Select Committee on Environmental Audit Minutes of Evidence


Memorandum submitted by the Environment Agency

". . . The Environmental Audit Committee has appointed a Sub-Committee which will examine how the Government and judiciary are helping to secure access to environmental justice in England and Wales. The Sub-committee intends to follow up its enquiry on environmental crime and the courts with a second inquiry looking at local environmental crime, in particular fly-tipping, fly-posting, litter, graffiti, noise and abandoned cars.

We are particularly seeking views on the following questions: [see below]"

SUMMARY

  The Agency is concerned that local environmental crime is having an impact not only on the environment but also on our quality of life, and some aspects are costing millions of pounds every year to tackle. Key issues are:

    —  Illegal waste activities are increasing in frequency and may increase further as the cost of legitimate waste management increases;

    —  Anti social behaviour is only part of the problem—criminals can make thousands of pounds profit from illegal dumping of waste that collectively costs local authorities, landowners and the Agency £100 milliotn to £150 million annually to clear;

    —  The Agency has responsibility for addressing a wide range of environmental crimes—crimes that are all too often tolerated by society;

    —  Partnership working is important in tackling these crimes—for example, we have agreed a protocol with the Local Government Association on tackling waste-crime; and

    —  Investment is required to reduce clean-up costs and the impact of these crimes.

INTRODUCTION

      (i)  The Environment Agency welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence as part of the examination of local environmental crime by the Sub-Committee to the Environment Audit Committee.

    (ii)  The Environment Agency (the Agency) is the principal regulatory body for environmental regulation in England and Wales. Our remit includes granting and enforcement of environmental licences, the apprehending of serious illegal unlicensed activity, and the prosecution of environmental offences. We enforce against illegal fish movements and poaching and we also regulate and enforce registration of craft on waterways within our control.

    (iii)  Our enforcement and prosecution activities follow a publicly available Enforcement and Prosecution Policy, and Functional Guidelines, which adhere to the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

    (iv)  The Agency has a broader remit to protect and enhance the environment, and make a contribution towards achieving sustainable development. This is subject to guidance from the Secretary of State. The Agency is an independent advisor on environmental matters affecting policy making within government and more widely.

    (v)  Of particular concern to the Agency (in the context of this inquiry) are illegal waste activities including fly-tipping. Many responses to the Sub-Committee's questions will therefore highlight waste-related issues, but where pertinent, wider Agency interests will be referred to. Should the Sub-Committee wish for further clarification of any aspect, the Agency would be willing to provide further details.

    (vi)  It is against this backdrop that the following responses to the Committee's questions are made.

1.   What is the scale of the impact of these crimes on the local environment?

  1.1  The scale of impact of local environmental crimes depends on the nature of the crime and local circumstances. In the worst cases the impact is large with, for example, fly-tipped waste, abandoned cars and graffiti collectively degrading an area and impacting on both the environment and quality of life.

  1.2  However, the term "environmental crime" includes not only the examples of fly-tipping, fly-posting, litter, graffiti, noise and abandoned cars given by the Sub-Committee, but a wider range of crimes that impact on the environment and on individuals enjoyment of the environment. Other examples include: poaching, illegal stocking of fisheries, and vandalism of waterside recreational facilities. Key impacts from the Agency's perspective are from fly-tipping, damage to Agency assets and crime relating to species and habitats.

  1.3  The scale of impact of local environmental crime (especially fly-tipping) can be measured in terms of:

    (1) frequency of occurrence;

    (2) seriousness of incident (eg location, type and amount of waste tipped); and

    (3) level of concern of those affected.

Considering this last aspect:

    —  In response to a MORI Survey of Neighbourhood Noise conducted for Defra in 2003, litter and rubbish (33% of respondents), dog fouling (27%) and graffiti (21%) were the most frequently mentioned local problems affecting quality of life. Abandoned vehicles were mentioned as a problem by 17% of respondents.

    —  There is evidence of an increase in concern about these problems. The MORI Public Attitudes to Transport Survey 2002 classified responses to a question about problems facing the local area under a number of headings (Crime, Economy/Employment, Education, Environment, etc). Litter and rubbish were the main problems mentioned under "Environment". 17% of respondents mentioned environmental problems in 2002, as compared with 10% in 2001 and 8% in 2000.

  1.4  It is important to remember that environmental crimes may not only damage the environment (for example by pollution of watercourses and destruction of habitats) they may also impact on enjoyment of the environment. Collectively, these may deter people from experiencing and enjoying the environment and may affect the perception of these crimes.

  1.5  Environmental crimes are also often grouped under the more general banner of "anti social behaviour". This may downplay the scale and serious nature of some environmental crimes. For example, emptying a car ashtray in a car-park may be anti-social, deliberate dumping of a lorry load of waste on a river bank is a deliberate criminal act.

  1.6  Both the Agency and local authorities have responsibilities for tackling illegal waste activities and fly-tipping. The Agency and the Local Government Association (LGA) have agreed a protocol that sets out the sorts of incidents that the Agency and local authorities each respond to. The Agency tackles large-scale illegal waste activities of more than a lorry load of waste, illegal waste activities involving organised criminals and illegal dumping of drums of hazardous wastes. Local authorities have responsibility for tackling the smaller scale incidents of fly-tipping.

  1.7  Such illegal waste activities may have a significant impact on amenity and an individuals enjoyment of an area, and may attract further dumping, vermin and other pests. Large-scale dumping of waste may have a profound impact on local environmental quality through water pollution and habitat degradation affecting both flora and fauna.

  1.8  During 2002, illegal dumping of waste accounted for 14% of the serious pollution incidents dealt with by the Agency. Between 2001 and 2002 the number of incidents that the Agency responded to involving the illegal dumping of waste increased by 19% across England and Wales. In Thames (the worst affected region) the increase was 73%. Early indications from the 2003 data are that there has been another rise in waste-related incidents, and further increases may happen as controls over legitimate waste management tighten and the costs of managing waste rises.

  1.9  Local authorities also tackle waste-related incidents, in particular smaller-scale fly-tipping such as bags of refuse in lay-bys, streets and other public open spaces. Many local authorities are also reporting an increase in the types of fly-tipping incident that they deal with, and in 2003 ENCAMS reported that more than 70% said that fly-tipping is a serious problem for them. The London Borough of Lewisham alone responded to 13,600 incidents—50% more than in 2001. (Defra consultation paper on a Fly-Tipping Strategy, February 2004).

  1.10  The Agency estimates that tackling waste-related crime costs local authorities, landowners and the Agency between £100 million and £150 million every year. Criminals can make considerable profits from flouting the law. In one case in North West England it is estimated that an offender avoided almost £25,000 worth of costs they would have incurred had the waste been legitimately managed. Cost avoidance in relation to construction, demolition and excavation waste in London alone could exceed £1 million a year.

2.   Has there been a cultural change in attitudes to these kinds of crimes and are they being treated more or less seriously than in the past?

  2.1  The public are becoming less accepting of detriment to their local environment and demand that perpetrators of these crimes warrant criminal sanctions. However, if we are to be successful in reducing crimes of this nature, community support in bringing cases to court is required.

  2.2  It is clear from survey responses that concern about behaviour affecting local environmental quality (particularly littering) has increased in recent years. It is difficult to say whether this reflects an increase in the frequency and seriousness of incidents, concern about the lack or ineffectiveness of actions to prevent or deal with the problem, or a change in attitudes to the problem. Surveys of young people's attitudes show a high level of concern about litter and rubbish in relation to other local problems (eg 2002 Coalfields Youth Survey).

  2.3  Some local authorities are treating the issue of local crime more seriously through schemes which appoint Community Wardens. At this stage there is limited information as to what extent these schemes are focussing on environmental crime, or what level of support they are receiving from local communities.

  2.4  Central government is taking these crimes seriously, and either have or are introducing a range of measure to address the problem as highlighted in ENCAMS The Annual Local Environmental Quality Survey of England 2nd report—2002-03. However, this should not (and does not appear to be) leading to complacency as more could still be done.

  2.5  The Agency remains concerned that in general, waste-related crime such as fly-tipping is not seen as socially unacceptable as it needs to be if we are to be successful in eradicating this problem. All too often individuals are involved in fly-tipping of their own waste, take too little care who they pass there waste on to, and many businesses seem unprepared to arrange for their wastes to be managed in accordance with what the law requires, for example by the Duty of Care. The "out of sight, out of mind" approach still persists in many cases.

  2.6  In some areas we see a positive response to high profile campaigns, increasing the level of public reporting of illegal waste incidents (eg fly-tipping). This suggests individuals are more inclined to report problems once their attention has been drawn to the problem, and a simple reporting mechanism is in place.

  2.7  Other areas show a general public tolerance of low-level environmental crime. Small-scale fly-tipping and littering continues, and is almost custom and practice by some perpetrators. The Agency and many local authorities recognise the importance of planned action to tackle local environmental crimes and are making significant efforts to tackle such problems, often as part of work to bring about a more general improvement in local environmental quality. The work of ENCAMS in developing sound methodologies for assessing and reporting local environmental quality is also an important step in tackling these problems, and for identifying the range of good practice that exists in tackling this problem in our complex society.

  2.8  The Agency welcomes the recent publication by Defra of a Fly-Tipping Strategy consultation paper that sets out government intentions to assist in tackling this aspect of environmental crime. This strategy includes a number of proposals for legislative changes as well as encouraging joint working between all local authorities and the Agency to tackle this problem.

3.  Do responsible bodies who deal with the problem and its consequences have sufficient resources and powers to do so?

  3.1  The adequacy of resourcing of enforcement work remains of concern to the Agency and many local authorities. Agency enforcement activity is funded by Grant-In-Aid (GIA) and this is under severe pressure. We have been working with government, most notably Defra, to identify further improvements to legislation and policy that would assist in this area and improve our efficiency. Many of these are contained in the Defra consultation. These formed part of our earlier submission to the Sub-Committee on "Environmental Crime and the Courts" and are attached again as Appendix 1 to this evidence.

  3.2  The nature of much environmental crime is such that completely tackling and eradicating these crimes could utilise a large amount of investigative and enforcement effort that has to be sustained over a number of years. The Agency's own resources are being stretched and this is compounded by increases in both levels of crime and expectations. The Agency is working to be more efficient, but if there are further increases in these crimes the Agency will experience significant resource problems. Consequently, enforcement bodies are typically a long way from being over-resourced and are having to find more efficient ways of working with limited resources.

  3.3  This is compounded by the growing complexity of some environmental crimes. For example, there is growing evidence of the involvement of organised criminals in illegal waste activities. To better tackle this sort of crime, the Agency is examining the scope to move towards a more intelligence-led approach. This approach is taken by the majority of UK enforcement agencies, including the police.

  3.4  Tackling such organised crime can be more resource intensive. Fewer, more complex, prosecutions require more sophisticated techniques of surveillance and investigation, as well as closer working between all enforcement agencies. Developing and implementing these more complex crime-busting techniques requires time and resources but will lead to a more targeted use of available resources on identified "hot-spots".

  3.5  The Agency's enforcement activities against illegal waste management are funded through Grant In Aid (GIA) and the Agency has proposed a number of key operational issues for which additional funding is required. These proposals form part of the current spending revue with government and, if successful, will include a phased programme of building capacity at national and local levels for a more intensive, better co-ordinated response to waste-crimes and greater support to local authorities.

  3.6  The Agency has been working with Defra, Cabinet Office, DTI and other government departments to identify possible changes to policy, guidance and legislation that would allow more effective action against waste-related crime. Further information on this was provided as part of the Agency's earlier submission to the Sub-Committee, and several ideas and suggestions are included in the Defra consultation on a Fly-Tipping Strategy.

  3.7  The Sub-Committee will also recognise that there is also a staff safety issue in relation to tackling environmental crime. There are occasional, but a growing number, of threats to our staff who often work in isolated situations when undertaking their day-to-day duties. There is increasing evidence of other, more serious, intimidation of staff. This is being treated very seriously, and the Agency enlists support from the Police in these circumstances, based upon the facts in the particular case.

4.   Is there sufficient dialogue and co-operation across Government and amongst the various bodies responsible for dealing with the problem at a local level?

  4.1  Tackling environmental crime links to the work of many government departments including Defra, DTI, Home Office, Department for Constitutional Affairs, Office of Government and Commerce, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Department of Work and Pensions, HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office. In our opinion, the level of interest across government in tackling illegal waste activities has increased over the past year, both in relation to the anti social behaviour agenda, and in relation to more serious waste crime.

  4.2  The protocol between the Agency and the Local Government Association, referred to in section 1.6 above has been reviewed and is being amended to build on experiences to date, and to take account of changes to legislation since the original protocol was agreed. Slightly different arrangements exist in Wales, due in part to additional funding from the Welsh Assembly Government.

  4.3  Across England and Wales, there are a number of excellent examples of joint Agency-local authority work to tackle fly-tipping. The Agency also works with the Police, HM Customs and Excise and other enforcement agencies as appropriate to particular cases. For example, Agency officers in the Kent area have been involved in training local authority officers in the preparation of casefiles for prosecution of waste offences. Agency officers are also involved in liaison with Kent local authorities, the police and the Vehicle Inspectorate in investigating complex crimes involving waste as one element of a serious of inter-related crimes.

  4.4  In Wales, the Pride In Our Communities project has set out to ". . . secure a substantial long term reduction in fly-tipping within communities in South West Wales through encouraging those communities to take ownership of local problems . . .". This project is a partnership between Environment Agency Wales, local authorities, Forest Enterprise, the Countryside Council for Wales, the Police, business representatives and Keep Wales Tidy. It is an example of excellent joint working to tackle waste-related crimes and benefits from additional funding from the Welsh Assembly.

  4.5  The Agency also engages with the Government Agencies Intelligence Network (GAIN) at a number of levels and would like to do more, but resource constraints inhibit this. It is evident that the priority these other enforcement agencies can give to assisting in tackling environmental crime is again affected by availability of their limited resources. However, working together is most beneficial in tackling the most serious, organised environmental crimes.

  4.6  The Agency also believes that individuals and businesses have a responsibility in preventing waste crime. Individuals arranging for waste to be removed from their homes, such as by a "man with a van" should make some basic enquiries on where the waste will be taken. Businesses should ensure that they comply with the statutory Duty of Care in relation to waste. They should only pass their waste on to an appropriate person such as a registered waste carrier and they should pass on a transfer note and a written description of the waste to the person or company who take their waste away. Businesses should also know where their waste is taken. The Agency's Netregs web-site contains important advice and information for businesses on how to comply with their legal responsibilities.

5.   What alternatives exist for dealing with these types of crimes outside the criminal justice system?

  5.1  In response to other crimes within society alternative responses (including education and designing-out crimes) have seemed to have some success. In the context of local environmental crime, the challenge of protecting and improving the environment is not one that the Agency or the government can tackle single-handedly.

  5.2  Recognising rights and responsibilities in relation to environmental management should contribute to preventing behaviours such as fly-tipping and littering. Environmental citizenship may also encourage communities to take a more active role in monitoring, reporting and preventing activities that damage the local environment.

  5.3  The Agency recognises the importance of working with others to protect and enhance the environment. We have been developing our understanding of the issues involved in engaging with members of the public and organised stakeholders through a number of research projects[1] looking at public participation. In particular, projects on Building Trust in Local Communities and Working with Special Interest Groups have highlighted the role played by local community and special interest groups and the need for public bodies to engage more effectively with these groups.[2]

  5.4  Research and practical experience suggest that when people participate in initiatives to improve their local quality of life, they develop the confidence and skills that enable them to take more effective action to protect and improve their local environment. Citizens and communities are resources that can help achieve environmental goals.

  5.5  Bringing about a shift in the public's perception of the illegal dumping of waste through information and education campaigns is a key element of successfully tackling the problem. Practical experience suggests that information campaigns targeted at waste producers to remind them of their Duty of Care, combined with enforcement activities have greater benefits than enforcement alone.

  5.6  In response to problems relating to waterways, we are trying to work with communities to reduce the impact of environmental crime by working with local communities, youth groups and sports governing bodies to show the value of our waterway corridors. This is a long process, but projects around the country to improve access to our waterways have also had the payback of, in some places reducing environmental crime.

  5.7  These alternative approaches are unlikely to have any real effect on the more hardened criminal. It seems likely that the important deterrent effect of criminal sanctions and effective enforcement of those sanctions will remain an important feature of tackling environmental crime as well as identifying the root-causes and identifying and instigating crime prevention measures.

6.   Does environmental crime have a disproportionate impact on poorer and less advantaged sections of society?. . ."

  6.1  Recent Agency research (published 14th January 2004) shows some correlation between social deprivation and three aspects of environmental quality: air quality, industrial pollution and tidal flooding. However, it is important to note that this research does not evaluate the relative exposure to hazard or the relative level of risk or the impact on people's health. Nevertheless, this work does indicate some concerns about such environmental inequalities and the need to ensure that these are addressed alongside social and economic problems in deprived areas.

  6.2  The Agency has not carried out any specific research to establish whether more deprived communities are exposed to higher levels of environmental crime. However, the Agency is developing a national database, Flycapture, that for the first time will collate Agency and local authority summary data on the scale and nature of fly-tipping that they deal with. This data could be used for improving our, and local authority, understanding of the distribution of illegal waste activities and relating this to a range of local factors including social inequity.

  6.3  Recent MORI research (1991) provides evidence that "liveability" issues including crime, litter, rubbish and vandalism are far more likely to be identified as serious matters by those living in deprived communities than by others. This, and other recent research by the Agency that looks at the distribution of environmental inequalities, suggests that there is the potential for a disproportionate impact of environmental crimes on poorer and less advantaged sections of society.

March 2004

Annex 1

What we want:

  Powers to stop people/vehicles to request names and addresses.

  Power to require suspected offenders to take part in interviews.

  Power to serve notices with immediate "stop" provisions without the need to obtain injunctions or provide time to comply.

  Clearer legislation with regard to flood defence enforcement.

We would like to see:

  Fly tipping (sections 33 and 34 EPA 1990) convictions "recordable" offences so that they appear to Home Office crime statistics and allow greater intervention by the police at Agency request.

  Fly tipping (sections 33 EPA 1990 and sl (1) of CoP(A) A ) offences arrestable either by a constable or a certificated officer of the Environment Agency.

  Government to require (eg through planning law/guidance) developers to produce a written "site waste management plan". This plan should identify the volume and type of material to be demolished and excavated and demonstrate how off-site disposal will be minimised and managed.

  Government to amend the Duty of Care provisions of the EPA 1990 (s34), to apply the Duty of Care to developers and others further up the construction and demolition chain and not to allow that Duty of Care to be discharged by simply putting the waste from a development onto a registered waste carriers truck.

  Government to amend the Control of Pollution Amendment Act 1989 to require waste carriers to register their vehicles (with a capacity over 5 tonnes) with the Agency and for such registered; vehicles to carry an appropriate identification.

  Law to be changed to require Carrier Registration documentation to be displayed on a vehicle involved in the transfer of waste.

  Duty of Care transfer note and written description of waste to accompany waste in transit.

  Fixed penalty fines to be introduced for failure to display the carrier registration details or produce on request the transfer note/written description.

  Government and tyre manufacturers to develop an industry mutual fund scheme to provide for clear up of fly tipped tyres funded through levy on new tyres.

  Producers of waste tyres should be required to produce a written "waste management plan"




1   These projects include: Evaluating Methods for Public Participation (2000-01), Local Outreach (2000-01), EC RISCOM II Project on enhancing transparency and public participation in nuclear waste management (2000-03), Joining Up 7: Living with Rivers (2004-final report forthcoming), Joining Up 9: Working with Stakeholders (2004-final report forthcoming). Back

2   Building Trust in Local Communities (2003-report forthcoming); Working with Special Interest Groups (ongoing; Literature Review published as R&D Technical Report P-019/TR, Final Report forthcoming).


 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 28 July 2004