THE Scottish Government’s green watchdog has been accused of supporting a tax break that will lead to hundreds of thousands of tonnes of contaminated soil being dumped at landfill sites.
The Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) has backed new guidance proposed by the tax agency, Revenue Scotland, which could make it much cheaper to dispose of soil that has been polluted by industry.
Under the guidance, companies wanting to get rid of contaminated soil could pay £80 a tonne less tax to tip it into landfill sites. Industry experts fear this will mean less soil is cleaned up for use in building projects, putting specialised soil decontamination firms out of business.
Revenue Scotland is proposing new guidance on the landfill taxes imposed on firms disposing of soil. The option backed by Sepa would mean firms returning to the old “dig and dump” regime of the past, according to Edinburgh soil cleaning company Soilutions.
In a submission to Revenue Scotland’s consultation, published last week, the company’s managing director John Curran warned the guidance would open up a tax loophole. “Waste tourism from south of the Border is inevitable,” he said.
The “common practice” of playing down contamination levels to avoid tax would increase, he argued, leading to more hazardous soil going to landfill. Treatment centres recycling soil “will no longer be able to compete with the cheaper landfill alternative and will be forced to close”, he said.
A soil cleaning plant run by Soilutions at Torphin near Livingstone would have to shut down, said Curran, who added this would be “quite embarrassing” for Sepa as it helped select the plant for a major green award in 2014.
He added: “From academia through to industry, a considerable amount of resource has been expended in developing a soil remediation and recycling industry sector. By the introduction of the lower rate of landfill tax this industry will collapse with certain job losses.”
Curran was backed by John Ferguson, an expert from waste company Binn’s “eco park” in Perthshire and a former waste manager with Sepa. “Healthy soils and the conservation of soils are one of the foundations of civilization,” he told The National. “Why is Sepa even considering allowing the cheap disposal of non-hazardous contaminated soils when we have an active and highly capable soils treatment sector with the skills to treat and recover these soils?”
Ferguson argued that the move flew in the face of European attempts to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill, adding: “It makes no sense to be promoting the cheap disposal of usable soils to landfill.”
Sepa, however, stressed it just reacting to proposals put forward by Revenue Scotland. It was concerned stricter standards and higher taxes would mean more soil was wrongly classified and illegally dumped.
Sepa pointed out that 1.2 million tonnes of soil had been disposed of at landfill sites in 2011 and 2012. “We have to take an overall environmental perspective, not a business perspective,” said Sepa’s principal waste policy officer, Gary Walker. “We have to balance our response”.
According to Revenue Scotland, the aim of its consultation had been to gather feedback on guidance to determine the correct rate of Scottish landfill tax on contaminated soils. It said it would publish its final recommendations on any amendments to the guidance by August 31.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here