FINES of up to £10 million, with company directors and managers made personally liable for criminal damage to the environment and the cost of cleaning it up, are among the grim consequences facing Irish business and industry if they fail to take this key issue seriously.

At an IBEC seminar on environmental management last week, Dr Mary Kelly said regulatory, societal and financial pressures were all pushing industry towards a higher level of environmental performance but it was also clear that this would require a "culture change" in the business community.

The scale of this problem was illustrated by the relatively sparse attendance at the seminar. Originally planned for Jurys Hotel in Ballsbridge, where it was expected to attract over 100 people, it was switched to IBEC's own offices when it became apparent that not much more than 50 had signed up.

Dr Kelly, who is IBEC's environment executive, told them society "now expects high environmental standards from companies both large and small". She said the old way of treating the environment as a "free resource" with scant regard for the future was "no longer acceptable".

In most developed countries, she said, "the attitudes of business and industry have evolved as public concerns have crystallised. They have moved from defensiveness, through acceptance to a recognition of the need for pro active environmental policies for survival and success".

She conceded that regulatory forces were one of the most important engines driving companies to adopt environmental management. The EU has brought in about 200 directives relating to the environment over the past 20 years and these, in turn, have led to major legislative changes here.

The two most important pieces of Irish law are the 1992 Environmental Protection Agency Act, setting up an integrated pollution control (IPC) regime which would affect about 1,000 companies, and the 1995 Waste Management Bill, now expected to become law before the Dail's summer recess.

Industries subject to IPC licensing must agree an environmental management programme with the PA. This would specify waste minimisation targets as well as monitoring and reporting responsibilities - all open to public scrutiny - and many companies would have to appoint an environment officer to meet it.

Referring to the Waste Management Bill, Dr Kelly said the only way companies could avoid "very prohibitive" fines of up to £10 million for breaches of the law was to participate in IBEC's voluntary recycling scheme for packaging, to be run by a subsidiary called REPAK, which has ministerial approval.

She also pointed out that the Bill lays down much higher standards for landfill dumps, in line with EU requirements, and the knock on effect for industry is that waste disposal costs will soar, making companies look again at the quantities of waste going to landfill.

"Complying with this legislation will require companies to consider the environmental impact of their processes from the planning stage right through to end of life and disposal," Dr Kelly said. "Failure to do so can result in non compliance, the penalties for which can be severe."

She also referred to the recent environmental boycotts of Shell petrol and French wine. "Both consumers and environmental groups will have learned the power of this tool from both these incidents, and business will be under more pressure to show clearly its stewardship of the environment."

Indeed, she said many companies were realising that adherence to environmental standards "may become a prerequisite for doing business in the 1990s". More and more companies were signing up for accreditation to one of the recognised 150 standards, and this was putting peer pressure on others to follow.

In addition, there was pressure from banks and insurance companies who were concerned that they could be held jointly liable for environmental damage or incur a long term liability to clean up after one of their clients. "Poor performance...may result in increasing insurance premiums," she said.

Dr Kelly said many companies recognised that, although there were extra costs involved, "good environmental management is essential to satisfy the expectations of stakeholders and interested parties and to avoid fines, liabilities and damage to a company's reputation".

She also pointed out that pollution prevention can pay, citing a project in Yorkshire which involved 11 businesses. They jointly hired a consultant on waste minimisation and he identified 542 opportunities, of which 379 had a pay back period of less than one year with £2 million in cost savings.

There were several other examples from the British experience showing what could be achieved by "a sound, proactive attitude" to environmental management. Documented cases of savings obtained in the Irish context are not available currently, but may be the subject of an IBEC survey later this year.