CUTE! (Debate)
| Rod Evans |
👍
4
Tue 25 Aug 2020, 14:40 (last edited on Tue 25 Aug 2020, 14:41) Below is a summary of a longer letter |'ve just sent to Robert Courts following our meeting last week. Happy to forward the rest to anyone interested but it's 6 pages long so won't be posting on here! WASP are holding another session very soon and we'll see after that about setting up a meeting here. This is written having taken account of the Environment Bill Policy Statement[1] but I need to do more research on the provisions of both the Bill itself (and Mr Dunne’s when available!) and the associated paper on targets[2] before I can write to you effectively on them. My conclusions so far are set out in the attached paper but can be summarised as follows: Where we are now · There is a large and growing body of evidence that demonstrates the decline in the overall quality of our rivers and waterways, with only 14% of them meeting current Water Framework Directive criteria for ‘good ecological status.’ · While the problem of pollution is not limited to sewage and surface run-off, a large proportion of it can be so attributed – and is avoidable. · The water companies use an inherited Victorian infrastructure as an excuse for this where it is their failure to invest sufficiently, despite the scale of their profits, that is the real reason for the system not being fit for purpose in the 21st century. · The regulatory system appears too heavily weighted in favour of the polluter both in the ‘costs/benefit’ analysis for investment and with the water companies responsible for monitoring and reporting on their own performance – a clear conflict of interest. · The EA’s ‘proportionate’ approach to enforcement is clearly related to the resources it has available, not to the task it is or should be charged with. It has failed – res ipsa loquitor! Where are we going? · The Environment Bill offers a real opportunity to remedy these deficiencies but on present evidence is unlikely to do so. · The new OEP needs to be genuinely independent of government, properly resourced and with a far more effective regulatory regime in place. · A new mechanism to replace the ECJ’s role in securing compliance with whatever replaces EU directives is needed. · Other sources of pollution need to be tackled, in particular from agriculture. · The only conclusion is that until it always costs the water companies more to pollute than to clean up their act, we will not see real progress. [1]https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/environment-bill-2020 |