The Government has today published its response to over 200 recommendations made by the Farming Regulation Task Force [1].

Rural campaigners have welcomed proposals that should mean progress in a number of areas but remain concerned about how changes to planning policy could affect the countryside.

Commenting on the Government’s response, Ian Woodhurst, CPRE’s Senior Farming Campaigner says:

“CPRE is pleased that both the Government and the Task Force clearly recognise the important role well-implemented environmental regulation plays in protecting the countryside's wildlife and much-loved landscapes.

“We are particularly pleased that the Hedgerows Regulations have avoided being weakened and we warmly welcome the Government’s plan to hold a national fly-tipping summit. A number of local CPRE groups are working with farmers to find ways of tackling the growing problem of fly-tipping.

“CPRE has long campaigned for an end to the uncertainty over how the planning system deals with polytunnels so it can tackle concerns over their cumulative impact on local landscapes. We are pleased this campaign is finally bearing fruit and welcome the Government’s undertaking to examine the issue. We look forward to helping to develop a workable solution that supports fruit and veg producers without damaging the character of our countryside.”

“We are very concerned by moves to relax planning controls that could allow farm buildings to be converted to offices, shops, tourist enterprises and leisure facilities with little prior notification or local consultation. The imminent new national planning policies must ensure that development has local consent and is environmentally sustainable.”

End

Notes to Editors
[1] DEFRA, Government Response to the Farming Regulation Task Force, 21/02/2012

Frustrated with the filthy state of many of England’s rail stations, railways and sidings, the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) and campaigners across the country, including CPRE President Bill Bryson, will today [Monday] use the law to compel public land managers to clear up unsightly litter.

Bill Bryson and CPRE campaigners will use a legal mechanism called a Litter Abatement Order that can compel public land managers to keep their land free of litter [1]. If no reasonable action is taken within five days of notification, Litter Abatement Orders can be sought from the courts. Litter Abatement Orders are simple to use and can be sought by any member of the public. .

To support this action CPRE has published a guide to Litter Abatement Orders which will enable people who are angry about persistently littered public spaces to take action [2].

Bill Bryson, CPRE president, says: “This is not a complicated or controversial issue. Organisations responsible for public land are required to keep it clear of litter. If they’re not taking this responsibility seriously, we all have the power to compel them to do so.

“Railway operators and Network Rail are not the only offenders, but they are responsible for far too much uncollected litter.  The first impression for a visitor arriving in a town is often formed by their view from a train carriage, and it is a disgrace that that view is so often a degraded and dirty one that suggests a lack of care or pride in the area.”

Many people know that littering is a crime. Less well known is that for those who have a responsibility to keep our public spaces clean it is also an offence to leave litter lying on the ground for long periods of time [3]. A Litter Abatement Order is handed out by a court if a written complaint about litter to the landowner has been ignored. Put simply, a Litter Abatement Order allows any person to serve a notice (via a Magistrates’ Court) to get a long-standing litter problem cleared up.

Bill Bryson will be seeking a Litter Abatement Order against Network Rail for continually failing to clear up rubbish along tracks in Cambridgeshire. Other lines campaigners will be targeting in today’s action include the London Bridge station (London) and its approaches, St Austell (Cornwall), Hersham (Surrey), Ainsdale Station (Merseyside), Clacton-on-Sea (Essex) and Gravesend (Kent). Campaigners will be exercising their statutory rights if litter around these stations is not cleared.

End

Notes to Editors

1. Section 89 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990) places a legal responsibility (a ‘duty’) on certain organisations to ensure that land, as far as is practicable, is kept clear of litter. Section 91 of the EPA 1990 goes on to state that a person who is fed up with a long-standing litter problem can use a Litter Abatement Order against those organisations listed under Section 89 (the ‘duty bodies’) if they are failing in their duty to keep that land clean. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/89

2. CPRE, Litter Abatement Orders: Taking action to deal with persistent, 14 February 2011.

3.    See [1]

•    CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Bill Bryson. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen. www.cpre.org.uk

New research commissioned by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) shows that a drinks container deposit refund scheme (DRS) has the potential to raise upwards of £432 million each year for local charities and Big Society initiatives [1].

A survey by Ipsos MORI found 12 per cent of British adults say they would always donate recovered deposits to a local charity, when given the option to do so [2]. A further two thirds (66 per cent) said they would donate their deposit most or some of the time, meaning the yearly windfall for charities could be even greater. 

Samantha Harding, CPRE Stop the Drop Campaign Manager, says: “Sometimes the best ideas are old ideas. By introducing a modern deposit scheme, we could boost income for local charities, and save money by reducing litter and increasing recycling. We know it works in other countries and our research suggests many people would support a UK scheme.”

The research shows that public support for a DRS is strong, with more than half (53 per cent) supportive of a 15p deposit on 500ml drinks containers (30 per cent are opposed). This support rises to six in 10 people (60 per cent) for a scheme with a 10p deposit (24 per cent opposed).

The scheme would work by including a small deposit of between 10p and 30p on the cost of drinks containers. This deposit is then refunded to consumers when they return the container to a retailer or other collection point. At this stage the customer could be offered the opportunity to donate their deposit to a local charity or community group.

A CPRE report published last year showed that such a scheme, already in place across large parts of Europe, the US and Australia, could be set up at a relatively low cost (£84 million) and has the potential to achieve substantial reductions in drink-related litter [3]. The scheme would also dramatically increase recycling rates of drinks containers – international experience suggests up to 90 per cent could be recycled.

Samantha Harding continued: “A deposit scheme has the potential to deliver huge benefits for society and can run alongside existing recycling systems. At a time when the Government is cutting spending and promoting the Big Society, implementing a scheme that would save money on street cleaning costs, boost recycling rates, reduce unsightly litter and promote charitable giving seems like a sensible choice. Why wouldn’t we want to enjoy these benefits?”

The Government is currently carrying out a review of its waste policy in England which is expected to be published in May. CPRE has supplied ministers and officials with its research and over 3000 members of the public have also made submissions in support of a UK DRS.

End

Notes to Editors
1. The potential £432 million in charitable donations is derived from a new MORI survey and previous CPRE research published in 2010 [3]. The report assumes that, by setting the deposit at an average of 15p per container, a UK DRS would result in a 90% return rate of drinks containers, stated in the report as equivalent to 24 billion containers being returned (this is based on similar rates of return for targeted materials in comparable schemes already operating in other countries). With a 15p deposit in place (the average deposit stated in the 2010 research), from the survey a 12% donation rate would result in 2.88 billion donations of 15p, in total: £432 million going to charity each year. However, if occasional donations are also included, the final total could be much higher.
2. This survey was commissioned by CPRE and carried out by Ipsos MORI, 4th-6th March 2011. Ipsos MORI interviewed a representative total sample of 1,008 adults in Great Britain aged 18+. Interviews were conducted by telephone on the Ipsos MORI telephone omnibus. Results are weighted to the population profile of Great Britain. Ipsos MORI is one of the largest and best known research companies in the UK and a key part of the Ipsos Group, a leading global research company. For more information please visit: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/
3. CPRE/Eunomia, ‘Have we got the bottle: Implementing a deposit refund scheme in the UK,’ 2010

• CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Bill Bryson. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen. www.cpre.org.uk