Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend for the
Environment Bill to be presented for Royal Assent before the 26th
United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties commences
on 1 November.
The Minister of State, Department for the Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
() (Con)
My Lords, our landmark Environment Bill was officially
reintroduced in the Commons following the Queen’s Speech at the
start of May. The Bill completed its passage through the Commons
and entered the Lords at the end of May. First and Second Reading
have been completed. We have publicly committed to Royal Assent
by autumn as a key part of our domestic and international
environment agenda ahead of COP 26.
(Lab) [V]
My Lords, I thank the Minister. The Environment Bill is big and
important, and Peers at Second Reading showed its need for
amendment; it must be given adequate time. Does the Minister
accept that the Bill would go a lot faster if sensible amendments
for improvement were accepted by the Government in a
collaborative spirit rather than routinely rejected as if by
rote? Would he accept that it would pretty difficult for the
Government to show global leadership at COP 15 and COP 26 if they
passed a Bill that is watering down previous environmental
commitments—for example, on the office for environmental
protection and halting biodiversity, climate and habitat
regulations?
(Con)
My Lords, it is absolutely right that this House will want to
subject the Bill to full and proper scrutiny, but I hope noble
Lords will agree that it represents a giant step forward in
environmental protection: whether through biodiversity net gain,
record-breaking targets, local nature recovery strategies,
conservation covenants or the office for environmental
protection. There is a whole package of measures to take us
towards a zero-waste society. Of course I will approach debate on
the Bill with an open mind, as all Ministers should, but it is
already an important piece of work.
(Lab)
The range of topics raised on Second Reading, coupled with the
number of amendments tabled since, highlights the gap we have
long identified between the Government’s promises and proposals.
The Minister has been refreshingly honest about the challenges
our climate and ecological system faces, but does he accept that
to get this Bill passed in a timely manner and ensure it is fit
for purpose, the Government will have to compromise?
(Con)
My Lords, very few pieces of legislation enter the process in
exactly the same form as they end it. To that end, a number of
changes have been introduced already in the Commons on due
diligence obligations—a world first—on dealing with our
international footprint, and amendments on the organisation of
the OEP and species conservation strategies. A number of
amendments have been tabled in recent days for the remaining
stages here in the Lords on species abundance targets, nature
targets and much more besides. So, of course, the Bill will
improve over time.
(Non-Afl) [V]
Part 2 of the Environment Bill deals with environmental
governance in Northern Ireland. Can the Minister specify when the
Northern Ireland member of the office for environmental
protection will be appointed?
(Con)
My Lords, environment policy is mostly a devolved matter.
Although a small number of provisions are drafted for Northern
Ireland and Wales only, only half the provisions in the Bill
extend beyond England. I cannot answer the question of when that
appointment will be made, but I will be sure to inform the noble
Baroness as soon as I have that information.
(Con)
[V]
My Lords, the Bill will be a success only if it ties in with
existing legislation and the proposed planning Bill. Can my noble
friend tell us whether there are any plans to introduce it or
present a full picture of the jigsaw of environmental
legislation, rather than piece by piece?
(Con)
The noble Lord makes a very important point, but it is true of
almost all legislation: no piece of legislation can be seen in
isolation. The department I stand here representing today is
closely involved in the formulation of any planning amendments
and changes that are being made. We are absolutely committed to
ensuring that the planning changes are completely consistent with
the aspirations in the Environment Bill.
(LD)
[V]
My Lords, Clause 24 of the Bill allows the Secretary of State to
give guidance to the office for environmental protection that it
must take into consideration when exercising its enforcement
functions. This seems to completely undermine and take away the
independence of the OEP. Will the Government rethink this clause
during the Bill’s passage through the House?
(Con)
My Lords, the Secretary of State will be able to issue guidance
to the OEP to ensure that the organisation retains a focus on the
key priorities, but the OEP is just as able to reject that
advice. It retains independence, and that independence is
confirmed through a number of mechanisms in the Bill that ensure
that, whether with financial independence or decision-making
independence, it is free from ministerial interference.
(Con)
My Lords, “perfect legislation” is the ultimate oxymoron, but
does my noble friend accept this is landmark legislation, so it
must be as near perfection as possible? That means that an
artificial deadline is far less important than thorough scrutiny?
This House must have the chance to do that.
(Con)
Again, the noble Lord makes a very important point, and of course
the Bill must be subjected to full and proper scrutiny—as I
believe it will in the days and hours that have been given for
its scrutiny. We have seven days for Committee, and I have no
doubt that that debate will be lively and that the results will
be effective in helping us to ensure that it is as close to
perfect as possible.
(CB) [V]
My Lords, as president of the CBI, I was privileged to chair the
B7, which feeds into the G7 this weekend, which in turn will lead
to the B20, the G20 and, eventually, COP 26. Is the Minister
aware that one-third of the UK’s largest businesses—representing
a market capitalisation of £650 billion—has already committed to
net zero by 2050, leading the world in this transition? The UK
Government are urging more businesses to commit to net-zero
emissions by 2050 and build back greener ahead of COP 26 in
Glasgow in November. Surely, the Government must lead by example
and ensure that this crucial Bill is debated thoroughly and
passed before then?
(Con)
My Lords, it is absolutely our intention that the Bill be passed
before COP 26. I note the comments of the noble Lord. Huge
progress has been made since the UK assumed the role of
president-designate. We have seen huge success at the G7 with all
members committed to net zero and steep emissions reductions in
the first part of that target—over the next nine years. We have
had commitments on nature in the G7 the likes of which we have
never seen before. Of course, we now have to turn those words
into action.
(LD) [V]
My Lords, I welcome the Government’s commitment to a species
abundance target. I regard this as even more important than
tackling climate change, since the loss of species is
irreversible. Will the Government commit to publishing clear
tracking data on the reduction in species abundance and on
individual species, and to do that in series going backwards as
well as forwards, so we can see exactly what is happening and all
the public can be properly aware of the significant declines in
species in the UK?
(Con)
My Lords, as the noble Lord says, we have seen significant
declines in biodiversity in recent decades. For a target to be
successful, there needs to be a strong element of benchmarking,
and that will be a feature of the measures we bring in.
(Con)
Given the priority that the Government have given this Bill and
the fact that most of the detail will be in regulations, will my
noble friend commit to publishing the regulations as the Bill is
going through, so we have a better idea of the detail and can
scrutinise it as we go along?
(Con)
My Lords, I do not think I am in a position to make that
commitment, but I will certainly commit to ensuring that the
House is presented with as much information as is possible during
the passage of the Bill in order that noble Lords can make
informed decisions.
(CB)
My Lords, there is quite a degree of concern about the new
watchdog, the office for environmental protection, and a feeling
that it should be strengthened, but it cannot exist as a legal
entity until the Bill passes, which leaves a big gap in
environmental law enforcement. Indeed, the chair designate, Dame
Glenys Stacey, has called that delay “extremely disappointing”.
Will the Minister outline what the Government are going to do
about the delay? Also, in a spirit of collaboration, will the
Government agree that they will not resist all noble Lords’
proposed changes to strengthen the OEP?
(Con)
My Lords, it is unfortunate that the Bill was delayed. I think
most will understand why it was delayed—we have had extraordinary
circumstances—but during this pause we have seen a lot of
progress, not least the appointment of Dame Glenys Stacey, in
addition to the process of beginning to develop those long-term,
legally binding environmental targets, as well as consulting on a
number of changes, including the DRS. Of course, it is hard to
comment on amendments until we see them, but the Government will
approach this with an open mind.
