MONDAY 14 JULY 2003

MR D COATHAM, MS G CLARKE, MR N SINDEN AND MR T OLIVER

  Q120  Mr Key: Do you get the impression with the local authorities that it is a problem of money, or is it a problem of priorities and local councillors and officers just do not think is a very important issue?

  Mr Oliver: It depends. In the case of some authorities the resources to enforce are crucial. Some local authorities do have excellent policies but do no enforcement, which is an idiotic situation but one forced upon them. It is also true that some do not deem themselves to be dealing with countryside issues. The interesting thing about the Countryside Agency guidance in 1997 was that it was talking about lighting in the countryside, whereas we are talking about the effect of pollution from everywhere. It is important in that context to make clear that CPRE has two objectives. One is the retention of a greater proportion of the really dark sky that still remains. Separately and cumulatively, an approach to all lighting so as to reduce the total pollution impact over time. With reference to your previous question about the time it will take for lighting to be changed, it is important to bear in mind that the figures speak for themselves really. I think the Highways Agency have responsibility for 150,000 lights out of a total of 4.5 million. So there is a considerable gap in the numbers. Twenty-seven per cent of all street lights are presently more than 30 years' old, so there is a huge backlog and there resources come in again. Interestingly, Lord Rooker, referring to the latest PFI funding from DfT of £300 million for new lighting, stated that as an opportunity to be taken to improve the lighting situation. As far as we know, from conversation with ODPM, there has been no requirement for that money to be spent in a way which, for example, enhances the performance and reduces light pollution.

  Mr Coatham: May I just come in on funding? The Institution, the County Surveyors' Society and the Lighting Board have been quite vociferous in trying to get the Department for Transport to give indications of what funding is being made available in DTP settlements so that the engineers can at least try to get hold of this money. They have been unsuccessful, in fact we are told basically that money is allocated for in there, but there is no indication as to whether it is £1 or £1 million. We believe that if there were some indication of that funding being made available to local authorities, the engineers could at least make an effort to get hold of some of that for street lighting purposes. Street lighting is certainly under-funded and that is why over 27% of street lights are over 30 years' old. If we carry on at the same rate of replacement as we have for the last few years, by the end of the ten-year programme for roads which the government announced, we will have above 50% of the street lighting over 30 years of age.

  Q121  Chairman: We will see what they say when they come in. I can assure you that we have a few questions in mind.

  Mr Oliver: May I add one small point about the question with regard to ODPM? We were lucky enough to meet ODPM recently on this subject. Unfortunately the building regulations side of ODPM at the moment does not deem itself to be within this discussion and that is something we should be anxious, thinking about the way local authorities can implement building regulations, to look at very closely with ODPM. We would welcome it.

  Q122  Chairman: Have you made representations to government directly?

  Mr Sinden: Yes, we have, both in response to the consultation documents we talked about, but also separately as well. We are pursuing those in discussions with officials in all relevant departments.

  Q123  Chairman: Do you stick by the comments you have just made about government's role following those meetings?

  Mr Sinden: Absolutely. There needs to be a clear overall lead within government for tackling the light pollution issue, which there currently is not.

  Chairman: Thank you very much for coming here and giving evidence. We are rushing through some others so we can bring our report out because we are determined to make a significant step change in this area. Thank you very much for playing your part in that.