Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to undertake
further consultation on the professional use of peat.
The Minister of State, Department for the Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
( of Richmond Park) (Con)
My Lords, we are currently consulting on measures to end the use
of peat in horticulture in England and Wales. This includes a
call for evidence on the impacts of ending the use of peat and
peat-containing products in the professional horticulture sector.
The consultation closes on 18 March this year. Our assessment of
the responses and the evidence that we receive will inform our
next steps, which will include targeted engagement with
specialised areas within the sector.
(Con)
My Lords—
(GP)
I was frightened that that would be the Answer. Environmentalists
are sick of all these consultations. The Government promised to
ban peat in 2020, and there were years to achieve that then. In
the interests of moving on, I suggest two things: first, that
imports of professional peat be stopped, because when we stop
selling it here it will just get imported. Therefore, this is a
primary thing to do. Secondly, we must replace peat with
something, and we could use green waste from councils, for
example. Can the Minister take that back to his department and
make them think about it?
of Richmond Park (Con)
My Lords, I will certainly take both those suggestions back to
the department. The point the noble Baroness makes about imports
is a good one; I will have that discussion with the Secretary of
State. She is not the only person who is sick of endless
consultations but unfortunately, they are unavoidable when the
impact of a policy affects the value of a business or of assets.
We have no choice but to consult, but we are doing so as quickly
as we can.
(Con)
My Lords, with apologies for jumping in too soon, the main
concern of those who use peat professionally is finding
alternatives of sufficient quality and quantity. This is not
easily solved, even by just using green waste. Can my noble
friend ensure that very real research is done by his department
into a cure for this problem?
of Richmond Park (Con)
My noble friend raises an important point, and she is right that
there are insufficient amounts of suitable replacement materials.
However, there is clearly scope for making better use of what is
otherwise garden and vegetable waste. There are high-quality
peat-free alternatives that are effective and price-competitive,
including a growing material formulated with wood fibre, bark or
coir, all currently available in garden centres.
(Lab)
My Lords, as the Minister knows, 3% of the earth is covered with
peatlands, but they account for a third of the store of carbon.
It is imperative that this carbon is not disturbed. We have a
huge amount here in the United Kingdom. Can the Government commit
to reducing to a minimum the amount of carbon from peat bogs?
of Richmond Park (Con)
My Lords, I absolutely make that commitment, and that is one
reason why we are moving with renewed vigour on banning the use
of peat in horticulture. Additionally, our England peat strategy
lays out ambitious plans to restore degraded peatlands on a scale
we have not done before in this country, with plans leading up to
2050 involving hundreds of thousands of hectares being repaired,
for all the reasons that the noble Lord has identified.
(UUP)
My Lords, the Minister may be aware that DAERA has undertaken a
consultation on the peatland strategy for Northern Ireland. While
peatlands cover 11% of England’s land area, 24.6% of Northern
Ireland is covered by peat. Is there scope for Defra to play an
active part in the formulation of this strategy to ensure that it
delivers the very best results for Northern Ireland and its
ecosystem?
of Richmond Park (Con)
The peat strategy we have produced is an England peat strategy,
so clearly, there are geographical limits. However, the issue
goes far beyond England: it is a UK issue, for the reasons the
noble Lord has provided. Peatlands are iconic features of our
landscape. They are the UK’s largest stores of carbon by far, and
they provide hugely important ecosystem services, supply over a
quarter of the UK’s drinking water, decrease flood risk and
provide food and shelter for rare and, in some cases, endangered
wildlife. That is why peat recovery and peat protection is a
priority.
(Lab)
My Lords—
The Lord Privy Seal () (Con)
My Lords, it is the turn of the Liberal Democrats. The noble
Lord, of Cheltenham, wishes to speak
virtually and this is a convenient point to call him.
of Cheltenham (LD) [V]
My Lords, the UK’s peatlands are of immeasurable importance,
storing three billion tonnes of carbon—as much as the forests of
the UK, Germany and France combined. What discussions have the
Government had with other countries about stopping the extraction
of peat, and was any progress made at the recent COP 26?
of Richmond Park (Con)
My Lords, an enormous amount of progress was made at COP 26. The
story that made the headlines related to forests but the
principles that were agreed around the protection of forests
apply also to peatlands. Between us, we secured unprecedented
sums—billions of dollars of finance—specifically to protect
fragile, carbon-rich, biodiverse-rich ecosystems such as
peatlands. Part of the agreement we reached involved commitments
by countries with those precious habitats to end their
destruction and to engage in restoration with renewed vigour.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Minister has already referred to the need to
protect peatlands as an example of our iconic landscapes; they
are a feature of these islands. Considering that the devolved
Administrations are involved in this work as well, as a follow-on
to COP 26 and as a means of protecting our landscapes, can he
give due consideration to leading a summit with his ministerial
colleagues and those involved in environmental organisations on
how to protect our precious peatlands the length and breadth of
the United Kingdom?
of Richmond Park (Con)
I am very happy to make that commitment on behalf of my
colleagues in whose portfolio and remit this issue sits. From an
international perspective, the noble Baroness makes a very
important point. We are designing programmes on the back of the
new commitments we have made using our ODA; £3 billion of our
international climate finance commitment will be invested in
nature-based solutions, a very big part of which will be
peatlands. I hope that we can describe in more detail soon what
those projects will involve.
(Lab)
My Lords, in a Written Answer to me, the Minister stated that all
government departments and their arms-length organisations should
meet the mandatory government buying standards, which include not
purchasing peat. Can he confirm that all government departments
are indeed abiding by that ruling, and explain why organisations
such as the Forestry Commission are still purchasing and using
peat when, as we have heard, other alternatives are
available?
of Richmond Park (Con)
The noble Baroness is right: Forestry England continues to use
peat in the manner she has described. However, it has committed
to eliminating completely the use of peat in the growing media by
2028 at the very latest. All government departments and their
related organisations must ensure that they meet the minimum
mandatory government buying standards when buying goods and
services. We also encourage the wider public sector to do
likewise, but it is certainly our intention to accelerate the
progress that is and being and needs to be made.
(Con)
My Lords, where does peat as a fuel fit into this picture?
of Richmond Park (Con)
I am not convinced that peat as a fuel does fit into this
picture. Our priority is to restore peatlands as closely as
possible to their natural conditions, so they can fulfil the
ecological functions we need them to fulfil.
(LD)
My Lords, I am interested to understand how the Government
reconcile allowing commercial peat exploitation while at the same
time the Exchequer, and thus taxpayers, are paying millions of
pounds for peatland restoration.
of Richmond Park (Con)
I am afraid I cannot provide that justification because there is
a clear contradiction, but that is why we are pushing ahead with
our proposals and measures to eliminate the use of peat in
horticulture. The noble Lord makes a very good point.
(Con)
My Lords, does my noble friend share my concern that, since we
have left the European Union, we will now have different
environmental standards in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and
Scotland? Will he use his good offices to ensure that the
devolved nations all impose a ban on the use of peat for
horticultural purposes, bearing in mind that it takes 200 years
to create a peat bog?
of Richmond Park (Con)
My Lords, it is not a source of concern that we are able to
legislate or regulate differently; the UK has demonstrated a
commitment to raising the bar in terms of environmental
protections. It is generally recognised—if not in this country
then certainly elsewhere—that the UK is a world leader in
conservation and nature restoration, but it is for the devolved
Administrations to make their own policies and, of course, we
will continue our discussions in the hope that we are as closely
aligned as possible.
