News that will ensure that pollution risks can be minimised at the scene of an incident. The agreement strengthens the existing working relationship, covering issues such as agreed responsibilities during an incident, the exchange of information, joint training and what types of incident the Environment Agency needs to know about. By ensuring that fire crews have the equipment to protect the environment the Environment Agency hopes that swift action can be taken to avoid any environmental disaster. Officers from the Environment Agency have been working with the National Fire Service College to develop the environmental module of its Environmental Protection and Hazardous Materials training course and have been training firefighters on how to use the grab pack at an incident. As well as oil and fuels, other spills that may not appear immediately hazardous. Chair of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority Val Shawcross said: "This agreement demonstrates our continued commitment to protect the communities we serve using the very latest equipment and techniques. The joint work we are doing with the Environment Agency builds on the procedures that we have in place to deal with pollutants at incidents." Chris Birks, director of the Environment Agency's Thames region, said: "This is a major step forward in prioritising the environment. The agreement is the result of some excellent joint work between LFEPA and ourselves. The equipment and training we have given to the London Fire Brigade should provide them with the right materials and skills to contain harmful substances and dispose of them safely. LFEPA and the EA have shown that the environment can be protected more effectively if we work together."
UK, Information on Contaminated Land The Environment Agency has published soil intake values for ethylbenzene and toluene which may be contaminating land. The main purpose of the documents is to provide regulators, developers, landowners and other interested parties with information 16
and advice on the assessment of risks arising from the presence of soil contamination associated with these substances. The reports describe soil guideline value, generic assessment criteria for assessing the risks to human health from chronic exposure to soil contaminated with ethylbenzene and toluene. To access the report on ethylbenzene, go to http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/commondata/acrobat/et hylbenzene_sgv_932499.pdf To access the report on toluene go to http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/commondata/acrobat/tol uene_sgv_932493.pdf
UK, February 28 2005. Corporate polluters will have to pay for their damage Rgw government is considering going into the election with a commitment to impose tougher penalties on companies and individuals who pollute the environment. The most far-reaching proposal in a new Environmental Justice Bill would give a right to communities to order an environmental impact assessment of developments such as new factories, roads or waste incineration plants. Harriet Harman, the Solicitor General, who is backing the policy, also wants new powers for the Environment Agency to demand court orders to force polluters to clean up the rivers or land they have spoiled. The proposals could upset the business community, but Ms Harman has privately told colleagues that they will be a vote-winner with many Labour supporters who believe tougher action is needed to tackle the problems of polluted Britain. They are due to go to a meeting of "green" ministers chaired by Elliott Morley, an Environment minister, on 8 March. However, one green campaigner who has been consulted said: "She has got to persuade 17 to 20 ministerial colleagues and get it past the Better Business Regulation Task Force, the Downing Street team, and the Treasury people. It is not going to be easy." The Environment Agency prosecuted 266 companies in 2003 and the courts
imposed fines on 11 company directors for polluting rivers, fields, and other parts of the countryside. But Friends of the Earth criticised the courts for handing out fines that are dwarfed by the profits of major companies. FOE said Sir Terry Leahy, the chief executive of Tesco, earned more in one day than the £10,000 fine levied against his company after fuel leaked into the groundwater from three fuel storage tanks at the Tower Park Tesco in Poole, Dorset. In its report, the Environment Agency said the leak continued for more than six months, adding: "Pollution of the groundwater can be irreversible or at best costly and timeconsuming to clear up." A fine of £60,000 was imposed on BP for allowing tens of thousands of litres of fuel to leak from a service station's tank into Luton's groundwater. FOE dismissed the punishment, saying: "It is equivalent to what BP's group chief executive, Lord Browne of Madingley, earns in just 4.5 working days. The incident posed a threat to Luton's drinking water because the petrol station is close to one of the town's abstraction points." Mike Childs, FOE's campaigns director, said: "The Government needs to get tougher on illegal pollution and make sure the big corporate polluters are fined amounts that get noticed in the boardroom. "But this is not enough on its own. The poorest in society bear the brunt of the worst pollution and much of this is legally allowed. A radical third term for Labour would pledge to tackle environmental injustices by making sure that pollution doesn't hit the poorest hardest." Campaigners claim that poor areas are subjected to the highest levels of pollution because they tend to be closer to heavy industry and motorways. Tony Blair has made climate change,a priority for Britain's presidency of the G8 and the EU later this year, but little priority has been given to proposals for higher penalties for polluters, which Michael Meacher promised in September 1998 when he was environment secretary. Mr Meacher said then that the fines for those who continued polluting were "pathetic". The average fine then was £2,500. It is now estimated to be around £4,000.
