Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
460-479)
DR PAUL
LEINSTER, MS
LIZ PARKES
AND MR
DAVID JORDAN
4 NOVEMBER 2009
Q460 Lynne Jones: You have not answered
my question as to whether the current complexity does make enforcement
more difficult. We have the report from Policy Exchange and they
recommend that we should move forward to standardisation of collection
at households and that there should not be separation between
small business and some public sector organisations in terms of
the collection methods.
Ms Parkes: I do not think it makes
our job of enforcement more difficult. It may make the challenge
of generating enough—
Q461 Lynne Jones: If it is being
done in different ways, coming from different sources and with
different mixtures, it must be more difficult, I would have thought,
actually to trace what is in what.
Ms Parkes: Irrespective of how
you collect the waste, it is always going to be sold on the open
market and there is going to be a large number of players involved.
That is the challenge we face and the challenge we deal with every
day.
Q462 Lynne Jones: Can I now move
on to electrical and electronic waste, which you did say a little
earlier was something that you are concentrating on a great deal
at the moment. Your evidence highlights the problems with this
equipment being exported purportedly for re-use but in reality
it is illegal disposal. Have you any suggestions as to how this
can be better tackled?
Ms Parkes: Our focus again is
upstream here. We regulate the collection facilities under the
WEEE Directive; this is for household waste at the civic amenity
sites where most household waste electrical equipment ends up.
We regulate those sites. We are working very hard to identify
if WEEE is leaking out of the system, where is it leaking, why
is it leaking and we are working with those operators to stop
that happening. We have a number of investigations in hand on
the back of that. The bigger challenge going forward is what is
called the business-to-business WEEE, so WEEE from businesses
and from public sector bodies that does not actually go through
that system. Here we do need to see much more responsible behaviour
not just by those who are getting rid of this equipment at the
end of its life but much more responsible purchasing behaviour
and making sure that sustainable procurement is not just about
buying low-energy products but considers the whole life cycle
and ensures that we have responsible waste management at the end
of its life.
Q463 Lynne Jones: You suggested that
the committee might like to consider whether greater responsibility
should be placed on the manufacturers but what have you actually
in mind? What kind of increased responsibilities are you suggesting?
Ms Parkes: We have a producer
responsibility regime at the moment and that is proving very effective
at allowing us to meet our recycling targets,, so we are meeting
those. It is proving very effective to collect household WEEE,
as I have said, and to make sure that that is recovered safely.
The bigger challenge is how you get manufacturers to look at the
impact of the particular products they place on the market. That
concept is known as individual producer responsibility; it is
certainly something that the Commission has in mind and had in
mind with the original WEEE Directive, and they are looking at
it again as the WEEE Directive is being re-worked. Rather than
just paying into a general fund and making sure WEEE is recovered
more generally, how can you make individual manufacturers responsible
for the take-back of their products. That is quite a nightmare
to administer and that is what has put every other country in
Europe off going down the path of individual producer responsibility.
We do think it is a good time to be looking again at this, not
as a replacement for the existing WEEE regime, which we think
is working well, but in addition to that: how can we be more responsible
as consumers and manufacturers in terms of the vast amounts of
new equipment that are constantly put on the market.
Q464 Lynne Jones: Have you any suggestions
as how you make it less of a nightmare?
Ms Parkes: We think you would
need to focus on the items that are causing most concern. I would
suggest that those are the ones that contain hazardous items,
the larger items, those that have quite a high replacement rate—things
like televisions and computers—and it is going to take a
lot of dialogue and debate. We are very pleased to see that the
WEEE Advisory Board has actually started that debate and is looking
with the manufacturers and retailers at how this could be made
to work in practice. It is a very real case where those initiatives
have to come from the industry. We cannot just impose regulation;
it has to be workable in practice.
Q465 Lynne Jones: How would that
work? Would there be some kind of check on the different types
of equipment being disposed of as to whether certain manufacturers'
equipment was more hazardous than others and they would pay more
and therefore that would give them the incentive to reduce the
hazardous nature of their products?
Ms Parkes: That is an aspect but
it is looking at it right from the design end and making sure
that you are designing a product with re-usable, safe disposal—safe
recycling elements.
Q466 Lynne Jones: What is the incentive
on the producers to go down that route?
Ms Parkes: It ought to increase
their market share. I think we are seeing increasing awareness
of environmental issues. Even with the WEEE Directive, it has
become something a lot of companies now advertise, that they will
do free take-back and recycling in store. Many companies are finding
that there is a market edge if they promote the environmental
footprint of their products. We are calling for them to look at
the whole supply chain,
Q467 Lynne Jones: If it is a market
advantage, why do you need to have greater responsibilities imposed?
Ms Parkes: That is a very good
question and I think that is when one should draw back from saying
one necessarily needs legislation and look at what industry is
doing itself through voluntary initiatives.
Q468 Lynne Jones: The Environmental
Services Association has suggested that exports of WEEE should
be limited to fully-functioning equipment. Is this feasible and
how might it be enforced?
Ms Parkes: One of the dynamics
around this whole issue of waste exports is that it is about allowing
waste to get to those countries that want it. The way the controls
work is that you can export materials to countries provided they
do want them and there is a demand out there for electrical equipment
either as working whole items or for components. For as long as
those countries say that they want to accept WEEE, we cannot unilaterally
impose domestic controls that say you cannot export it. Even if
one were to limit the export of waste electrical equipment, all
electrical equipment reaches its end of life at some point and
in fact working electrical equipment is becoming obsolete. Really
the issue of whether it works or not is not the whole issue. We
have a growing mountain of electrical equipment in this country
and internationally and we need to tackle that at source and understand
the impact of that.
Q469 Lynne Jones: You say that it
is only exported when somebody is willing to receive it. They
may be willing to receive it but they may want to melt it down
to extract metals in a way which is unacceptable. Just wanting
it does not necessarily mean that it is being disposed of appropriately.
Ms Parkes: Absolutely, and either
countries have prohibited the import of hazardous WEEE or they
are required to be notified. It is subject to very tight controls.
The problems we have seen are around illegal export. It is not
a question of the rules so much as those that are flouting the
rules. We do take this very seriously. We think this is an issue
of growing concern.
Q470 Mr Williams: A constituent who
manufactures monitoring equipment or accounting equipment on a
very small scale came to me the other day. He sends one of his
products up to the Orkney Isles and then at the end of its life
technically it is going to come back to him. Is that how it works?
He was telling me that the WEEE Directive causes huge bureaucracy.
Part of the problem is that the items are not collected together
in a controlled area where you could control whether that was
exported or not. He was talking about batteries and things like
that.
Ms Parkes: With the producer responsibility
regimes that we have in this country, they are under a legal obligation
to ensure that take-back happens and it is funded, but that does
not mean the company physically takes back the equipment that
they put on the market. You may recall this debate happened first
around the end-of-life vehicle concept and the whole challenge
of what you do with orphan vehicles. It is a producer responsibility,
if you like, more in kind than in practice.
Q471 Mr Williams: Is that not the
cause of the problem here that because the responsibility is not
carried out by local producers or it is very difficult and very
bureaucratic, a lot of this equipment is not controlled very carefully
and exports can take place?
Ms Parkes: The system we have
does work well and it does ensure the recovery. We have met more
than double our UK targets for the recovery of WEEE from householders,
so the system is working. It is not excessively bureaucratic.
Companies have to register; they have to meet their obligations,
and that does all happen. The concerns we have are about the illegal
export of WEEE that does not enter the system.
Q472 Mr Williams: The concern I have
is that that stuff does not enter the system because the schemes
that are operating are not fit for smaller producers.
Dr Leinster: That gentleman should
be able to dispose of his material. If he has sold items up to
Scotland, the person who is using that material should be able
to dispose of it in Scotland. It does not have to come back to
the originator. The issue, as Liz says, that we are seeing is
not around materials which have clear take-back systems; it is
around business-to-business waste, which does not have a clear
regime around it, and that is where we are seeing people who can
make money and therefore act illegally.
Q473 Miss McIntosh: Can I ask first
about environmental permitting? This is causing great concern
in the industry. I wondered what consultation there has been with
the industry. I gather the House is soon going to be asked to
look at the amending regulations, and there are rather a lot of
them. What consultation has there been with the industry on the
environmental permitting regulations?
Ms Parkes: The environmental permitting
regulations have been in for a number of years now.
Q474 Miss McIntosh: There is a statutory
instrument out.
Ms Parkes: Yes, to amend and increase
the scope of the environmental permitting regulations and Defra
have consulted fully on those in the normal way.
Q475 Miss McIntosh: So you have not
been involved in the consultation?
Ms Parkes: We would have been
party to pulling together the consultation paper, but it would
have been a government consultation. Where we then consult is
on the guidance, the permits, that comes in under that regime,
and we do that obviously working very closely with government
to make sure the whole package fits together.
Q476 Miss McIntosh: In the particular
waste area of oil products, in particular recovered fuel oil,
there is a problem at the moment I understand on the definition,
particularly if they wish to use it for the generation of power,
heat or electricity. Are you aware of that and have you had discussions
with DEC and Defra on that because you will be the implementing
authority?
Ms Parkes: We have had extensive
discussions not only on the definition of oil as waste but also
on working with the sector to put in place a protocol such that
they can demonstrate to us that the oil is being fully recovered
and will no longer have a negative impact on the environment when
burnt. I believe that work is coming to a conclusion but we can
provide you with a separate note on that, if that would be helpful.
Q477 Miss McIntosh: If you could
let the Chairman have that, we would be grateful. Where are we
on the take-up of the private finance initiatives as part of the
reduction of waste going to landfill?
Ms Parkes: That programme is administered
by Defra's Waste Implementation Programme. There has been quite
wide-scale take-up of that and lots of new infrastructure is coming
on stream as a result. As ever, there have been some difficulties
in securing planning permission for some of the infrastructure
but some fairly major contracts, including the Manchester PFI,
which was very recently awarded, are quite considerable and that
does show you that the system is working and is helping to deliver
the infrastructure that is needed to divert waste from landfill.
Q478 Miss McIntosh: Presumably your
local Environment Agency people have to give a permit for each
application?
Ms Parkes: That is right. The
way it works is that we do need to issue a permit but we administer
that nationally. We have been working very closely with a team
at Defra so that we can see what is in the pipeline. We then work
with the company to make sure that we do not cause any delay and
that they are very clear up front as to the permit conditions.
In every case the permits are getting through on time and with
the conditions that people expect to see.
Q479 Miss McIntosh: You did just
say that there are problems with planning permission. What more
can you or Defra do to make the public aware that perhaps they
should not be as concerned about some of these targets as they
appear to be?
Ms Parkes: Obviously the planning
decision is one for the local authority to make but we do recognise
we have a role to play, predominantly as a regulator through the
issue of the permit but also by providing support to local authorities
to help them demonstrate the need for facilities. In fact, we
are just starting on a piece of work to pull together a national
picture of infrastructure as to what is in place and what is coming
on stream so that we have a better handle on it. In doing this
work, we are working with Defra, DECC, WRAP and others so that
we can build one national picture of where we are with the infrastructure
and then better understand, if there are issues, what is behind
those issues and what more all of us could do collectively to
help give the public confidence about the need for such facilities.
Dr Leinster: One of the other
things we have done as part of the environmental permitting regulations
is to devise a number of standard condition permits so that an
operator is able to know that for a particular type of facility
these will be the conditions which will be applied to that facility.
Again, that speeds up the process. They are able to design a plant
in the clear knowledge of what they must meet.
| 
