Magazine Issue 2 - Winter 1996
Wherever I dump my waste...

A lack of legislation regulating use of contaminated land has left Britain's remaining greenfield sites as a corporate free for all. Paul Vernon reports


On the 25th of November John Gummer, Environment Secretary, announced that the government would not tolerate more than 40% of new homes being built on greenfield sites. He said that 4.4 million new homes were needed over the next twenty years and the majority needed to be built on brown land.(1)

The Environmental Protection Act 1995 established general guidelines for Local Authorities to deal with contaminated land. These attempt to define whether land is contaminated, who is responsible and what defines a cleaned site.

On three occasions the government has proposed a general outline which industry has rejected on the grounds that proposed regulations would make developing on contaminated land far too expensive; resulting in more greenfield sites being built on. The government is likely to dither further: "The Government believes that the normal process of development and redevelopment provides the best means of tackling much past contamination. Improvements to the condition of land can in most circumstances be created through the voluntary, commercial activities of the private sector without the need for direct intervention by regulatory authorities." (2)

More Homes?
Although the population of Britain will remain roughly stable over the next half a century, more homes are needed to cater for more people choosing to live alone.This is a sad trend that is perpetuated by corporations who can sell more products to the public if we all live separately. The government has failed to realise the need to use derelict buildings - currently estimated to be around 800,000. (1)

In Britain it is up to the home owner to check a property before buying - once bought the seller is not liable for any problems.

Most buyers use the services of a surveyor to check the property before buying, but how deep in the ground do surveyors check?

Groundwater contamination is a pressing dilemma - out of sight, out of mind. Philippe de Henault of the Environment Agency admitted that the agency's predecessor, the National Rivers Authority, had carried out "no systematic recording of groundwater contamination". (3)

The Environment Agency published the first national survey of ground-water contamination this month revealing over 1200 sources of pollution in England and Wales. The newly privatised water companies don't seem to be very concerned about the problem. Only half of them even replied to the Environmental Agency's survey.

One way in which the government may dodge the issue is in the wording of the final guidelines. The current definition of contaminated land is where land "appears to the local authority" to contain substances which either cause "significant harm" or where there is a "significant possibility of such harm being caused."(4)

Another problem lies in the government's refusal to outline actual levels of contamination for each type of contaminant. Such levels of toxicity are used on the continent.

In years to come the home building corporations will leave a lot of people living in new homes built on contaminated land. Once again the government is giving them free rein to make a profit at the expense of the public and the environment. And once again it is up to us to try and stop them.

Notes
1 The Guardian, 26th Nov.'96.
2 Framework for Contaminated Land, DoE '94.
3 New Scientist, 21st Sept '96.
4 Town and Country Planning, Sept '96.