Baroness Sheehan (LD)

It is a pleasure to follow my noble friend, if I can refer to my erstwhile colleague on the Environment and Climate Change Committee as that, so I thank the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, for her contribution. I would be very interested to hear the Minister’s response to those points, and I thank her for introducing these regulations. The move towards a digital waste-tracking system represents a significant milestone, which the waste industry has been calling for, for over a decade. It has taken a very long time. However, it is here now, and this instrument is a vital first step—it is only a first step—towards modernising our infrastructure and replacing the outdated paper-based systems that, in effect, left the door open for criminal activity. The move towards a mandatory digital record for the 200 million tonnes of waste produced in the UK annually must be effectively delivered. By establishing a real-time audit trail, this system has the potential to disrupt the organised criminal networks responsible for the 38 million tonnes of waste that are illegally dumped or misdirected every year: a scourge that costs our economy, as the Minister recognised, at least £1 billion a year, and that is a very conservative estimate. The introduction of a unique ID number will finally allow businesses and householders to verify that their waste has reached where it should be going—its legitimate destination—supporting our transition to a truly circular economy. That has to be the final aim of anything that we do with waste regulation. I welcome the new system’s potential to generate better data, because that will inform better policy-making. I welcome the intention to align this approach across the UK; that is very important and it is good to read that we will be working in partnership with the DAs. However, as the Minister said, this instrument represents only the first phase and its success will depend on what follows. Full end-to-end traceability, from production to the final resting place, remains contingent on future legislation. I would be very grateful if the Minister could confirm that phase 2 will be delivered in full and on time, and that we will not be waiting another decade. There are other critical concerns regarding the implementation framework. First, we must not underestimate the sheer magnitude of the task on which final success depends. Phase 1 targets 12,000 permitted sites. Phase 2 will bring over 100,000 operators, carriers, brokers and dealers into scope across the UK. We are talking about potentially billions of data transactions—and I thank the Environmental Services Association for its briefing. Will the Government allocate the resources necessary to deliver the back-up needed, such as in communicating effectively with legitimate operators, whatever their size? Quite a lot of SMEs will be involved at this stage, as will sole traders. Secondly—and this is the most pertinent flaw in this SI—I am concerned about the producer loophole that it is proposing or that I understand is coming down the line. While producers are the start of the duty-of-care chain, I understand that the current proposal will make their registration optional. I want to understand whether this is actually the case. I find it hard to believe that the Government are trying to tackle waste crime without mandating that producers take part in the scheme but, if they are, can the Minister explain the Government’s thinking there? I deeply share the industry’s concern that this would create a very dangerous loophole. If waste producer registration is not mandatory, it is difficult to see how a complete audit trail could be achieved or how those fly-tipping and illegal operators will be effectively identified. While on the subject of producer responsibility, I will mention my Private Member’s Bill—the Corporate Waste Responsibility Bill—as it is an opportune moment to do so. In that context, it becomes even more pertinent if the producers are not included in the digital waste-tracking system. If I may be so bold as to say so, this makes my Bill even more pertinent and even more deserving of government support. I welcome the opportunity to speak to the Minister about that. Nevertheless, I hope that she will address the concerns raised on this SI on the potential non-inclusion of producers. As the recent inquiry by the Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee, which I have the fortune to chair, highlighted, the Environment Agency’s current record on enforcement is woeful. It is clear that technology alone is not a panacea: without sufficient resources to monitor and to act on intelligence generated, this risks becoming a mere data-collection exercise. Our inquiry was clear in its findings that the tools to tackle waste crime are in place, but what has been lacking is the effective use, enforcement and compliance of the actions that follow on from the powers that the Environment Agency already has. The Government must provide assurance that this system will be sufficiently resourced and operationally ready from day one. I remain of the opinion that we need more than just digital tracking; we need to foster a genuine enforcement culture. How does the Minister propose that this instrument will do that? Can she assure us that regulators will have full visibility of waste movement from the point of production through to the final treatment and disposal? If not, how do the Government expect digital waste tracking to deliver the intended improvements in compliance and enforcement? I will finish with a couple of questions for the Minister. First, we must ensure that criminals cannot simply submit inaccurate information into the system to mask their tracks. How will the Government ensure that criminals do not do that? Secondly, it would be helpful to understand how the Government will measure whether the implementation of this SI has been successful. What other key performance indicators will be published? How will Parliament be kept up to date on the scheme’s effectiveness? Finally, we have a strong duty to ensure that this system provides end-to-end traceability from the point of production to final disposal. Anything less is just digitising the problem rather than fixing it.