There was a hint of annoyance in the committee chair’s letter. The parliamentary Select Committee on Environment Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) had received assurances from Environment Secretary of State Thérèse Coffey that her promised investigation into the past year’s North East sea life die-off would be independent. But patience is wearing thin.
The independent review has been established to weigh up conflicting theories for the die-off. Was it a natural event caused by an algal bloom? Or was it unnatural poisoning by the industrial chemical pyridine, dredged up from the Tees riverbed?
The debate on the cause was aired at a hearing of the EFRA committee in October. In response to a raft of recommendations from the committee, Coffey agreed to an independent inquiry.
But her appearance before the committee on 6 December was no comfort to those hoping for an objective probe.
Membership is being kept secret until publication
The new investigation panel will submit its report in January, and its membership will be kept secret until publication of its findings.
In his letter of 13 December Sir Robert Goodwill MP, Chair of the Committee (and Tory MP for Whitby, which was affected by the die-off), asked Coffey to conduct the review in an open, transparent and collaborative way. He called on the government to publish the panel’s terms of reference and membership. In his letter he wrote:
“The committee welcomes the setting up of an independent group of external experts to analyse the evidence behind the competing theories of algal bloom and pyridine pollution. …
“In our original letter on the matter, we called on the independent panel to review the evidence for both theories. …
“However, in your last appearance before the committee, you were unable to explain how the members of the panel will be chosen, nor provide details about its current or expected composition. The exact terms of reference of the review are unknown. The committee has also been shown emails from an official involved in the inquiry which states that membership of the panel will not be shared outside of government until the panel has published its findings.”
He also asked that:
“As a minimum – and before the end of the year – the government should publish the panel’s terms of reference; its membership; and a document setting out the panel’s ways of working – including how it will ensure all viewpoints will input into the panels’ work.”
Goodwill also requested that the final report be published in its entirety.
Response to Coffey
Coffey’s performance at the committee was not well received by the North East public, her vague answers seeming casual and unprepared.
Among the angry responses to the committee’s tweet, one viewer wrote of Coffey,
“What an absolute disgrace she is – doesn’t care, cannot be bothered, clearly not engaged with the conversation, wants it to happen without any effort or burden to herself. Meanwhile our sea life dies and people lose their livelihoods.”
The North East Fishermen’s Collective tweeted:
“Every stakeholder needs true and transparent involvement. Every story and side must be heard”
Joint scrutiny panel
All the more need for the work of the joint scrutiny panel being set up by four Tees Valley councils: Redcar and Cleveland, Middlesbrough, Stockton and Hartlepool. They will be holding their first meeting in the very near future.
Meanwhile local campaigners are keeping up the pressure. On 14 December, fishermen sporting the masks of Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen picketed the gates of Teesworks, the Teesside former steelmaking site suspected of much of the pollution. They are demanding that dredging be paused until the reason for the die-off is found.
On Sunday 18 December the campaign’s hardy souls will hold a festive demonstration on Saltburn pier at 2pm. More details are on the Reclaim Our Sea Facebook group page.
