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
| 
