But I absolutely disagree that on average people boil wash and tumble dry their reusables. That completely twats most of them, making them unusable.
Please provide some evidence other than your opinion. Some reusebles can only be washed at lower temps, but not all. The totsbots I used could be washed up to 60, though I only ever washed them at 40. If you want some evidence that people do not always swish them about in fresh spring water this is from totsbots own website:
‘We have had some very bedraggled little nappies come home to us and it just makes us sad to hear what some people do to them to keep them white or stain free. Repeat after us “Whiter than white simply ain’t right”! The nappies are there to catch waste and over time they may become stained, this is to be accepted and is not a fault.’
Secondly, the advisory board for the first report was pretty biased, let's face it.
The original board had a variety of interests represented. That included the likes of Proctor and Gamble but also The Real Nappy Association, in the name of balance. Since the report has been superseded by the update it is not really relevant (i've already posted the organisations behind the second report).
Thirdly, the environment agency is not wholly centrally funded. It also derives some of its income from sources such as waste handling licenses. Which does kind of create a teensy conflict of interest.
Not really. If people want a licence for a regulated activity they have to pay for it, and it is one mechanism for setting operating conditions that prevent environmental damage. Would you prefer that the tax payer footed the bill for the operation of private companies? Income raised through licensing is a drop in the ocean compared to central funding and flood defence levies, and is often ploughed back into improvements for that particular sector, e.g rod license income goes to river habitat enhancement.