@robdob / Kuco – the word going round is that there’s scope for the flood defence aspects of the Environment Agency’s remit to be picked up by other parties, potentially the water companies, who have some track record in investment planning and delivering efficiencies in delivery over the last couple of decades.
As for the other functions that the EA fulfil in pollution prevention etc – yeah, wouldn’t it be odd if it was all split up again, back to the NRA / HMIP / Waste Regs. Seem to recall the argument back then was that merging = efficient… Can’t believe that anyone would be daft enough to bring say an NRA role back into a water company though (poacher and gamekeeper under one roof like when what became the NRA used to be the Rivers Division of the Water Authorities).
As a general comment – let’s not confuse most of these proposed cuts with efficiencies, they’re just savings. Efficiencies are when you do the same with less (or more with the same).