« Previous | Contents |
Listen
The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2004: Draft Regulations: Analysis of Responses to the Scottish Executive
6. CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
Consultees provided valuable feedback regarding both the way the draft CARs are presented and a wide range of comments, issues and recommendations for amendments relating to specific sections and regulations. A full summary of these comments, issues and recommendations has been included within
Chapter 4: Key Comments, Issues and Recommendations and
Chapter 5: Additional Comments of this summary report. This section provides a conclusion of the main issues and points to emerge from the consultation process.
Key Conclusions
Overall Style and Approach of the CARs
After analysis of the responses received to the Controlled Activities Consultation overall, there is wide support for the aims and objectives of the
Water Framework Directive; the
Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act,2003; and
Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2004. The majority of responses were in agreement to the approach taken to protect and improve the water environment through the introduction of the CARs and the proposed three tiers of control.
However, some consultees felt that the approach appears to be prescriptive in relation to the GBRs, and that the level of detail provided may restrict the flexibility and adaptability which will be needed to allow the successful implementation and working of the system. It is suggested that care be taken within the regulations to encourage the development of management plans and local codes of practice as methods of protecting and improving the water environment.
Registrations
The issue of environmental benefit versus the regulatory burden and administrative costs for both SEPA, and individuals, organisations and businesses has been raised in relation to the proposed system of registration. It is suggested that the possibility of removing this tier of authorisation be investigated. This would, however, result in a reduction in the ability to track and assess potential cumulative impacts.
General Binding Rules
There are many comments, issues and recommendations for amendment made relating to the GBR system in general and the proposed individual GBRs presented within the consultation paper. These have been summarised in detail within Chapter 4 of this summary report. GBRs concerning croys, ditch clearing, dredging and desilting activities, vegetation clearance, abstractions and oil storage attracted the highest level of response, with the fisheries sector in particular noting the rules for ditch clearing, dredging and desilting activities (Section 2.2 of the consultation paper) and vegetation removal and management (Section 2.9 of the consultation paper) as being the most contentious.
One of the key comments made by consultees with regard to GBRs was that the decision to provide a high level of detail within the regulations may restrict the ability for them to be adapted and tailored further in the future.
Licenses
In general, consultees are supportive of the proposed licence system.
With respect to composite licences, organisations and businesses dealing with works that are standard and similar but on a regional scale, such as maintenance works for roads and railways, have asked that consideration be given to grouping such activities under one 'regional' application. Hydro operators and the agriculture sector have also asked whether activities at multiple locations several kilometres apart may be grouped, and whether some activities such as those associated with river management could be authorised on a catchment area basis.
Local authorities have asked for clarification over whether they are able to apply for one authorisation covering all their watercourse duties (such as vegetation removal, use of vehicles in water, dredging, desilting).
Timescale for Implementation
It was felt by many consultees that a longer timeframe than that presented within the consultation paper for implementation of the regulations would be beneficial.
Consultees have also asked that care be taken to ensure that there are no shortfalls or significant overlaps in the timing and transfer of responsibilities between existing legislation and the introduction of CARs.
Financial Burden
There are concerns from local authorities and voluntary organisations that the administrative and training costs associated with compliance with CARs and the associated applications procedure will force them to reduce the services they currently provide.
Integration with Other Legislation
Responses indicate that integration of the regulations with existing legislation is not as comprehensive as is needed to reduce the possibility of a shortfall or overlap in regulation and protection. In particular, the need to consider, in detail, the interfaces and potential conflicts between the following legislative areas and regulations have been identified.
Consultees urge the Executive to consider the implications of the regulations for organisations and businesses that operate in cross-border areas i.e. between Scotland and England.
Local authorities and other organisations have asked that their statutory duties, for example, flood prevention and control, navigation, pathway, road and railway maintenance and watercourse management, be acknowledged and considered within the procedures for authorisation.
The System and Associated Timescales for Application and Approval
This section of the consultation paper received a large level of response, with a high percentage of consultees disagreeing to the system and timescales for approval. The timescales for approval are considered by a majority of consultees to be unreasonable. A number of consultees also raise issues associated with the potential for timescales for different regulatory systems to conflict, for example the planning approval system, which has a shorter timescale than the proposed four month GBR and licence consideration periods. Consultees have raised doubts as to the capacity and capabilities of SEPA with regard to the processing of applications within the specified timescales. It is feared that many applications will be refused due to the inability of SEPA to process them in time, and that there is no incentive for SEPA to do so.
Possible Exemptions
A number of activities have been suggested for exemption. A list of these activities is included within Chapter 4 of this summary report.
Some of the exemptions listed under Regulation 5 have been questioned with regard to their fulfilment of the aims and objectives of the WFD.
Appeal, Arbitration and Liability
A number of consultees have asked that arbitration procedures be outlined within the regulations, together with further details regarding the appeals procedures to be followed in the event that an application is refused by SEPA.
Consultees have also asked for guidance regarding the liability that SEPA will have, and clarification on the compensation status for requirements that SEPA may make, which are later proved to be unnecessary or detrimental to the situation / application.
Competition and Advantage
Responses from the business community that in an international environment where competition is already high for many of the goods and services that are offered by Scotland, the implementation of the regulations in advance of the rest of Europe may place an unfair regulatory and financial burden for Scottish based business.
SEPA's Capacity and Capabilities
Consultees commented on the capacity and capabilities of SEPA to handle the high workload and complex assessments associated with the regulation of the system of control under CARs. Consultees will require assurance from the Executive and SEPA themselves that the organisation will have both the capacity and expertise to fulfil their new role and achieve the correct balance in the assessment of controlled activities between environmental protection and improvement, social development and economic performance.
Small changes in the way we perform everyday tasks can have huge impacts on Scotland's environment.
Walking short distances rather than using the car, or being careful not to overfill the kettle are just two positive steps we can all take.
This butterfly represents the beauty and fragility of Scotland's environment. The motif will be utilised extensively by the Scottish Executive and its partners in their efforts to persuade people they can do a little to change a lot.
« Previous | Contents |