Chamber
Plenary, 12 Feb 2004
12 Feb 2004 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Sewage Dumping
I will be as brief as I can, but these are serious issues.
I add my congratulations to Rosemary Byrne on securing tonight's debate, because the Executive acknowledges that the Parliament has taken a consistent interest in the disposal of sewage sludge and other organic waste. As has been mentioned, in the previous parliamentary session, the Transport and the Environment Committee and the Public Petitions Committee carried out inquiries into the issue. The first of those inquiries led to a debate in the chamber in October 2002, which I remember vividly.
That parliamentary interest has had important consequences. In March last year, in response to the concerns that were expressed in the Parliament and elsewhere, the Scottish Executive amended the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994. In the debate of October 2002, I promised that I would introduce those amendments, which have greatly strengthened controls on two uses of organic waste, including sewage sludge. Those uses are: the spreading of sludge on agricultural land; and the use of sludge for reclamation and improvement of land. The latter is particularly relevant to what is happening at Dalquhandy and elsewhere.
It would take me too long to correct all the inaccuracies that appeared in this morning's Daily Record—usually a very reliable journal—and I do not have time to do so. However, I will make a number of important points. As was repeated earlier, the paper claimed that the stuff would not be dumped in Shropshire. In fact, a great deal of Thames Water's sludge is used in land restoration in the Thames valley. An interesting point is that the regulatory regime in England is weaker than the one in Scotland. In Scotland, ecological improvement must be demonstrated in advance in accordance with the statutory procedures.
The Daily Record also claimed that Scottish sludge is of lesser quality than English sludge. That is rubbish and Thames Water has told me that it is absolute nonsense. In fact, Scottish Water was offered the contract, but it did not have enough sludge available. Nevertheless, good, old-fashioned Scottish sludge is being used in land restoration.
The amendments that we made to the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 mean that sludge may be used only for the purposes of ecological improvement or agricultural benefit. The amended regulations set out a rigorous procedure for demonstrating to SEPA, which is the regulator, that the improvement is being delivered. The regulations also include general provisions to protect the environment. If the conditions cannot be met, SEPA will not register the activity and the activity may not be carried out.
If untreated sludge were to meet the requirements, that would be only because its use was demonstrably safe. In any event, I understand that the sludge that will be used at Dalquhandy will be treated. It will need to be treated sufficiently to ensure that the requirements in the regulations can be met. In that context, it is simply unhelpful for Alasdair Morgan to suggest that there is some undefined category of semi-treated sewage. If sewage is treated such as to meet the regulatory requirements only partially, it may not be used.
As David Mundell mentioned, Roseanna Cunningham was quoted as saying:
"To pretend that spraying untreated human excrement on to open countryside is environmentally friendly is a sick joke".
Frankly, that would be the case if we had said that.
I add my congratulations to Rosemary Byrne on securing tonight's debate, because the Executive acknowledges that the Parliament has taken a consistent interest in the disposal of sewage sludge and other organic waste. As has been mentioned, in the previous parliamentary session, the Transport and the Environment Committee and the Public Petitions Committee carried out inquiries into the issue. The first of those inquiries led to a debate in the chamber in October 2002, which I remember vividly.
That parliamentary interest has had important consequences. In March last year, in response to the concerns that were expressed in the Parliament and elsewhere, the Scottish Executive amended the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994. In the debate of October 2002, I promised that I would introduce those amendments, which have greatly strengthened controls on two uses of organic waste, including sewage sludge. Those uses are: the spreading of sludge on agricultural land; and the use of sludge for reclamation and improvement of land. The latter is particularly relevant to what is happening at Dalquhandy and elsewhere.
It would take me too long to correct all the inaccuracies that appeared in this morning's Daily Record—usually a very reliable journal—and I do not have time to do so. However, I will make a number of important points. As was repeated earlier, the paper claimed that the stuff would not be dumped in Shropshire. In fact, a great deal of Thames Water's sludge is used in land restoration in the Thames valley. An interesting point is that the regulatory regime in England is weaker than the one in Scotland. In Scotland, ecological improvement must be demonstrated in advance in accordance with the statutory procedures.
The Daily Record also claimed that Scottish sludge is of lesser quality than English sludge. That is rubbish and Thames Water has told me that it is absolute nonsense. In fact, Scottish Water was offered the contract, but it did not have enough sludge available. Nevertheless, good, old-fashioned Scottish sludge is being used in land restoration.
The amendments that we made to the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 mean that sludge may be used only for the purposes of ecological improvement or agricultural benefit. The amended regulations set out a rigorous procedure for demonstrating to SEPA, which is the regulator, that the improvement is being delivered. The regulations also include general provisions to protect the environment. If the conditions cannot be met, SEPA will not register the activity and the activity may not be carried out.
If untreated sludge were to meet the requirements, that would be only because its use was demonstrably safe. In any event, I understand that the sludge that will be used at Dalquhandy will be treated. It will need to be treated sufficiently to ensure that the requirements in the regulations can be met. In that context, it is simply unhelpful for Alasdair Morgan to suggest that there is some undefined category of semi-treated sewage. If sewage is treated such as to meet the regulatory requirements only partially, it may not be used.
As David Mundell mentioned, Roseanna Cunningham was quoted as saying:
"To pretend that spraying untreated human excrement on to open countryside is environmentally friendly is a sick joke".
Frankly, that would be the case if we had said that.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S2M-770, in the name of Rosemary Byrne, on sewage dumping.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament accepts that the dumping of untreated or semi-treated sewage on land is a revolting concept to the public with potentially devastating he...
Ms Rosemary Byrne (South of Scotland) (SSP):
SSP
First, I thank members for staying behind for this debate and for taking so much interest in it. I have not stopped receiving e-mails and phone calls today; ...
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
I just want to record that when I was a member of the previous Public Petitions Committee, Dorothy-Grace Elder carried out quite a lot of work on Blairingone.
Ms Byrne:
SSP
I am aware of that, and I am sure that we can learn lessons from those who were involved in that work.It appears that sewage is being disposed of in communit...
Roseanna Cunningham (Perth) (SNP):
SNP
I congratulate Rosemary Byrne on securing this debate and on raising a very important issue in the chamber. I also congratulate the Upperward against polluti...
The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Allan Wilson):
Lab
Does the member accept that that information might not be right? Thames Water deposits solid wastes in the Thames valley.
Roseanna Cunningham:
SNP
A great deal of investigation has been carried out in the past 48 hours on the reasoning behind the situation. The advice that we have been given is that the...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):
Lab
I congratulate Rosemary Byrne on securing the debate. Although I do not agree with the entire content of her motion, it is important that we are able to deba...
Ms Byrne:
SSP
Will Karen Gillon elaborate on what she means by saying that members are not fully informed?
Karen Gillon:
Lab
I ask the member if she has met SEPA to discuss the issues that she has raised and, if so, what answers SEPA gave. I had a two-and-a-half hour meeting with S...
Ms Byrne:
SSP
Can I answer the member's question?
Karen Gillon:
Lab
I am afraid not. I must take SEPA at its word. The minister will have to ascertain whether there is a problem with the regulatory regime in relation to SEPA....
David Mundell (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
I congratulate Rosemary Byrne on instigating the debate. She has done a great deal of work on the issue, such as lodging questions and raising issues in Parl...
Euan Robson (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD):
LD
I thank the Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development for his permission for me to say a few words on a constituency matter. The village of Newca...
Mr Adam Ingram (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I, too, congratulate Rosemary Byrne on securing the debate. I tick off David Mundell, who knows perfectly well that my colleague Alasdair Morgan has taken a ...
Chris Ballance (South of Scotland) (Green):
Green
I congratulate Rosemary Byrne on the motion and on her work in raising the profile of the issue that we are discussing.There are three problems. First, sewag...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
A short extension to the time allowed for the debate would enable me to call the few remaining members who wish to speak. I am minded to accept a motion unde...
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees that, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by five minutes.—Alasdair Morgan.
Motion agreed to.
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
As a member of the Environment and Rural Development Committee, I was made aware of the issue slightly later than the local members. Concerns have been raise...
Karen Gillon:
Lab
Only three weeks ago, I brokered a meeting with Scottish Coal, Thames Water and Terra Eco.Systems to which representatives of the Upperward against pollution...
Rob Gibson:
SNP
I am glad to hear that some attempt has been made. We are trying to find means of having these communications out in the open at an early stage, but the evid...
Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green):
Green
Like others, I congratulate Rosemary Byrne on securing a debate on this controversial topic. The use of human waste as a fertiliser is controversial not only...
Alasdair Morgan (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Public consultation on the issue has been significantly lacking. At the well-attended meeting in Douglas to which I went, many people did not know what was g...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
I call the minister to wind up. He has seven minutes.
The Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Allan Wilson):
Lab
I will be as brief as I can, but these are serious issues.I add my congratulations to Rosemary Byrne on securing tonight's debate, because the Executive ackn...
Mr Ingram:
SNP
I hear what the minister is saying, but does he recognise that there is inconsistency in the way that the water companies treat sludge at the point of produc...