By Julius Goldthorpe

Regardless of which political party reigns triumphant in the upcoming UK general election on May 6, one area where we can expect to see change is the UK policy on the illegal timber trade. With the three leading political parties agreeing, at the very least, the UK needs a domestic ban on the importation of illegal timber.

The agreement between Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats fully underlines the importance of this issue. With all parties stating in their election manifestos that a UK ban on illegally logged timber is essential. Labour and the Liberal Democrats have gone one step further by suggesting a campaign for an EU-wide ban to be implemented if they can gain support from other EU nations.

Need to end illegal timber trade to reduce climate change says Environment Minister

UK Minister of Environment Hilary Benn, believes the EU cannot expect to see a decline in deforestation if it continues to allow the importation of illegal timber from foreign soil. He also indicated at the 15th Illegal Logging Update, held at Chatham House, that if an agreement on a ban could not be met at a continental level, then the UK would take action at a national level.

Benn also criticised the policies of other EU members with regards to illegal logging. He believes it is the responsibility of EU nations to stop illegal timber from entering Europe and, in turn, help reduce the global warming effect that is caused by deforestation. He said: “It’s no good being in the same boat as everyone else if that boat is sinking.”

But, it is not just the EU politicians that are divided over this topic. The European timber industries also have their fair share of sceptics. Some industries favour a ban because it would reduce competition. However, others are concerned that a ban could lead to excessive bureaucracy for forest owners.

Despite concerns expressed by some EU members, it is believed that an agreement to suit all parties may be within reach.

Although the UK does face opposition to a ban, it is not alone in its desire to put a stop to the illegal timber trade. André de Boer, of the European Timber Trade Federation insists: “We must make illegal trade an offence under criminal law.”

If a law is passed, Benn is sure concerns regarding increased bureaucracy will be short lived. “A prohibition would be a boost for the domestic timber industry,” he said.

The cost of incorporating this law into EU policy is unclear, but Benn believes “the argument for getting this done in Europe is overwhelming.”

By Tiffany Stecker

Plastic bottled water is losing its appeal as city-wide efforts encourage people to twist on the tap.

In the past few years, tap water campaigns have circled the world, from Tokyo to Toronto, calling people to ditch plastic bottles and have faith in the purity of their local treatment plant.

Picture credit: saw2th on Flickr

In Bundanoon, Australia, a town of approximately 2,500 people, the sale of plastic bottled water was banned in September last year – theirs was the first local government to do so, ever. Venice, a city literally built on water, launched a glossy campaign in the summer to promote tap water and reduce the amount of rubbish along its canals. In October The Greater London Authority, along with Thames Water and Transport for London announced the installation of water fountains at the Hammersmith bus station and Tower Bridge museum.

While the drinking water movement has its origins in grassroots environmentalism, tap water campaigns in the United Kingdom are of a different nature: the leaders are private water companies who vie for a profit, just like bottled water companies.

“It’s kind of a weird contradiction, the fact that water is privatised in Britain,” says Richard Girard, head researcher with the Canadian think tank Polaris Institute. Girard wrote an article that warned: “Don’t be fooled by strange bedfellows.”

“Private water delivery companies see bottled water as a direct competitor for their product, tap water,” he wrote. “It is not surprising, then, that the pro-tap water movement in the UK has achieved such prominence - with the public relations teams from several private water companies working on the issue, and the use of the print media for promotion, it is bound to achieve some.”

There is an indication that preference for bottled water is decreasing in the UK. A report from market research group Zenith International released last March found that 2008 sales of bottled water fell by 5.5 per cent in volume and 4 per cent in retail value. The Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI), which regulates mains-fed water quality, commissioned a survey in November 2008 to compare attitudes towards tap water to results from a similar survey completed in 1995. It found that the number of people drinking bottled water has remained fairly static between the two phases, if not with slightly fewer consumers of bottled water in 2008 compared with 1995.

However, this decrease may be attributed to consumers simply switching to beverages other than water, rather than a preference for tap, according to Zenith. The group also projects bottled water consumption to rise in the UK to 2.5m litres - a 500,000 unit increase - by 2015.

While lobbyists from both camps accuse the other of lower quality, the reality is that one type is not held at a higher standard, but at a different standard.

Tap water quality is regulated by the DWI in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Bottled water is approved by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in three different categories: natural mineral water, spring water and bottled drinking water.

Natural mineral water, the most expensive form of bottled water, must be recognised by establishing the composition of water in relation to the rock strata through which it passed, and the aquifer in which it accumulated. Mineral and microbe composition must be strictly monitored to avoid variance. There is also no legal limit for sodium content in mineral water, which is not the case for the less expensive types. Despite its premium price tag, natural mineral water is also the most popular type of water, says Jo Jacobius, director of British Bottled Water Producers Ltd.

For spring water, regulations are a little less stringent. The underground source does not have to be officially recognised by the FSA, although it must be declared on the label. Criteria for chemicals and microbes are “essentially the same as tap water,” says an FSA spokesperson.

The ‘bottled drinking water’ category encompasses all other types of bottled water, which are usually the least expensive brands. This designation has no restrictions on the water source, and may be drawn from the same source as tap. The requirements for chemicals, pathogens and pesticides are also the same as for tap.

“Comparing bottled water and tap is an odd thing to do as the two aren’t straightforward alternatives - any more than a soft drink or hot beverage is a tap water alternative,” says Jacobius.

By Aine Gormley

A UK water company has been permitted to pump more than a million litres of untreated sewage effluent into the North Channel every day, starting in summer 2011.

Northern Ireland Water (NIW) can avoid laws that other parts of the UK obey because it has no independent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The Northern Irish environment agency is run by the government. The agency objected to NIW’s proposal for a sewage works serving 5,680 people, allowing the government-owned company to provide only primary treatment of the sewage.

Primary treatment removes solids but not toxic waste. Normally, sewage works in England and Wales that pump into the sea for populations over 2,000 must also apply secondary treatment.

But Edwin Poots, the Northern Ireland environment minister, a member of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), had the final say. He chose to reject the opposition to the proposed works, and construction will begins later this autumn.

Alliance Party member Sean Neeson has warned that population growth means the agreed level of treatment is unlikely to meet future requirements from the European Commission. “This will leave only two options: a further upgrade or heavy fines, to be paid by ratepayers,” said Mr. Neeson.

In May 2008, the then-Environment Minister Arlene Foster declined the chance to bring in an independent EPA. Ms. Foster said: “I and my party take the role of environmental governance too seriously to externalise the organisation”. She resigned 13 days after her decision.

Tom Burke, who chaired the 2008 Review of Environmental Governance in Northern Ireland, said that because of Northern Ireland’s fragmented institution, he was not surprised that NIW is allowed to pollute the environment more than other UK water companies.