The 1990 Environmental Protection Act introduced the requirement for local authorities in the United Kingdom to establish and prepare registers of land that had previously been subjected to a potentially contaminative use. This was met with opposition from a range of interests who articulated concerns about potential blight and the effects upon property development. Amongst these interests were those of local authorities of which the larger ones, it is contended, would have good reason to oppose the introduction of registers because of the fear of their consequential impact on local economic development. In this paper the author appraises the local authority responses to the government's proposals for registers of potentially contaminated land and, following the government's decision to abandon the registers, their views of what policy and legal measures ought to be adopted in their place. The author then considers the extent to which these views have been reflected in the 1995 Environment Act which sought, inter alia, to provide a comprehensive legal and policy framework for the resolution of the location and apportionment of contaminated land liabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsC DBaumA EMacgregorB D, 1985, “The influence of valuation practices upon the price of inner city land”Land Development Studiesnumber 2, 157–173
2.
AtkinsonN, 1991, “The regulatory lacuna: Waste disposal and the clean up of contaminated sites”Journal of Environmental Law3265–280
3.
BarnettA, 1992, “Contaminated land: What a mess”Estates Gazettenumber 9422, 4 June, 42–43
4.
CBI, 1993, “Firm foundations: CBI proposals for environmental liability and contaminated land”, Confederation of British Industry, Centre Point, New Oxford Street, London WC1
5.
ChisholmMKivellP, 1987Inner City Waste Land: An Assessment of Government and Market Failure in Land Development (Institute of Economic Affairs, London)
6.
Control of Pollution Act, 1974Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 40 (The Stationery Office, London)
7.
Criminal Justice Act, 1991Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 53 (The Stationery Office, London)
8.
Dangerous Dogs Act, 1989Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 30 (The Stationery Office, London)
9.
DoE, 1990This Common Inheritance: Britain's Environmental Strategy Cm 1200, Department of the Environment (The Stationery Office, London)
10.
DoE, 1993, “Michael Howard announces review of land pollution responsibilities”, DoE news release, 23 March, Department of the Environment, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB
11.
DoE, 1996, “Part IIA Environmental Protection Act, Contaminated Land: Consultation on draft statutory guidance”, Department of the Environment, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB
12.
DoE/WO, 1991, “Public registers of land which may be contaminated: A consultation paper”, Department of the Environment/Welsh Office; copy available from DoE, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB
13.
DoE/WO, 1992, “Environmental Protection Act 1990: Section 143 registers”, Department of the Environment/Welsh Office; copy available from DoE, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB
14.
DoE/WO, 1994a, “Paying for our past: The arrangements for controlling contaminated land and meeting the costs of remedying the damage to the environment”, Department of the Environment/Welsh Office; copy available from DoE, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB
15.
DoE/WO, 1994b, “Framework for contaminated land”, Department of the Environment/Welsh Office; copy available from DoE, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB
16.
DTI/DoE, 1993, “Report of the Financial Sector Working Group of the Advisory Committee on Business and the Environment”, Department of Trade and Industry/Department of the Environment; copy available from DoE, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB
17.
Environment Act, 1995Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 25 (The Stationery Office, London)
18.
Environmental Protection Act, 1990Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 43 (The Stationery Office, London)
19.
FeaginJ R, 1988Free Enterprise City: Houston in Political and Economic Perspective (Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ)
20.
HC, 1990Contaminated Land: First Report of the Environment Committee, Volume 1 House of Commons paper 170-I(The Stationery Office, London)
21.
HirdJ, 1994Superfund: The Political Economy of Environmental Risk (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD)
22.
HL, 1995Parliamentary Debates (Hansard): House of Lords Official Report—5th Series, Session 1994 95, Volume 562, Number 52, 7 March 1995 Columns 111 262House of Lords (The Stationery Office, London)
23.
MazmanianDMorellD, 1992Beyond Superfailure: America's Toxic Torts Policy for the 1990's (Westview Press, Boulder, CO)
24.
MolotchH, 1976, “The city as a growth machine: Towards a political economy of place”American Journal of Sociology82309–331
25.
Murphy v Brentwood DC (1990) 2 AII HR 908
26.
Planning1991a, “Blight alarm raised on contaminated sites lists”, number 932, page 8
27.
Planning1991b, “Birmingham counts costs of registers”, number 942, page 1
28.
POST, 1993, “Contaminated land”, Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, House of Commons, London
29.
RCEP, 1984Tackling Pollution—Experience and Prospects Tenth Report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, Cmnd 9149 (The Stationery Office, London)
30.
RobinsonK, 1995, “Industrial location and air pollution controls: A review of evidence from the USA”Progress in Human Geography19222–244
31.
Rylands v Fletcher (1865) 3H&C 774
32.
ShelbournC, 1994, “Historic pollution—does the polluter pay?”Journal of Planning and Environment Law703–709
33.
StaffordH, 1985, “Environmental protection and industrial location”Annals of the Association of American Geographers75227–240
34.
StewmanSTarrJ, 1986, “Public – private partnerships in Pittsburgh: An approach to governance”, in Pittsburgh – Sheffield: Sister Cities Ed. TarrJ, (Carnegie Mellon University Press, Pittsburgh, PA) pp 141–181
35.
The Financial Times1993, “Relief over polluted land decision” 25 March, page 8
36.
The Independent1993, “City welcomes pollution ruling”, 10 December, page 31
37.
ThompsonH, 1992, “Contaminated land: The implications for property transactions and the property development industry”National Westminster Bank Quarterly Review (November) 20–33
