Government response
Introduction
The Government welcomes the Committee's
report on these two important producer responsibility Directives.
The report is timely, appearing as it did during public consultations
on the Government's proposed measures for implementing the Directives
in the UK. Both consultations have since closed. 219 responses
were received to the consultation document on the implementation
of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive,
and 65 to that for the End of Life Vehicles (ELV) Directive. The
Government is currently assessing these responses, which will
be taken into account before Regulations to complete the transposition
of the ELV Directive are finalised and before draft Regulations
and guidance is developed for further consultation and then implementation
of the WEEE Directive. The Committee's report will of course also
be taken into account as part of this process.
The Government has the following comments on the
Committee's conclusions and recommendations:
Recommendation 1
We strongly recommend that the Government
ensure that, as soon as possible, it issues clear guidance to
the recycling industry about exactly what is expected of it, in
order that it can make decisions to investment in new facilities.
If it fails to do so it will exacerbate
the potential problems associated with these Directives - such
as, in the case of the ELV Directive, an increase in the number
of abandoned cars. We
further recommend that over time the Government continue to update
its guidance, and take steps to communicate its wishes clearly
to stakeholders. (paragraph 14)
Clear guidance has already been issued
to dismantlers, scrapyards, and shredders in respect of what is
expected of them in the context of the ELV Directive.
This guidance was issued by the
Environment Agency, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, DoE/Northern
Ireland and Defra shortly after the End-of-Life Vehicles Regulations
2003 came into effect in November 2003 (S.I. 2003/2635 and
related legislation in Scotland and Northern Ireland).
The guidance expanded upon the
site, storage and treatment standards set down in the ELV Directive
and the transposing Regulations which need to be observed by ELV
"authorised treatment facilities".
Further technical advice on ELV de-pollution
and dismantling methods was issued jointly by DTI and Defra in
December 2003. Both
Guidance Notes and Technical Advice were developed with the benefit
of industry input, including from some of the Trade Associations
which gave written and oral evidence to the Committee's Inquiry.
The Guidance Notes and Technical
Advice will, as a matter of course, be updated in the light of
practical experience, and as best practice develops, and communicated
to interested parties.
The Government had already, in June 2002,
announced its decision to introduce producer responsibility for
free take-back of ELVs from 1 January 2007, until which time there
would be a continuation of the existing arrangements. These are
that the last owner of a vehicle will be responsible for its final
disposal at a licensed dismantler, scrap yard or shredder, which
might or might not involve a charge upon them, depending upon
the location, age, make and model of the vehicle, and the prevailing
value of scrap metal at the time of scrapping.
The Government believes, therefore, that
businesses wishing to upgrade to meet the higher site, storage
and treatment requirements of the ELV Directive had sufficient
guidance, sufficiently early, to make a considered decision to
meet the 31 January 2004 deadline for making applications to become
"authorised treatment facilities". They were not required
actually to have upgraded to the new standards by that date, merely
to make the application.
The Government is currently working with
the Environment Agency and industry to produce draft guidance
on the treatment requirements laid down in the WEEE Directive.
It is expected that this will be part of the next consultation
on WEEE implementation which will be issued in the next few months.
Recommendation 2
The evidence we have received makes
us seriously question the 'own marque' approach to funding the
disposal of end of life vehicles after 2007.
The objective should be to ensure
that complying with the ELV Directive is as straightforward as
possible. We
urge the Government urgently to re-examine whether that objective
will best be achieved by encouraging consolidation and concentration
in the dismantling sector, as the 'own marque' approach seems
likely to do. (paragraph 17)
The 'own marque' approach to allocating
responsibility for end-of-life vehicles is seen by the industry
as a good expression of the policy of producer responsibility
and of the polluter pays principle, both of which are supported
by the Government. As with other waste streams, placing obligations
on businesses to recover value from the vehicles which they have
put on the market, when they eventually become waste, is intended
to encourage those businesses to design their products in such
a way that makes them easier to re-use or recycle - deploying
less complex and less hazardous material mixes, making disassembly
easier, or designing out difficult-to-recycle or hazardous materials;
this will also help to minimise costs. An 'own marque' approach
is one way of applying producer responsibility. The Government
has sought views on this approach to implementation in the consultation
which closed on 30 March. The Committee may wish to note that
some other Member States have adopted a similar approach.
The 'own marque' approach emerged from a number
of possible options aired in public consultation, and then considered
in detail by the DTI's ELV Consultation Group, consisting of the
leading four Trade Associations whose members are likely to be
most affected by the terms of the Directive. In
the event, the Government's efforts to reach consensus among the
main stakeholders were unsuccessful, and all external members
of the Consultation Group were not able to agree upon a single
option. The vehicle manufacturers' preferred option
was rejected by the shredders, whose own preferred approach was
rejected by the vehicle manufacturers. Faced with
this impasse, the Government elected to develop the own marque
approach, in consultation with the affected sectors.
The Government agrees that an objective
of implementation should be to ensure that complying with the
ELV Directive is as straightforward as possible.
As part of its assessment of the responses received to the recent
consultation, the Government will be examining whether further
consideration of its approach is needed, including simplification.
The Government believes that some consolidation in the ELV treatment
and dismantling sector is inevitable, for example, given the provisions
of Article 6 of the Directive which sets higher environmental
standards for treatment facilities to meet. It is unrealistic
to expect that every business currently operating to lower standards
than those required will have the desire or wherewithal to invest
to upgrade to the new standards. In addition, properly licensed
or registered exempt operators, who have applied by the due date
to become authorised treatment facilities, will welcome the closing
down of illegal operators, whose ability to undermine them they
have long complained about. The introduction of the new "authorised
treatment facility" status, and the linking of this to the
ability to issue a "Certificate of Destruction" to the
last owner, will increase the pressure on illegal operators.
However, it should be noted that the Government's
proposals for an own marque system contain criteria in respect
of authorised treatment facility capacity and accessibility which,
if adopted in final Regulations, are intended to ensure the availability
of sufficient treatment facilities treat all ELVs to the new standards
and to provide convenience and accessibility for the last owner.
The proposed system foresees networks
of authorised treatment facilities, contracted to vehicle manufacturers
to provide free take-back for their marques, and also an uncontracted
sector which, under the proposed implementation approach, are
to provide the same service for those ELVs that it decides to
accept.
Recommendation 3
Therefore, we recommend that the Government look
again at the funds it has made available to local authorities
for dealing with abandoned vehicles, specify in response to this
report exactly what these sums are and how they
have been allocated and distributed, and ensure that they are
adequate to deal with increased abandonment up to 2007. (paragraph
21)
The Government is providing £25 million per
annum to local authorities for three years under the "New
Burdens" arrangements. The bulk of this money has already
been transferred for disbursement to the Office of the Deputy
Prime Minister, the Northern Ireland Office, the Welsh Assembly
Government and the Scottish Executive according to the "Barnett
formula" of apportionment. These funds are designed to cover
the additional cost to Local Authorities of (a) having to have
the vehicles de-polluted and dismantled to the new standards,
and have Certificates of Destruction issued, for baseline numbers
(2001/02) levels of abandoned vehicles; and (b) those same costs
plus removal costs of any abandoned vehicles above baseline numbers.
The Committee is assuming there will be an increase
in the number of abandoned vehicle numbers in the years to 2007.
This is a possibility, but by no means a certainty. The Government
does not believe that disposal costs are the primary reason for
last owners to take the decision to abandon a vehicle, and the
Government is taking a number of initiatives to make it more difficult
to abandon with relative impunity. The Government believes that
the funds it has provided under the New Burdens scheme are sufficient
to offset any additional costs faced by local authorities as a
result of the introduction of regulations to transpose the ELV
Directive into national law.
Recommendation 4
We are concerned that an 'own marque' approach
will mean that it is more difficult for local authorities to deal
with the problems of abandonment, since they will not simply be
able to use a single contractor to deal with any and all abandoned
vehicles. We invite the Government to reflect
on this issue, and to explain exactly how in practice local authorities
will deal with abandoned vehicles after 2007. (paragraph
22)
Recovery contractors appointed by Local Authorities
will be able to deliver abandoned vehicles to authorised treatment
facilities contracted to provide free take-back for specific brands,
and the draft Regulations on which we have recently consulted
propose "accessibility" criteria to ensure convenience
for a last owner to deliver an ELV into the take-back network.
If the draft regulations are adopted in their present form, the
same degree of accessibility will also be available to local authorities,
who effectively become the last owner of an abandoned vehicle
and, as such, will be eligible for free take-back.
Recommendation 5
We believe that civic amenity sites have a crucial
role to play in ensuring that waste electrical and electronic
equipment can be collected separately from the rest of the municipal
waste stream. We recommend that the current network of civic amenity
sites be expanded, so that such sites are easily accessible to
all. We recommend further development of those sites which already
exist. In order to facilitate these recommendations we also recommend
that the Government find ways to streamline the process of gaining
and amending waste management licences for civic amenity sites,
and of gaining and amending planning permission.
(Paragraph 24)
The Government is keen to build on existing infrastructure
where possible, and agrees that civic amenity sites have an important
role to play in the separate collection of WEEE.
However, the Government recognises that the WEEE
Directive does not place obligations on local authorities, and
therefore, the Government will not place any new unfinanced burdens
on local authorities. Instead, the Government has put forward
proposals to incentivise local authorities to separately collect
WEEE. Under these proposals, local authorities would be able to
bid for money to upgrade their civic amenity site infrastructure
to separately collect WEEE. Further, local authorities would be
able to pass any WEEE that is separately collected to producers
for recycling, thus avoiding the disposal costs and, at the same
time, increasing their levels of recycling.
In order for collection points to be easily accessible
for consumers, the proposals also suggest that, in addition to
separate collection facilities at civic amenity sites, there should
be a number of retailer run collection points at, for example,
retail parks. Where this is not possible, alternative arrangements
should be put into place, such as organised bring events or kerbside
collections of WEEE. In the case of larger appliances, the continuation
of take back on delivery of new equipment is encouraged.
We agree that planning has a critical role to play
in enabling adequate and timely provision of waste management
facilities. Planning Policy Guidance Note No. 10 (PPG 10) - the
PPG setting out national planning policy on waste management -
makes it plain that the planning system should enable adequate
provision of waste management facilities in appropriate locations.
In general, given that waste proposals can be controversial, the
planning system has been doing a good job. Last year (2002/2003)
waste planning authorities in England made decisions on 358 planning
applications for 'major' waste management developments. 86% were
granted; and of 806 applications for 'minor' waste management
developments, 93% were granted. That doesn't mean improvements
can't be made. Extensive planning reforms are being taken forward
by Government and will lead to a thorough overhaul of planning's
performance. Later this year the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
(ODPM) will consult on a replacement for PPG10 as part of Government's
drive to streamline planning policy to give greater clarity in
terms of the outcomes to be achieved. The intention is an effective
planning system that helps deliver thriving and sustainable communities
with the right infrastructure in place at the right time.
Defra is currently reviewing the existing waste management
licensing system and intends to replace it with a new permitting
regime. Under this new regime, the degree of regulation will be
proportionate to the risks posed by different waste recovery and
disposal activities. The new regime is intended to come into operation
at the same time as the WEEE Directive is transposed. The government
intends to provide for greater development of standard permits
and for a more streamlined approach to the processing and determination
of applications for new permits and their modification without
undermining the attainment of the environmental and health objectives
of the Waste Framework Directive.
Recommendation 6
We urge the Government to ensure that the Environment
Agency is adequately resourced to deal both with the requirements
of implementation of the Directives and with their consequences,
and to identify in its response to this report exactly
how much additional resource has been or will be allocated to
the Agency for this purpose. (Paragraph 26)
The Environment Agency will be able to recover the
costs of dealing with the requirements of both Directives from
the parties it will be regulating.
Recommendation 7
Although we understand the argument made by the
Government, we are concerned that excluding printer cartridges
from the WEEE Directive will not encourage their sustainable re-use.
We invite the Government to think again about the matter. (Paragraph
27)
The Government agrees that reuse of printer cartridges
is generally environmentally preferable to recycling them. However,
the Government can see no evidence that the reuse of printer cartridges
will suffer as a result of the implementation of the WEEE Directive.
In fact, if printer cartridges were to be included in the scope
of the WEEE Directive, original equipment manufacturers would
be obliged to take back their old printer cartridges when supplying
new ones and recycle them, thus leaving fewer cartridges available
for re-manufacturers to refill. Moreover, the major refilling
franchise, Cartridge World, report that their network expects
to grow by 40% in the near future.
The Government supports the aims of the printer cartridge
remanufacturing industry to see a greater incidence of reuse of
products and notes that there are numerous schemes already in
place which collect and refurbish printer cartridges. The Government
expects these to continue when the WEEE Directive comes into force.
To ensure full account is taken of all the relevant
issues, DTI Ministers have agreed to meet the re-fillers and DTI
and Defra have already facilitated a meeting between the re-fillers
and original equipment manufacturers with the aim of fostering
more shared understanding of the issues associated with cartridges
and their reuse.
Printer cartridges do not fall within the scope of
the WEEE Directive. However, they do fall within the scope of
the current text of the Framework Directive on Eco Design for
Energy Using Products (EuP), and therefore, could be the subject
of an implementing measure if manufacturers were to begin using
devices that specifically prevent reuse of printer cartridges
in the future.
Recommendation 8
Nevertheless, we recommend that Defra re-examine
the workload placed on its specialist staff, including its lawyers,
to ensure that they are not being asked to do too much, and that
they are thus able to act efficiently and effectively. (Paragraph
29)
The Department has a team of in-house lawyers who
are part of the Government Legal Service and a number of these
lawyers specialise in issues relating to environmental waste.
Since May 2002, this team has increased from three to five and
a half full time equivalents in light of the increased workload.
The parts of the ELV Regulations that were drafted by Defra lawyers
were produced in time to consult jointly with the DTI and the
implementing Regulations are now in force. Defra lawyers are now
fully involved with the transposition of the WEEE Directive, and
are on course to draft Regulations to implement Article 6 of the
WEEE Directive in accordance with the agreed timetable.
Recommendation 9
Before embarking on the negotiation of Directives
such as the ELV and WEEE Directives the Departments involved should
review whether they have available the specialist skills and other
resources needed to do so effectively. The Government should not
agree to this sort of European legislation without a clear understanding
of all of its ramifications. (Paragraph 30)
The Government agrees that this sort of
European legislation should not be agreed to without a clear understanding
of the ramifications, and presses for use of the extended impact
assessment process for EU proposals where appropriate. The Government
was aware of the wide ranging implications of both Directives,
and made a particular point of considering at an early stage what
the practical implications of implementation would be. The likely
impact of both Directives was made clear to Parliament, which
scrutinised them and provided clearance before the Government
agreed to them.
Recommendation 10
We strongly recommend that Defra (and other Government
Departments such as the Department of Trade and Industry) take
steps to develop its understanding of the waste and recycling
sector. We urge it to institute a programme of seconding outside
experts into the Department to help with the negotiation and implementation
of European legislation, and a programme of seconding officials
out to work for short periods in the waste and recycling industry.
(Paragraph 31)
The Government recognises that external
experts have a valuable role to play in the development of policy
during the negotiation and transposition of European legislation
and takes full advantage of its wide range of contacts and advisors
during the course of the negotiations, and implementation. The
Government also made use of external consultants to provide input
into a number of technical areas. Indeed, the Government commissioned
four separate reports by external consultants to support the most
recent consultation on the WEEE Directive, and further work is
ongoing.
The Government welcomes the prospect of using external
secondees, where possible, in the implementation of European legislation.
Two secondees from the Environment Agency have been working in
the Permitting Review Team in Defra, which is transposing Article
6 of the WEEE Directive, since January 2003. This has proved to
be a productive arrangement with mutual benefits for the team.
Accepting secondees from industry is not straightforward, as care
has always to be taken that individual companies do not gain unfair
commercial advantage from such an arrangement, although two industry
representatives have assisted the team.
In the course of the negotiations, and
transposition, of both of these Directives, officials have visited
a number of waste management treatment and recycling facilities
to develop their understanding of this sector and have attended
a large number of conferences. The Government will consider if
it would be appropriate for officials to be seconded out to work
for a short period in the recycling industry to further develop
their knowledge of this area.
Recommendation 11
We reiterate the recommendation made by the Better
Regulation Taskforce that the Environment Agency should be directly
involved at an early stage in the negotiation of European environmental
legislation. We further recommend that the Government consider
involving others, such as representatives of the waste and recycling
industry, also at an early stage in the process. (Paragraph 32)
Generally, the International Concordat
between Defra and the Environment Agency sets out the basis for
the two organisations to work together in both Europe and the
wider international arena.
The Concordat acknowledges the Agency's
expertise in the implementation of environmental legislation and
actively encourages Defra policy leads to engage with their counterparts
during the formative stages of EU legislation and beyond.
Additionally, for the first time,
formal arrangements are to be put in place for the Agency and
Defra to come together to consider joint priorities and strategies
for dealing with EU environmental legislation.
The Government drew on advice from specialists
from the various sectors affected by the ELV and WEEE Directives
throughout the negotiations. Officials from the Environment Agencies
also regularly provided input throughout the negotiations of both
Directives, and are integral members of both cross Government
implementation teams.
In the case of the WEEE Directive, to engage experts
from a variety of sectors as early as possible, the Government
held a number of 'focus group' meetings with affected stakeholder
groups during the negotiations and these continue as the approach
to implementation is developed. In this way, the views of local
authorities, producers, retailers, dismantlers, refurbishers and
the Environment Agency are taken on board both in the negotiations
and throughout the transposition of the Directive.
Recommendation 12
We support the recommendations of the Better Regulation
Taskforce, and urge the Government to ensure (a) that a clear
'lead' Department is designated for each piece of environmental
legislation, and (b) that a project management approach to the
implementation of legislation is adopted. Doing so would go some
way to avoiding a repeat of the confusion and lack of clarity
which has afflicted the stakeholders of these two Directives.
(Paragraph 34)
The Strategy Unit report, Waste not,
Want not recommended that a review be undertaken to assess
the merits of focusing all waste policy in one department.
In its response, the Government
arranged that the Cabinet Office would carry out this review.
We expect the report to be completed this spring.
However, as noted in the Government's
response to the BRTF report, the Government has adopted a project
management approach to the planning for the implementation of
both the ELV and WEEE Directives. Cross-Whitehall teams
oversee the work of project teams
who take forward the detailed implementation of the Directive.
This approach has proved particularly
successful for the WEEE Directive. All the milestones set out
in the project plan have so far been delivered on time. Even so,
given the short implementation timeframe, and a lack of clarity
at a European level on key requirements of the Directive, in particular,
the scope of the Directive, it has not been possible to provide
greater clarity on these requirements of the WEEE Directive at
this stage. Guidance is due to be issued later this Spring, which
will take into account responses to the consultations, and discussions
at a European level.
Recommendation 13
But it does seem likely that there will be problems
of abandoned waste as a result of the way in which the ELV Directive
is to be implemented. That said, for the moment the prospects
for a 'smooth' transposition of the WEEE Directive do seem brighter.
We nevertheless urge the Government to take steps, beginning with
the recommendations of this report, to ensure that it remains
in control of the process of implementing these Directives. (Paragraph
35)
In developing its approach to implementing
the ELV Directive, the Government has taken steps to ensure, as
far as possible, that the provisions of this Directive will not
run counter to the wider programme the Government has in place
to deter abandonment of vehicles.
The Government is certainly working to achieve a smooth transposition
of the WEEE Directive and will be doing everything it can to remain
in control of the process of implementation of both these Directives.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
April 2004
|