Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by Augean Plc

INTRODUCTION

  1.  Augean Plc is one of the UK's market leaders in the management of hazardous waste, providing advice and cost-effective solutions to UK businesses' waste problems. We work in partnership with our clients to provide long-term answers to the treatment and disposal of their waste.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  2.1  The work of the Environment Agency is essential.

  2.2  Management of the Agency needs to focus on bringing more consistency to regulation across the country.

  2.3  The current industrial climate seems to punish those who want to deliver compliance whilst ignoring, knowingly or not, those who choose to break the law.

  2.4  The Agency is much segmented with each area applying different standards of regulation.

  2.5  The Agency might consider being staffed by fewer better trained officials who can not only understand the science but also take good measure of threats to the environment. Industry experience would be a significant benefit to the skill set of staff at the Agency.

  2.6  The Agency need to focus on assisting compliant operators not seeking to "trip them up" to prove their value.

  2.7  Independent annual review of the Agency's overall performance should be complemented by a quick appeals and arbitration mechanism for the rapid resolution of disputes between Agency officials and regulated entities.

  2.8  The Agency's reputation within industry is poor. Anyone setting out to deliver innovation within the sector first has to consider the Agency's detrimental effect on the development.

AUGEAN PLC RESPONSE

  3.1  Our comments on the performance of the Environment Agency are restricted to the company's direct experience of its people and regulatory procedures. While we believe strongly in the need for good environmental regulation, we also believe that, in many respects, the Environment Agency could improve on being a strong, effective and evenhanded regulator.

  3.2  We make the following points in response to the request for evidence issued by the select committee.

How successful the Environment Agency has been in its role as enforcer of environmental regulation and controls, and how well it manages its wide range of activities;

  4.1  The arbitrary manner in which officials conduct their work can result in companies being targeted for investigation without the existence of objective evidence to warrant such action. It appears common that the Agency targets organisations that, by their own objectives, are easy to score against whilst turning a blind eye to the real criminal waste operators.

  4.2  We and many of our colleagues in the industry cannot understand why the Agency cannot regulate the known criminals in the sector. The Agency seems not to focus on targeting real environmental crime. This is often brought about by the Agency's inspection regime which views organisations on their presentation rather than auditing the waste streams which are actually handled.

  4.3  Local Agency officials appear to have little guidance as to how to apply a risk-based model of regulation. Instead of looking for regulatory breaches which might result in genuine harm to the environment, some officials give the appearance of preferring to uncover minor transgressions which do not involve material harm to the environment. [This may be because it enables officials to show their superiors that they are doing their job, while avoiding the difficult task of confronting genuine polluters.]

  4.4  We do not consider it acceptable for officials to take more than three weeks to read or even receive company mail. Moreover, we are concerned about the care taken with company forms and documents which can in some circumstances be commercially sensitive. They should not be carried between office and home but be properly filed in locked cabinets on secure Agency premises.

  4.5  The compliance costs for companies that the Agency brings in its wake are excessive. These can take the form of management time, legal, economic, public relations and other consultancy costs.

Whether the Agency operates efficiently and provides good value for money

  5.1  Our key efficiency concerns about the Agency centre on the technical competence of the officers dealing with waste management operations. We have found on numerous occasions that the time it takes to resolve a technical issue with the Agency, and the ability of the officers to efficiently understand the objectives, add both time and cost to the operator and the Agency. We have also experienced over zealous officers involved in over regulation to create more issues than necessary therefore creating avoidable costs.

The structure, governance and accountability of the Agency

  6.1  The current structure of the Agency is difficult to understand. As a waste manager, Augean Plc ought to be able to understand the Agency's structure, its governance and accountability—but this is not clear nor fully understood. Therefore other organizations who may not interface with Agency as regularly as Augean are even less likely to understand the Agency's structure.

  6.2  The Agency operates on an Area Team basis, with a National Team lead. While the Area Team dominates the regulation of operations, it is rarely qualified to take on all the complex technical issues involved in waste management. Augean finds it difficult to access the right person with the right aptitude to deal with assisting the company on its operations.

  6.3  While the structure, governance and accountability of the Agency could be strengthened, the biggest improvement the Agency could make would be to improve the training of its staff. We do not see the need for a new body to replace the Environment Agency—just a need for better and more consistent application of regulation. Any changes to governance structures should be geared towards the consistent application of regulation across the country.

  6.4  Safe regulation of the hazardous waste industry requires a level of scientific understanding which is rarely found in the Environment Agency. Too often, companies like Augean Plc have to explain to the Agency how the science works. Misunderstanding of the science can both delay our operations and result in competitor companies being allowed to breach regulations. For example, some hazardous waste operators are able to perform "sham" treatments to turn hazardous waste into non-hazardous waste without the Agency intervening.

  6.5  The Agency should employ scientific specialists with experience of working in business who can act as referee for local Agency officers faced with decisions involving complex scientific processes.

Its relationships with Defra, Defra-sponsored bodies and the rest of Government, including the Agency's role in the planning system

  7.1  The Agency does not appear to have officers who are trained to understand the planning system. When the Agency has crossed responsibility boundaries with other Government bodies, it has created avoidable issues and costs to all parties. Where the planning system is effective and well understood, we have seen frustration from other Government bodies at the lack of understanding displayed by the Agency when it is consulted on planning matters.

The Agency's relationship with non-Governmental stakeholders and the general public, and how the Agency monitors satisfaction with its services

  8.1  The integrity of the Agency's relationships with non-Governmental stakeholders depends upon the consistent application of regulatory principles. Organizations which deal with the Agency should receive feedback as to how the Agency is improving its services.

  8.2  The Agency is inconsistent in the manner of its conduct in different geographical regions. Relations with Augean's landfill sites in the North East of England, for example, are cordial and regulatory work is carried out relatively efficiently; whereas in the East of England, work at Augean's sites has been delayed by a heavy handed and excessively bureaucratic approach of local Environment Agency officials.

  8.3  The Agency is also inconsistent in the way it treats different companies. For example, a derogation was granted by the Agency to Waste Recycling Group to enable it to win a contract to dispose of chemical waste from batteries. Augean applied for the same derogation and was refused without a consistent explanation from the Agency, despite winning the contract.

  8.4  The monitoring of Agency services could be conducted by an independent body which would consult stakeholders on its performance. Under the current arrangements, few companies would dare criticize their inspectors for fear that they would then be targeted for over-zealous inspection in future. The independent body could report to the Secretary of State and Parliament annually.

  8.5  If a body disputes the view taken by the Environment Agency, it has little recourse to justice except through judicial review or the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. These processes can often take months and the delay can impact detrimentally on commercial operations. We therefore recommend that a quick appeals and arbitration mechanism be introduced, whereby a company can lodge a claim with an independent arbitrator who can help resolve disputes that arise without prejudice to future legal proceedings.

The Agency's responsibilities for flood defence and flood mapping, including guidance to the public

  9.1  No comment.

How the organisational changes brought about by the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill will affect the role of the Environment Agency

  10.1  No comment.

How the Agency's work in improving wildlife habitats will tie in with Natural England's work on biodiversity

  11.1  No comment

The Environment Agency's forthcoming corporate strategy 2006-11

  12.1  The corporate strategy for 2002-07 presented great goals for the development of the Agency but its subsequent performance does not seem to have been reviewed thoroughly against the objectives set. The corporate strategy should target key deliverables. The strategy statement is not easily accessible for the public. Stakeholders have not been made aware of the strategy and its objectives.

Augean Plc

November 2005


 
previous page contents next page

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

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 11 May 2006