10th April 2015
Annual Scrutiny of Natural Resources Wales
We would like to add some
further concerns, having had the opportunity to look at the remit
letters for NRW during its years of operation.
- Extract from 2013/14 NRW
remit letter: “...we look forward to Natural Resources
Wales delivering a streamlined programme of work which reflects our
Government priorities on living sustainably, reducing poverty, and
improving equality. It will help improve the lives of the people of
Wales…working for sustainable development with healthy
people enjoying a better quality of life in safe and more cohesive
communities...’
- The above intentions are
worthy but are perhaps somewhat distant from what should be the
core priorities of a body taking on the remits of the Countryside
Council for Wales (CCW), the Environment Agency and the Forestry
Commission. Attention to these inherited priorities might indeed
result in achievement of these intentions.
- CCW: The stated
aims and policies of this organisation are clearly set out on the
CCW website and the role of the organisation in responding to
planning applications set out with great clarity and precision in
‘Countryside Council for Wales: A Service Statement for
Planning and Development’. In summary, CCW state on their
website: “CCW champions the environment and landscapes of
Wales and its coastal waters as sources of natural and cultural
riches, as a foundation for economic and social activity, and as a
place for leisure and learning activities. We aim to make the
environment a valued part of everyone’s life in
Wales.”
- NRW seem to be in retreat
from either this commitment to championing landscapes, or
recognising their importance ‘for economic and social
activity’, and seem, by reference to their own Service
Statement, to have contracted the role formerly played by CCCW as
statutory consultee. This is nothing short of tragic. Wales has
outstanding landscapes which draw visitors from across the world,
and which are a large part of what attracts people to remain in
rural Wales to live, or draws them to move to rural Wales. The
rural economy does indeed depend very significantly on protection
of landscapes, and this was recognised by CCW. Managed sensitively,
development within Wales’s outstanding landscapes can be
reconciled with the aim of protecting the high quality of rural
landscapes. However, for this to happen requires an agency with
understanding of the importance of landscapes and a commitment to
their protection and an active role as consultee to the planning
process.
- Environment Agency
Wales' role included: reducing industry’s impacts on the
environment, enforcing pollution legislation and reducing the harm
caused by flooding and pollution incidents. It also oversaw the
management of waste, water resources and freshwater fisheries;
cleaning up rivers, coastal waters and contaminated land and
improving wildlife habitats.
- Forestry
commission: responsible for the protection and expansion of
forests and woodlands. Also responsible for scientific research,
promotion of outdoor activities within its holdings and protecting
and improving biodiversity around woodlands.
- The effective
continuation of the roles of these two organisations requires
retention of staff with the appropriate scientific qualifications
to understand the interrelationships between developments, both
individually and in aggregate, and consequences for water quality,
contamination by airborne pollutants, impacts on biodiversity etc.
It also requires that the expert scientific opinions of qualified
staff are given their proper weight in decision making. There is
some concern that this is not always the case.
- In any case, the desired
outcomes of NRW’s work, as stated in remit letter 2013/14,
are not always matched by the realities on the ground in rural
Wales. To take one example, the removal from NRW of an effective
consultee role in the approval of smaller wind development
applications outside designated landscapes, has caused huge
disruption and upset in rural communities, with one person’s
financial interest being all too frequently allowed to eclipse his
neighbours’ rights to quiet enjoyment of their homes and
gardens and landscapes. Not to mention the widespread complaints
about noise impacts on sleep and health, the damage to the tourism
economy and the likelihood of substantial damage to the rich
wildlife of rural Wales. In this respect, in rural areas our
lives are not improved by NRW’s activities, quite the
reverse, and our communities are split by the divisiveness of these
improperly regulated applications and our environment is
degraded.
- The same remit letter
includes in Annex 1 as a priority for 2013/14:
“…facilitating new business opportunities, including
tourism...” Tourism in rural Wales is highly dependent on our
high quality landscapes. Protection of these by way of ensuring the
sensitivity of development is essential to the achievement of this
priority. Sadly it appears that protections, by way of an active
role as statutory consultee on landscape issues in planning
applications, which were offered by Countryside Council for Wales
are not consistently offered by Natural Resources Wales.
- The theme which emerges
most strongly from a reading of the remit letters is the extent of
Welsh Government control of NRW’s direction and activities
and the consequent lack of independence afforded to an organisation
which has as one of its key functions operating the necessary
checks and balances on development. To perform an effective
watchdog role, NRW must be free of heavy handed controls and
political direction. It is already evident in rural Wales that
development decisions are being made which have caused genuine
distress and upset and are beginning to erode the key attractions
of living in a quiet and beautiful rural area.
- We would wish to see that
part of NRW responsible for comment on development applications
wholly independent of government agendas so that it is indeed free
to offer the advice which is necessary to protect our natural
environment.
This is our additional personal response to the consultation. We do
not object to publication.
Yours sincerely
Margaret and Iain Aitken