As greater accountability is demanded of business, so-called ‘triple-bottom-line’ reporting is become the norm. But are ‘green’, or sustainable, business practices delivering tangible benefits? Alison Birrane and Marsha Jacobs report.
As greater accountability is demanded of business, so-called ‘triple-bottom-line’ reporting is become the norm. But are ‘green’, or sustainable, business practices delivering tangible benefits? Alison Birrane and Marsha Jacobs report.
The issue of environmental accountability has again been highlighted in the wake of what is claimed to be the biggest pollution spill into the Swan-Canning river system.
Caused by a damaged pipe, the spill leaked an estimated 500,000 litres of effluent into the river system near Caversham and created a public relations and environmental nightmare for the Water Corporation.
The latest spill comes as the corporation faces prosecution by the Department of Environment over three incidents last year.
The cost of environmental incidents to business can include fines, decreased profits and damage to reputation, all of which have the potential to drive away customers, stakeholders and potential business partners.
Environmental accountability is an issue high on the agenda for the State Government, which is widely recognised for its broad ranging environmental policy.
Environment Minister Judy Edwards this month announced new ‘get tough’ pollution measures with the launch of Pollution Watch – calling on the community to report businesses that discharge pollutants into the environment.
New laws mean that individuals causing serious environmental harm will face fines of up to $500,000 or five years in jail, while companies will also face jail terms and fines up to $1 million.
The State Government has also committed more than $4 million for the investigation of and response to environmental incidents, including a 10-member enforcement squad and an expanded pollution response unit.
“The government is serious about detecting environmental crime and enforcing the State’s beefed-up environmental protection laws. These laws are in place for a very good reason – and there are severe penalties for some activities,” Ms Edwards said.
“Under the new unauthorised discharge regulations, the same penalties apply to businesses that let off smoke while burning solvents, electrical cables, paint, plastic, rubber or treated timber.”
But while a clean, green image is one that many industries are keen to promote, the new legislation has attracted some criticism.
Bill Sashegyi, director of industry policy of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia, said most businesses were keen to comply with the environmental and sustainable laws.
But aspects of certain legislations, for example, the unauthorised discharge and waste disposal, made it difficult for business to abide by and added increased administrative burdens on both government departments and business, he said.
WA Chamber of Minerals and Energy CEO Tim Shanahan said the resources sector in WA applied some of the highest standards of environmental stewardships in the world.
“I think the mining industry has a very good record to stand on,” he told WA Business News.
Mr Shanahan said companies needed certainty and a streamlined process that was adequately resourced in order to comply with the environmental requirements, and indeed the broader category of sustainability.
Meanwhile, Conservation Council spokesman Chris Tallentire said conservation groups had recognised the efforts made by industry, but the very nature of some businesses meant that they were not environmentally friendly.
Mr Tallentire said while the Conservation Council had been “critical of the low level of fines in the last three years … things have improved in recent times”.
“I think that industry is getting the message and government has improved things,” he said.
