Examination of Witnesses (Questions 53-59)
Ian Pearson, Mr Ian Macdonald and Mr Rob Hitchen
24 JANUARY 2007
Q53 Chairman: Thank you very much, Minister,
for coming along and welcome. It is always a pleasure to have
Ministers here to talk to us and help us with our inquiries. Thank
you very much for finding the time. My usual welcome contains
the dreaded words that you will be aware of course that this is
broadcast and also webcast.
Ian Pearson: Thank you very much. I am delighted
to be here this morning to answer your questions. Just for the
record I would like to say that I have with me today Ian Macdonald
who is the policy lead on toxic substances in water for Defra,
and also Rob Hitchen, who is the policy lead on the implementation
of the Water Framework Directive. I hope, if I cannot answer your
questions, then at least they will be able to do so.
Q54 Chairman: Can I kick off, Minister,
and ask you if you can update us on the progress that is being
made in implementing the Directive throughout the United Kingdom?
Are you in a position to say anything about progress in the River
Management Plans as well, covering the UK as a whole?
Ian Pearson: The first thing I would want to
say is that I think the Water Framework Directive implementation
timetable is a challenging one. Defra and the Environment Agency
have actually met all the Directive's deadlines so far and we
expect to continue to be implementing them according to the schedule
and what is envisaged. We have met the deadlines to transpose
the Directive into UK law, which was by December 2003, to send
information about our administrative arrangements for implementation
to the European Commission by March 2004; we have also met the
deadline to analyse each River Basin District, its characteristics,
the environmental impact of human activity and economic analysis
of water use. We sent this to the Commission by the deadline of
March 2005. The Environment Agency have also published a timetable
and work programme for the production of the River Basin Management
Plan for each River Basin District in December last year. We are
meeting all those key milestones and as we move forward there
are some challenging issues that will need to be dealt with. But
I am confident that we are on track at the moment and will continue
to be for the future. When it comes to the River Management Plans,
we have a good level of co-ordination through various bodies.
There is a UK-wide policy group, what is called a UKTAG (UK Technical
Advisory Group on the WFD), and there is an Economic Steering
Group as well. There is England/Wales, England/Scotland co-ordination,
and also with Northern Ireland as well there is a good deal of
co-ordination. There is obviously some international cross-over
with the river basins as well between the north and south in Ireland,
and again the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government in the Republic of Ireland is actually a member of
the UK Technical Advisory Group. We are pretty joined up in this
area.
Q55 Chairman: Are there any particular
problems that stem from where the river basins cross boundaries?
I am thinking of the Solway/Tweed basin, which is pretty vast.
Are there any particular difficulties because there are bits in
England and bits in Scotland?
Ian Pearson: It does require more co-ordination
obviously but the Environment Agency and SEPA have published a
joint River Basin Management framework setting out how they work
together in the Solway/Tweed River Basin District. They have established
a cross-border Area Advisory Group for river basin planning in
the Solway and the Tweed areas so that level of joint working
is happening at the moment.
Chairman: That is promising. Lord Palmer?
Q56 Lord Palmer: In this country
we seem to have a very good reputation for meeting our deadlines,
particularly where EU Directives are concerned. Do you have any
evidence of how our European colleagues are getting on with the
implementing of Directives in their respective countries?
Ian Pearson: Yes, I do. One of the features
of the Water Framework Directive is that there is a Common Implementation
Strategy process, and I think that has been very useful. My understanding
is that it was established by the Commission and Member States
in 2001 to enable an informal exchange of best practice and information
between Member States. This process is overseen by EU Water Directors,
which meets every six months and is chaired by the Water Director
from each Presidency. There is a formal mechanism of consultation
and dialogue here. The sense that I get from this is that there
is a strong desire to have common implementation standards, so
there are regular discussions between Member States about what
appropriate standards there should be. Rob actually attends some
of these meetings.
Q57 Lord Palmer: Do you yourself
not attend?
Ian Pearson: No. This is all at official level.
Mr Hitchen: I attend something called the Strategic
Co-ordination Group. There are various working groups in the Common
Implementation Strategy. For example, there is a working group
on groundwater, there is a working group on defining Good Status
at EU level. Talking to my colleagues in other Member States I
am very aware of what is happening. This process allows for a
lot of informal dialogue with colleagues and various workshops
are organised, some of which have been hosted in the UK. Compared
to the implementation of some other Directives, with this one
we can have a reasonably good idea of how it is going in other
member states.
Ian Pearson: One of the things that has happened
in this process is that there has been a production of guidance
documents, which have been very helpful in the characterisation
process, in particular when you are looking to characterise River
Basin Districts. While the guidance documents are non-legally
binding, they are a way of ensuring common standards across Europe
in terms of interpretation, which we think is important. There
is clearly the right of Member States to do what is appropriate
for their local circumstances and what is relevant for one River
Basin District may not be as relevant for another.
Q58 Lord Plumb: What about the new
Member States, particularly the ones that are joining imminently?
There are bound to be some difficulties there, are there not?
Ian Pearson: Certainly with the very newest
Member States, across a range of areas they have a number of challenges
in terms of meeting EU standards. As far as what we used to call
the ten accession countries, again they are in a situation where
they have now had some experience of the Water Framework Directive.
They were looking at EU legislation prior to accession. Rob, I
do not know whether you have any feeling on the ground from some
of the meetings that take place, but with the guidance documents
the network of support is there at the moment for those Member
States.
Mr Hitchen: We have been involved in workshops
with Poland, for example, and it is very interesting to learn
that they have very robust technical expertise in monitoring for
example and strong academic institutions with expertise in water
management. They are also very keen to learn from the UK. Another
example is that colleagues from the Czech Republic came over to
spend some time with the Environment Agency, and also under the
CIS (the Common Implementation Strategy) there was a guidance
document produced on linking cohesion funding with the WFD specifically
to help the newer Member States and in particular to help target
some of the EU funding to help reach WFD objectives.
Ian Pearson: They will have to work with some
of the established Member States as well on River Basin Districts
because they clearly cross international boundaries.
Q59 Chairman: How do you tackle something
like the Danube? It must be a nightmare to try to set up something
as big as that.
Ian Pearson: I must admit that I struggle to
tackle the Solway/Tweed, the Severn and other rivers. I do not
have any specialist knowledge of the Danube. But you are right;
it has to be a huge issue. I am sure officials will know more
than I do about that.
Mr Hitchen: The Danube is the largest River
Basin District in the EU and if you think the Solway/Tweed might
have some difficulties, the Danube has more: there are multiple
languages, multiple starting points. There are some existing mechanisms,
like the Danube Commission, and the Commission are involved quite
closely with that. From what I understand from contacts, the Danube
is progressing very well actually.
| 
