Memorandum submitted by Campaign to Protect
Rural England (CPRE)
INTRODUCTION
1. CPRE welcomes the opportunity to contribute
to this inquiry. This submission covers three main issues:
— the relationship between the Environment
Agency and Natural England;
— the governance of the Environment
Agency; and
— the role of the Environment Agency
in strategic planning, including Strategic Environmental Assessment
and transport debates.
2. We believe the Environment Agency has
an increasingly important role to play in securing improvements
in environmental standards. It requires greater resources and
political support to enable it to perform this role more effectively.
NATURAL ENGLAND
3. CPRE warmly welcomes the creation of
Natural England and has played a leading role among the environmental
non-governmental organisations in the development of the new agency.
We have twice given evidence to the Committee on the subject of
Natural England and the Rural Strategy 2004. Specifically, we
welcome the unification of landscape and biodiversity protection,
together with the encouragement and enhancement of responsible
public access to the countryside. We have also welcomed the proposed
universal approach of Natural England to the natural environment,
which gives the new agency a remit across urban and coastal landscapes
as well as rural ones. In our view, however, the role of the Environment
Agency (EA) remains essential and we urge the Government to encourage
through every possible means, effective and well coordinated joint
action by both agencies.
4. The regulatory role of the EA in the
protection of the natural environment requires a level of experience
and expertise which no other organisation can match. The EA benefits,
we believe, from the clear separation of an incentivising role
from that of environmental regulation. Should grant making processes
be run by the same individuals that need to make objective judgements
on environmental contamination for example, the complex relationships
which would inevitably arise would damage the public confidence
in and credibility of the regulatory process, and the fairness
of the grant making process. Both the effective enforcement of
regulation, as well as the enthusiastic encouragement of best
practice are vital; and the responsibility for discharging these
functions should not be vested in one body.
5. Nevertheless, CPRE is strongly supportive
of the leadership shown by the EA in promoting the cause of integrity
of the natural and semi-natural environment. An robust evidence
base for making decisions on regulation and priorities for incentives
is vital. There should be great strength of the distinctive roles
of the EA and Natural England but they will need to work in close
liaison for the public good to be well served. Some degree of
overlap and mutually reinforcing roles, especially in relation
to environmental leadership and vision, will help substantiate
the contribution of each to improving environmental quality.
GOVERNANCE
6. CPRE considers the governance arrangements
of the EA to be effective in ensuring the right degree of independence
from Government. This is particularly significant, given the great
controversy surrounding the initial proposals for an "integrated
agency" in 2003. During the process of consultation over
Natural England's formation, the Government has shown it has fully
understood the importance of the independence of board and chairman
to secure public confidence in Non-Departmental Public Bodies.
We stated in our evidence to the Committee in November 2004 that
Natural England should be "bone-crackingly independent":
we believe the same standard should continue to apply to the EA.
THE PLANNING
SYSTEM AND
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
7. CPRE has for some time been concerned
that plans for very large-scale development—as set out in
the Sustainable Communities Plan (2003) and subsequent documents,
notably the Five-Year Plan Sustainable Communities: Homes for
All (January 2005)—have been subject to little or no effective
environmental appraisal. Where there has been appraisal, the results
have either been opaque (as with the recent work for ODPM on the
impact on sustainability of Kate Barker's increased housebuilding
scenarios) or appeared too late and been ignored (as with the
draft East of England Plan). While we welcome the stronger role
for the Environment Agency in advising on development and flood
risk, it has a key role to play in providing independent advice
on the wider environmental implications of proposals for major
development. It is not clear that it has been the case in relation
to recent debates over housing supply.
8. Water supply is central to these concerns.
Combined with the forecast effects of climate change on rainfall
and flooding, this is an acute and growing problem. Concern is
most acute in the East of England. This is the driest region in
Britain, where a combination of wetter winters, even drier summers,
extensive low-lying land and vulnerable coasts raises serious
questions as to the wisdom and practicality of the "step-change"
in development proposed in the Sustainable Communities Plan and
now taken forward in the draft East of England Plan. In evidence
to the examination-in-public of the draft Plan, the Environment
Agency has stated that the growth proposals demand two large and
expensive expansions in supply capacity, as well as a 15% improvement
in water efficiency in all new housing and an average 8% reduction
in water use in all existing housing across the region. Such a
proposition, simply to accommodate the level of growth proposed
in the next 16 years, is a formidable challenge, and there must
be doubts as to its achievability. It also poses unanswered questions
about the polices driving the growth agenda and the relationship
between central Government departments, in particular the Treasury
and the ODPM, to the EA.
9. We note that the Chartered Institution
of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) is so concerned
about this issue that it has called for a rethink and public audit
of the Government's growth plans.
10. CPRE believes that the EA has a crucial
role to play in assessing and communicating the physical implications
of spatial planning proposals. Above all, we think greater attention
should be paid to the capacity of the environment to accommodate
and support new development. We believe that a key step towards
this must be to involve the EA in the development and assessment
of spatial planning options at the earliest stage of policy making
and at the highest level. We are disturbed, however, that the
Government's commitment to growth in housing supply is reducing
the freedom and integrity with which the EA is able to perform
this task.
11. Moreover, the EA is a statutory consultee
for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), which has been a
requirement of certain major developments since 14 July 2005.
CPRE is not clear whether additional resources have been provided
to ensure they can do this job effectively. The EA has a particularly
important role in checking that SEA reports are of a sufficient
quality.
TRANSPORT
12. The EA should also have a clearly defined
role with regard to engaging with transport issues. We believe
that it has sometimes experienced difficulty in this regard. It
appears that the EA has tended to see its role as a regulator,
or consultee for specific schemes with regard solely to effects
on the water environment. However, given the wider brief that
the EA has established, and the holistic approach which is necessary
to protect the environment, we believe the agency needs to be
unequivocal in its role in engaging with transport policy decisions
(as opposed to examining schemes on a case by case basis). Clearly
it should be provided with the resources to be able to achieve
this, as well as the support of DEFRA and the Department for Transport
in performing this role.
Campaign to Protect Rural England
December 2005
| 
