up in the North-West that
we work very, very closely with and they have a whole series of
local stakeholder groups, community groups, that are centrally
involved in delivering river valley initiatives. Perhaps that
is the sort of model that I might well envisage occurring if this
is implemented in the true spirit of Article 14.
630. You gave an example there of something
that you are involved in as not exactly a model but best practice,
shall we say. How easy do you think it is going to be to deliver
and set up what you are involved with in the Mersey Basin right
across England and Wales as a system where people do feel that
they are getting the public consultation process going? Are we
going to be able to do this?
(Dr Howe) If the resources are made available, yes,
it could be possible. I doubt that that will occur. I suspect
that we will probably continue with the current position in the
way that local authorities consult over their development plans
at the moment which in some cases is reasonable but in some cases
is not quite so good.
631. I do not know about you but I know that
in my job endless Friday evenings are spent with people saying
"I never knew about this", villagers or people from
an area of a small town, "I did not know they were going
to build this or develop this or change this". I have to
say that if I turned round and said to them "Well, it was
in your Local Development Plan", they would say "What
Local Development Plan?", "Oh, the Local Development
Plan that was on display in the local library and there were public
notices in the press". I have to say my local authority is
pretty good with their publication and consultation on their development
plan, they do go around the parishes and do it. If that is good
practice, are we not saying that this is a bit of a sham, that
public participation does not really involve and engage people
and leave them well informed? That is now in the planning process
and this is going to be even more. Is it not going to be deliverable?
Is Article 14 just a wish?
(Dr Howe) I think I would be tempted to disagree with
you on that. I do have sympathy that we struggle to reach many
individuals out there through the existing planning arrangements
but, then again, I do not think we could necessarily reach people
out there. The best way to reach people out there is to build
something in their backyard and then all of a sudden they will
participate, to be honest with you.
632. That is true.
(Dr Howe) How you are going to reach these groups
is through many of the environmental NGOs, through many of the
other organisations who are operating at locality levels and they
will be the ones who make valid representation to this particular
process.
633. Are we saying that the pressure groups
and the lobby groups, like RSPB, World Wildlife Fund, Council
for the Protection of Rural England, we can go on, is public consultation
in your view, their views coming forward?
(Dr Howe) It is the best we have got.
Diana Organ: Thank you.
Chairman
634. All these organisations Diana has been
talking about are predominantly involved in the countryside. They
all send me enormous submissions on the subject of the future
of agriculture but I do not recall any of them sending me submissions
on the future of buses.
(Dr Howe) I agree.
635. There is a problem here. If you are going
to rely on the lobby organisations dealing with the urban environment,
there are transport lobbies obviously of one sort or another but
I am not conscious of their having some coherence or having focused
in the way that some of the others have.
(Dr Howe) I agree with you. I think there are many
groups out there who should have made a more vocal representation
to this particular Committee, not least my own, town planning.
Chairman: If I may say so, I think if you are
the only person who has published on this, Dr Howe, you have got
a glittering career ahead of you as a consultant over the next
few years, so I would discourage any competition if I were you
while you are ahead of the game.
Diana Organ: You have cornered the market.
Chairman: I realise we called you at short notice
and did not give you time to prepare any written material, so
if in retrospect there are things you would like to say please
do send them to us because the drafting, obviously, is a fairly
open process. We may wish to consult you and we are open to receive
additional information. Thank you very much for coming at such
short notice and for being so helpful.
| 
