Memorandum submitted by the United Kingdom
Major Ports Group
The United Kingdom Major Ports Group (UKMPG)
welcomes the Committee's inquiry into the Government's plans for
the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Regrettably
we only became aware of the Committee's inquiry after the deadline
for the submission of written evidence. Nevertheless we would
like to offer the following comments which we hope may assist
the Committee's investigations.
The UKMPG is the association which represents
the majority of the larger commercial ports in the UK. We have
eight members who operate 42 ports which account for about two-thirds
of the tonnage handled in UK ports. 95% of the country's international
trade passes through UK ports, so ports play an important role
in the nation's economy.
Seaports are necessarily built on the coast
or in estuaries and all the maritime activity in our ports takes
place in tidal waters or in enclosed docks. These locations represent
only a small proportion of the totality of river basins but we
are nevertheless concerned about the possible impact of the Directive
on the ports industry.
We have studied the Directive and the consultation
papers produced by the Department for Environment Food and Rural
Affairs and by the Environment Agency, but they do not provide
much assistance in assessing the likely implications of the Directive
on the ports industry. This is partly because of the vague terminology
which is used. Phrases such as "good ecological state"
appear frequently but we have not hitherto been able to establish
what such concepts will mean in practice. It has certainly not
been possible to produce a regulatory impact assessment of the
Directive on ports.
The Directive envisages the designation of "heavily
modified water bodies" (HMWBs) or "artificial water
bodies" (AWBs), where it is envisaged that the targets for
water quality will be less demanding than for the remainder of
river basins. It is fairly clear what is an AWB and we assume
that enclosed locks will be so treated. However no criteria have
yet been provided to define what constitutes a "heavily modified
water body". We assume that all ports will so qualify, but
this has yet to be clarified.
HMWBs will be expected to demonstrate "good
ecological potential" but again it has not been possible
to establish what this will mean in practice. So far as we can
see, the two activities in ports which are likely to create the
greatest problems in this context are maintenance dredging (ie
dredging to maintain the existing depth of a navigational channel)
and capital works, which may include the deepening of an approach
channel. Both these activities are likely to lead to some disturbance
of the seabed and hence an increase in the solids suspended in
the water—and indeed the passage of ships in shallow water
might have similar effect. So far as we can discover, none of
the guidance issued either by DEFRA or the Environment Agency
gives any guidance on whether such temporary disturbance will
be permissible although some commentators have suggested that
the effect of the Directive might be to make new port development
more difficult and more expensive.
The Directive proposes the development of river
basin management plans. Those harbour authorities who are situated
in estuaries have statutory powers and responsibilities relating
to activities on the rivers within their harbour limits. We therefore
assume that such authorities will be involved in the preparation
of the plans. However many of our estuaries contain areas designated
for special conservation under the Birds and Habitats Directives,
and these Directives already provide for the establishment of
management plans. We see no sense in the development of two separate
sets of plans, so we hope that it will be possible for them to
be integrated.
DEFRA's "Second consultation paper on the
implementation of the EC Water Framework Directive" appears
to envisage a regime of cost benefit analysis where economic activity
is likely to be affected by the implementation of the Directive.
We would hope that any new measures or restrictions required as
a consequence of the Directive which are likely to interfere with
port operations will be subject to such assessments.
We have had some initial discussions with the
Environment Agency about these issues, but they have not so far
been able to offer any specific guidance. We hope that in our
future discussions some of these points will be clarified, but
we nevertheless thought that the Committee should be aware of
our concerns about the potential impact of the Directive on port
operations and development.
The United Kingdom Major Ports Group
17 December 2002
| 
