Cabinet
5 September 2011
Agenda Item No____9_________
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ENFORCEMENT POLICY
Summary:
The previous Enforcement Policy adopted by the Council was
common to all Norfolk authorities as part of the Norfolk Better
Regulation Partnership. The partnership is no longer in operation and
elements of that policy have been subject to challenge in a legal case
brought by a neighbouring Council. The revisions within this policy
address the issues highlighted in that case and ensure that the policy
is compliant with latest guidance.
Conclusions:
The adoption of the revised Enforcement Policy ensures that
enforcement action taken is compliant with statutory guidance and
best practice and there is a reduced likelihood of successful legal
challenge.
Recommendations:
That Cabinet recommend the policy to Full Council for adoption.
Cabinet member(s):
Ward(s) affected:
John Lee, Trevor Ivory
All
Steve Hems, 01263 516182
steve.hems@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Contact Officer, telephone number,
and e-mail:
1.
Background
1.1.
Environmental Health provides regulatory services across a wide range of
legislation. It is always the aim to seek compliance with the legislation through
the provision of education, support and guidance. Unfortunately there are
occasions where this approach fails to achieve the desired outcomes and in
these cases formal legal action is considered.
1.2.
In 1998 the Cabinet Office published the “Enforcement Concordat” to help
promote consistency in the UK regulatory enforcement regime.
1.3.
The Enforcement Concordat set out principles of good enforcement policy and,
although a voluntary code of practice, it was adopted by 96% of all central and
local government bodies with enforcement functions.
Cabinet
5 September 2011
1.4.
Following the recommendations of the Hampton Report1, the Enforcement
Concordat was supplemented by a statutory code of practice, the “Regulators
Compliance Code”, to give the Hampton Principles a statutory basis.
1.5.
This is provided by the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, which
places a duty on regulators to have regard to five Principles of Good Regulation2.
The code of practice was issued on 17th December 2007 and came into force on
6th April 2008.
1.6.
In 2008 all Norfolk Councils agreed to work in partnership to ensure a consistent
enforcement approach across Norfolk. This partnership, the Norfolk Better
Regulation Partnership, produced a joint enforcement policy so that
organisations and people who may be affected knew how decisions were made.
1.7.
The Norfolk Better Regulation Partnership did not deliver the significant benefit
that was originally envisaged and, although the collaborative working remains, no
longer formally operates.
2.
Reasons for Change
2.1.
The Norfolk Better Regulation Partnership Enforcement Policy continued to be
used by most Councils as the principals of the policy were felt to be sound. In
2010 a neighbouring Council brought a prosecution and the Enforcement Policy
formed part of the challenge raised by the defendants in that case. As a result
that Council took legal advice and has subsequently amended their enforcement
policy to remove the potential for future challenges on the identified issues.
2.2.
This revised enforcement policy is a developed enhancement of the original
Norfolk Better Regulation Partnership, removing the potential for legal challenge
and reflecting current best practice.
2.3.
The enforcement policy furthers the aim of providing consistency of approach
within North Norfolk District Council’s Environmental Health Department and with
other partner regulatory services within Norfolk. It seeks to ensure improved
regulatory outcomes, whilst reducing unnecessary burdens on compliant
businesses.
3.
Financial Implications
3.1.
There are no budgetary implications associated with the adoption of the revised
enforcement policy. Indeed the new policy reduces the risk that any prosecution
taken to court resulting in costs being awarded against the Council.
1
“Reducing administrative burdens: effective inspection and enforcement” – Philip
Hampton 2005
2
Transparency, accountability, proportionality, consistency and targeted action.
Cabinet
5 September 2011
4.
Risks
4.1.
The successful challenge in court to the previous Enforcement Policy increases
significantly the likelihood of a similar challenge being mounted unless the
identified issues are addressed. The adoption of the new policy reduces the risks
of challenge to any enforcement action that the Environmental Health
Department may take.
4.2.
Although any legal action brought has the potential to be unsuccessful and for
costs to be awarded against the council the Enforcement Policy ensures that best
practice and statutory guidance is followed thereby reducing the opportunity for
challenge on technical issues. Financial risks are therefore reduced.
4.3.
Public confidence in the Council’s ability to undertake enforcement action is
undermined and this could lead to a lower confidence in the compliance levels of
local businesses. Non compliant businesses may be able to operate with reduced
sanctions leading to an unfair competitive advantage over compliant businesses
and the potential for public health to be put at risk.
5.
Equality and Diversity
5.1.
There are no equality and diversity issues associated with this report. The
enforcement policy accords with the principles of the Human Rights Act 1998, the
European Convention on Human Rights, The Freedom of Information Act 2000
and Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
6.
Sustainability
6.1
There are no sustainability issues associated with this report.