Full Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education, Issue ...

Implementing the Water Framework Directive67population density exceeds 800 people per sq kmand some 80 percent of non-urban land is coveredby one or more environmental designations. Land isa scarce resource in England and in order to reducenew land take, there is a target of 60 percent of newhomes to be built on Brownfield land (Office ofthe Deputy Prime Minister 2004) and to increaseresidential densities which currently average 27dwellings per hectare.Under pressure from reformers at different times,government in England has become progressivelymore centralized. The result was a reduction fromaround 11,000 parish councils, roughly equivalentto 35,000 communes in France, to the current 409district, county or unitary authorities. It is true thatthere are an additional 10,000 or so District orParish Councils, but these have negligible powersand funding. In turn, the powers and funding oflocal authorities have been progressively reduced.Since England has no written constitution, localauthorities have no constitutionally reservedpowers or sources of funding; 52 percent of localgovernment funding is directly through grants fromcentral government and only 26 percent is raisedthrough local taxes (Office of the Deputy PrimeMinister 2005). The local authorities are, however,responsible both for land use or spatial planningand the control of development—and enforcementlevels for development control are high. In thenineteenth century, it was those who wished to seesanitation and water to be introduced by the localauthorities who sought to reduce the number oflocal authorities (Best 1979), notably the abolitionof the parishes which were roughly equivalentto the French communes. In the old rural areasthere are some 220 or so Internal Drainage Boards.Originally, at least some of these were similar innature to the Dutch Waterschappen but they werebrought under the directing authority of centralgovernment in the 1930s. There is also a completeabsence of the Water User Associations found inother countries, notably Germany, France, Spain,and the United States.Wastewater and water services were privatizedin 1989 primarily for ideological reasons so noattempt was made to promote efficiency eitherthrough competition or through the principlesunderlying IWRM (Green 2001). Instead, thethen existing patchwork of combined water andwastewater companies and local water supplycompanies were privatized as they stood. Hence,in some areas one company supplies water andwastewater services, but across the street, the firstcompany may supply wastewater services, with awater supply only company providing the water.While the Environment Agency is theenvironmental regulator, the Office of WaterServices is the economic regulator of the water andsewerage industry in England & Wales. The Officeof Water Services set limits on what companiescan charge and has a duty to ensure that companiescarry out their responsibilities, are efficient, andmeet the principles of sustainable development(Office of Water Services 2005).The Environment Agency has been nominated as“Competent Authority” in England. At no point wasthere any open discussion of possible institutionaloptions for the competent authority; it seems thatan early decision was taken that this would bethe Environment Agency. It is not clear whetherthis was a decision thrust upon the EnvironmentAgency or whether the agency actively sought thisrole. Our suspicion is that it was the latter. Theproblem for the agency is that it has neither thepowers nor the funding necessary to deliver therequirements of the Water Framework Directive.The Environment Agency has a number ofcharacteristics that are relevant:1. It is a scientific bureaucracy with a verystrong public service ethos and a commitmentto enhancing the environment. However,the traditional public service ethos was todetermine what the public (or the environment)need, determine the best course of action tosatisfy that need, and implement that courseof action. It was reported that, immediatelyafter the 1997 election, the incoming Ministersaid to the then Chief Executive of theagency that the institution needed to be moreopen and transparent. The agency went intoshock because it believed that it was openand transparent, and responded as a scientificbureaucracy should be expected: it appointedan expert on a part-time basis to tell them itwas involved in being open and transparent.2. It is an agency of government with Chair,Chief Executive, and Board appointed throughthe public appointments procedure. It is thusJOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY WATER RESEARCH & EDUCATIONUCOWR