Penalties
Copyright Environment Agency
For some years there has been a move to take a proportion of environmental crime out of the criminal courts to be dealt with directly by regulators, including the Environment Agency. In February 2010 that process came to a critical point when the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs announced its intention to implement Part III of the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act 2008 in England. The proposals would provide the Environment Agency and Natural England deal with a range of new sanctioning approaches.
This new tool kit of sanctions is intended to implement the risk-based approach to Regulation which was highlighted in the review of Philip Hampton (the Hampton Review) which was echoed and built upon in the Macrory Report - Regulatory Justice: Making Sanctions Effective (November 2006). The Hampton Review proposed that the penalty regime should be based on the risk of re-offending, and the impact of the offence with a sliding scale of penalties that are quick and easier to apply for most breaches with tougher penalties for rogue businesses that persistently break the rules. Professor Richard Macrory acknowledged that these changes would not happen overnight but would require a shift in long established culture and practice in regulators and business and an overall commitment to reform. That process and cultural change is now at a key juncture.
How, exactly, is the new tool box to be filled? The article by Peter Kellett provides a guide to the new proposals.
Article by Peter Kellett first published in Croner's Environment Magazine, Issue 38. (Adobe Acrobat)
UKELA is generally supportive of a wider range of sanctions and a more effective and efficient approach. However, UKELA has expressed serious concerns as to the methodologies DEFRA has proposed to be adopted.