Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80-86)
Ian Pearson, Mr Ian Macdonald and Mr Rob Hitchen
24 JANUARY 2007
Q80 Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer:
Is it fairly frustrating that Defra has to deliver this and yet
actually in many ways the power to deliver it is in the hands
of the Department of Transport and Department of Communities and
Local Government because actually the way that local development
frameworks are implemented and the way that drainage is designed
by highways agencies is going to have a huge bearing on this.
And yet you cannot write their guidance for them. How are you
going to address these issues across departments? Are they represented,
for example, on the implementation group?
Ian Pearson: I know it is fashionable to talk
about government being in silos and departments not talking to
each other. But that is actually very far from being the case.
Defra has policy leads on a number of areas where implementation
will involve working closely with a number of other government
departments. In climate change, for example, we work very closely
with DTI, DFT, CLG and others, and it is exactly the same when
it comes to the Water Framework Directive. At an official level
there is an Inter-Departmental Steering Group that assisted with
the transposition of the Directive and that has now been replaced
by the WFD Whitehall Group, which mirrors the Ministerial Energy
and Environment Committee at official level. I sit on EE as well
and this includes a range of government departments. We take issues
to do with the Water Framework Directive, and indeed climate change
and other matters, directly to EE and Ministers from different
government departments all have the opportunity to have a policy
input. As I say, this is mirrored at an official level as well
so there is a lot of joined-up working here that I think sometimes
people on the street do not appreciate. The average person in
the street does not understand the sophistication of the policy
formulation process in government; quite rightly they are more
concerned with outcomes. Sometimes I think we could better explain
that we do consider these things seriously. Ministers across a
range of government departments have an input into the policy
process and we come to a mature judgment about what is the right
thing to do.
Q81 Lord Greaves: I have to say I
do not think it is just people in the street who do not understand
the sophistication of government departments, I think we do not
either and perhaps we ought to do more. So far as local authorities
are concerned, is it just the planning system that it will feed
through, the regional spatial strategy's local plans and so on?
or is there going to be a wider role for local authorities at
either county or district level across everything they do and
how will this actually work if it is?
Ian Pearson: I know, Lord Greaves, that you
are a great expert in local government matters and my understanding
of how this works is that local authorities already have an obligation
to consider impacts on water in their planning activities. The
new planning policy statement that we issued, for instance, is
just one part of that and there is already liaison between local
authorities and the Environment Agency on a range of issues relating
to the water system. Baroness Young will have a view on this but
certainly we would expect that the River Basin Planning systems
will change the way in which the Environment Agency and local
authority liaison will happen. We would expect local authorities
to have strategic discussions through the Agency's River Basin
District Liaison Panels and possibly sub-groups of those panels,
which are the forums in which the River Management Planss negotiations
and discussions will take place. I think there will be a lot of
dialogue between local authorities and the Environment Agency
and getting the right sort of structures in place will be important.
Work is taking place on that at the moment.
Mr Hitchen: The Environment Agency and RTPI
(Royal Town Planning Institute) together with the Local Government
Association have developed some informal guidance to local authorities
about how they need to take into account the Water Framework Directive
and that is available on the Environment Agency website. There
is some thinking, some informal steer if you like, about what
kind of things local authorities should take into account.
Q82 Lord Greaves: Are the existing
regional assemblies going to have a role in this?
Ian Pearson: The regional assemblies will have
a view on the regional spatial strategy and that will have reference
to River Basin District Management Plans.
Q83 Baroness Jones of Whitchurch:
Given the expertise and the investment that is going into implementing
the Water Framework Directive, have you got any plans to take
that forward into the impact that freshwater then has on seawater
as it flows into the sea and actually ensure that all that good
work does not just end in the river basin but actually is applied
out beyond to the seawater and marine life and so on? I suppose
the next bit of that question is, therefore, if there is going
to be a new Marine Bill, will that take account of some of this
good work that is taking place? Otherwise a lot of the good work
will be lost.
Ian Pearson: Yes we have. The Defra Marine Bill
team is very well aware of the requirements of the Water Framework
Directive and they understand that its implementation needs to
be carefully considered when developing the Marine Bill, particularly
because the River Basin Management Plans should include transitional
and coastal waters. It is important that we are joined-up about
this and there have already been discussions with the Environment
Agency and other stakeholders which have a role in implementing
the Water Framework Directive to ensure that there are linkages
and synergies with the Marine Bill. These discussions will continue
and as you will be aware we still very much want to produce the
Marine Bill and set up a marine management organisation, but we
need to make sure that there is a consistent and joined-up approach
here and we will do just that.
Q84 Baroness Jones of Whitchurch:
So the principles from the Directive will be applied in any future
bill. That is basically what you are saying?
Ian Pearson: Yes, we will take full account
of the Water Framework Directive in our design for the detail,
the policy that goes into the Marine Bill.
Q85 Baroness Jones of Whitchurch:
When are we likely to see the bill?
Ian Pearson: We have said that we want to have
a Marine Bill and, as you know, it was not in the Gracious Speech.
However, we are taking work forward on it and there are a number
of technical issues and discussions that we have been having,
particularly with the Devolved Administrations on this matter.
Certainly there is an intention to produce a draft bill and we
will undertake to keep the Committee fully informed.
Q86 Chairman: Thank you very much
indeed for coming and talking to us, Minister, and your two colleagues
as well. You have painted a complex picture for us to reflect
on more than anything else, and clearly there is an enormous amount
of work still to do. I was just wondering,—between you,
me and the gatepost, did we actually realise what we were letting
ourselves in for when we signed up to the Directive in the first
place?
Ian Pearson: I think the Water Framework Directive
overall is an important and significant way in which we can produce
the water and environment quality improvements that we would all
want to see. It is flexible, unlike some other directives, and
it will enable that overarching framework to be applied to management
of the water system. As is always the case with these things,
some of the consequences that follow from it and some of the legislation
needs to be looked at very closely and we need to make sure that
we get the detail right. One of the key things of the Directive
overall is that Article 4 makes it clear that members would not
be required to take action which would incur disproportionate
cost or which is not technically feasible within allotted timescales.
I think that principle has to apply to all the Daughter Directives
and this very much a key part of our negotiating remit as we move
forward with this proposal on priority substances.
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed
and good luck.
| 
