UK Government
162. The UK has played an important role in the development
of the legislation. We have already noted that the process was
initiated at the Council of Environment Ministers in Chester during
the UK Presidency in 1998. DEFRA is the lead Department on the
legislation and WWF congratulates it on having "invested
much time, effort, and expertise, in co-ordinating the views amongst
the different Government departments, and in synthesising the
views of different stakeholders".[250]
The WWF describes the Government as a "powerful positive
force for change" but expresses concern about the DTI's "increasingly
pro industry hard line". The EEF supports the DTI's downstream
users' group but has complained that DEFRA has not included all
industry groups in its consultations.
163. The Prime Minister has taken an interest in
the legislation. On 20 September 2003, he wrote a joint letter,
with President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Gerhard Schröder,
to Romano Prodi, President of the Commission. In particular, the
letter expressed concerns that:
164. The WWF argues that the Prime Minister's signature
on the trilateral letter to the President of the Commission demonstrates
that the UK is "prioritising the concerns of a dinosaur industry
over and above the needs of human health".[251]
The trilateral letter is said to have had a significant effect
on the development of the Proposals.[252]
165. WWF has expressed concern that the Department
of Health and the Health and Safety Executive have given little
support to the new legislation: "It is a well-known fact
that the vast majority of substances traded in the EU do not have
available adequate toxicity data to make even a basic risk assessment".
WWF also laments the lack of visibility of the Department of Health.[253]
Dr Church denied that these Departments' input had been inadequate
and described a "series of concentric rings of interested
departments and agencies". He said that "the HSE is
part of the inner ring
, as is the Department of Health
[which] has been superb in offering us advice on some of
the testing issues, some of the general public health issues.
The Health and Safety Executive have a lot of experience because
they run the new substances regime, so they have been giving us
expertise there".[254]
166. Andrew Lee from Greenpeace told us "Whilst
behind the scenes we hear a lot of very clear and good messages
from DEFRA, when the Prime Minister intervenes we see criticism,
with the government seeing this as a problem and a barrier".[255]
We asked Mr Michael about the role different Departments have
played, only to be accused of indulging in "the time honoured
sport of trying to put pieces of cigarette paper between either
the Prime Minister and other Ministers or between Government Departments".
We fully admit to testing joined up Government: the Minister should
recognise that presenting a disjointed and inconsistent negotiating
position is unhelpful, not least if the Prime Minister expresses
views that are distinct from the lead Department, if only in tone.
167. The Government has played constructive and
important part in the development of the legislation. The trilateral
letter signed by the Prime Minister played an important role in
making the Proposals more workable but the UK Government needs
to keep up pressure to improve workability.
237