Environment Bill Day 1 – purpose and potential

Without these amendments the Bill risks falling far short of what it needs to achieve. Without these amendments, setting out the clear purpose, there will be a danger of policymakers and the courts interpreting this legislation far too narrowly. Without these amendments, there is very little to bind the decisions made under the Bill.

Then there is the requirement for the Prime Minister to declare a climate and ecological emergency. Why has he not done so already? This must happen before COP 26. It is impossible for the United Kingdom to give any type of leadership at COP 26 without this declaration. It should form the very foundation of COP and be the basis for negotiations there.

A huge amount hinges on this Bill. I agreed with Lord Cormack, who said that the Bill has to be right. To do that, it has to be amended here in this House. If we get this Bill right, it will mean that we can get a lot of other things right: our farming, our food production and food growing, clean air and clean water supplies, our health and well-being, and our economy. A good Bill will mean no trade deals with countries like Australia with its awful farming practices, which have been banned here for years, and none of the ecologically and economically illiterate long-distance swapping of lamb and beef when we can buy UK-produced meat right here from our own farmers with higher welfare standards. A good Bill will offer more tech opportunities and more jobs in sustainable industries. A good Bill would be this Bill, heavily amended by the House of Lords.

Moving on, this is a perfect group of amendments. I congratulate Lord Lindsay, for such a brief introduction; his amendments are incredibly valuable and go to the heart of why the Bill exists. Personally, I think that if we get this right, it will be as big and important a piece of legislation as the Human Rights Act.

Amendment 2 in the name of Lord Teverson, reflects on the climate and ecological emergencies facing us. My friend Lady Bennett and I were very happy to sign it, and we are thrilled that all the opposition parties can unite around understanding the climate and ecological emergencies. Without the amendments in this group, the Bill risks falling far short of what it needs to achieve. Without these amendments setting out the clear purpose—the central aim—of the Bill, there will be a danger of policymakers and the courts interpreting this legislation far too narrowly and failing to give effect to the proper intention of Parliament. Without these amendments, there is very little to bind the decisions made under the Bill. The ambition of the Bill could have little real-world effect if we do not craft the right mechanisms to turn the ideas into action.

Then there is the requirement for the Prime Minister to declare a climate and ecological emergency. Why has he not done so already? Perhaps the Minister can tell us. Quite honestly, this must happen before COP 26. It is impossible for the United Kingdom to give any type of leadership at COP 26 without this declaration. It should form the very foundation of COP and be the basis for negotiations there. Without properly diagnosing the issue, we will never agree on the solutions and actions that the world must adopt. I support these amendments wholeheartedly.

Read the whole debate on Hansard