Clause 87 - Control of water from coal mines
Water Bill [Lords]
9:45 am
Mr Paddy Tipping (Sherwood, Labour)
I am pleased to support the amendment. It gives me the opportunity to praise the
work of the Coal Authority, particularly its chairman, John Harris and its chief executive, Ian Roxburgh. The Bill recognises that over many years, since coal privatisation in 1994, the Coal Authority has been working outside its powers.
Clause 87 will provide a proper statutory basis, which is progress, but I want to press progress a little further. The Coal Authority has developed considerable expertise on mine water discharge; not just coal mine water discharge, but mine water discharge in general. It is perhaps now the leading authority in Europe and further afield, and it is important that we use that expertise to make the best of difficult pollution problems.
My hon. Friend the Member for Falmouth and Camborne mentioned Wheal Jane, a tin mine incident, but lots of mining incidents occur throughout the country, and the Coal Authority is often called out to deal with them. Some 40 per cent. of calls to the Coal Authority about mine water discharge turn out not to be coal-related issues. A sensible point is being made, which is that the Environment Agency should act as a regulatory body. At the moment, it is not just a regulator; it is often asked to devise schemes and put them into action.
As my hon. Friend said, the amendment would introduce a permissive power that allows cost recovery. The Coal Authority has the expertise, and it makes good sense to try to use it in a more proactive and thoughtful way. I should be grateful if the Minister told us about any discussions that there have been with the Coal Authority. Has he met John Harris, the authority's chairman, and what is the view of other partners? I am told that the Environment Agency supports the idea in principle, and I know that the Local Government Association does. My understanding is that the Department of Trade and Industry, which sponsors the Coal Authority, is not averse to the approach, although as always it is worried about cost. However, there is a good deal of support for the amendment.