News

Ministers are looking into the environmental impact of all new post-Brexit trade deals, the government has confirmed.They will also explore the possibility of applying a policy of net gain – which aims to leave the natural environment in a better state than before – to trade, according to a response to recommendations from MPs. The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) made a host of suggestions last year in a report which said there were concerns over the potential impact of UK trade agreements on international levels of biodiversity.The MPs called on ministers to use “sustainability impact assessments” for future deals, after a minister told the committee last January he was in favour of the idea but could not make committments on behalf of the government. The government response – published on Monday – said it carried out impact assessments for post-Brexit trade deals that look at “several aspects of the environment” – including greenhouse gas emissions, air and water quality and biodiversity. “The Secretary of State for International Trade will work closely with other government departments to assess the environmental impacts of new FTAs, and to improve their coverage and approach,” it added. While the government agreed to look into the possibility of embedding environmental net gain into trade decisions, it rejected another EAC suggestion to evaluate all tax changes against environmental goals. The government said it would not be “practical, cost effective or beneficial” to look into the “detailed environmental impacts for every tax change” – such as to personal allowances for income tax.Philip Dunne, the Tory chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, said he was “very pleased” to see the government accepting some of the suggestions made in the report on the UK’s footprint on global biodiversity.“Embedding nature protection in trade agreements not only safeguards biodiversity, but it sends a striking message to trading partners that this must be prioritised,” he said.Katie White from the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) welcomed confirmation the government was “giving greater consideration to the impact of trade on the environment”.But she added: “Vague commitments about environmental assessments won’t be enough – ministers need to go further to use trade to drive the transition to greener farming. “That means establishing core standards, including environmental standards, for all foods sold in the UK, and a new legally-binding target to slash the UK’s global environmental footprint by 2030.” More

Ministers are being slow to act on potentially deadly air pollution because they are “cowards”, an MP has said Geraint Davis, the Labour chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Air Pollution, told The Independent the government had a “duty” to clean up its air for its citizens — and that this was not happening fast enough. He urged ministers to implement a stricter threshold on what constitutes dangerous levels of air pollution. This was also recommended by a coroner last year, who found excessive pollution contributed to the death of nine-year-old Ella Kissi-Debrah in 2013.MPs voted down a proposal to bring the UK’s legal limits in line with the World Health Organisation’s last October. Mr Davis told The Independent more needed to be done to tackle air pollution in the UK. “The UK governments are being so slow to act on such a critical issue because they are fundamentally cowards waiting for the public to catch up on the fact this is so damaging for the families,” he said. The chair of the APPG on air pollution added: “Parents have a duty to protect their children’s right to life. And the government has got a duty to ensure they can by cleaning up all of air.”He suggested there was a reluctance to toughen up legal pollution limits because it would mean “suddenly” having to take significant action, such as by banning wood-burning stoves and restricting the number of cars. “But the truth is, we should ban wood-burning stoves and we should limit the number of diesel-belching cars,” the Labour MP for Swansea West said. “So they should impose the guidelines for the very reasons they haven’t.”Public Health England has previously called air pollution the UK’s “biggest environmental threat to health”, estimating long-term exposure contributes to up to 36,000 deaths a year. Poor air quality has been linked to a host of health problems, including heart and lung disease, lung cancer and making asthma worse. A Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs spokesperson said: “Air pollution has reduced significantly since 2010 – at a national level emissions of fine particulate matter have fallen by 11 per cent, while emissions of nitrogen oxides are at their lowest level since records began.!They added: “To continue to drive forward tangible and long-lasting improvements to air quality we are committed to setting stretching and ambitious targets on air quality through our Environment Act.”After rejecing bringing UK air pollution limits in line with the WHO’s last year, the government said it would run a public consultation in 2022 and aim to bring in new legislation by autumn. More

The UK government must go “further and faster” to prepare for the impacts of warmer temperatures caused by the climate crisis, according to its own analysis. The new report said “stronger or different” government action was needed to tackle more than 30 climate-related risks in the next few years, including over coastal flooding, public water supplies and health. The government’s UK Climate Change Risk Assessment also said it would cost billions every year to deal with the impacts of the climate emergency by the mid-century.“We have clear evidence demonstrating the pace of warming in recent decades and the impacts we will face should this continue,” the report – published on Monday – said. “As we redouble our efforts to achieve net zero, we must also continue to raise ambitions on adaptation to ensure the UK is resilient to the challenges of a warming world.”The report laid out how even a small shift in the average climate can lead to “major changes in extreme events”, including increasing the frequency of severe flooding event, and said preparations needed to be made for the possibility of a 4C rise in temperatures. The Climate Change Committee (CCC), which advises the government, identified eight priority areas which require the most urgent action over the next two years.These included the health risk of warmer temperatures in buildings, the impact on people and the economy of a power system failure linked to the climate, and the threat of a supply chain collapse linked to the crisis. More action was needed over the next five years to protect the UK from 34 potential impacts of the climate emergency, such as damage from flooding, threats to wildlife and people taking ill from rising temperatures.The risk assessment was published on the same day Office for National Statistics analysis found the climate crisis was already having a negative impact on health in the UK – and this was expected to get worse over time. The new government report said it recognised the scale of the challenge posed by the climate crisis, but added: “We must go much further and faster to truly prepare for the impacts of a warmer world.”Baroness Brown of Cambridge from the CCC’s adaptation committee said: “Building resilience to a cocktail of climate impacts facing our country, including flooding, drought, heat exposure and extreme weather events, is a mammoth task and we’re falling well behind.”She added: “We look forward to seeing the government’s action plan to shift the dial and deliver a well-adapted UK.”Last year, England’s Environment Agency warned the climate crisis – which leads to heavier rainfall and rising sea levels – was worsening the risk of floods across the UK.Earlier this month, the climate emergency was named as the biggest global risk by the World Economic Forum (WEF). More

The government has been warned it may be acting too slowly to meet its promise to restore nature by 2030 as it unveils a plan to protect national parks, which has been more than two years in the drafting.The environment secretary, George Eustice, has set out proposals to boost nature recovery and safeguard England’s national parks, with a public consultation to seek people’s views.The scheme involves “ambitious changes to increase access to nature and ensure protected landscapes can deliver more for climate, nature, people and places for the next 70 years and beyond”.A new “national landscapes partnership” will enable people in charge of England’s national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs) to work together on nature recovery and better public access.The idea is they will carry out campaigns, organise events and offer volunteering opportunities that bring people closer to nature.The 12-week consultation will ask for views on proposals to drive nature recovery within landscapes and support communities that live and work within them.In 2018, Julian Glover, a former government adviser and speechwriter to David Cameron, was asked to review the protection for national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty, and drew up a report the following year. These plans have now been drawn up in response.Ministers said protected landscapes play an essential role in tackling the climate crisis, protecting biodiversity and supporting health and wellbeing.A Natural England survey found that almost half the population say they are spending more time outside since the pandemic started, and most adults surveyed by Forest Research agreed their level of happiness when in nature had increased.However, the RSPB criticised the time taken to devise a response to the review, and urged ministers to do more, and more quickly.The charity director of England, Emma Marsh, said: “Today’s announcement is a step forward. It’s good to see a headline commitment to give England’s protected landscapes a stronger focus on recovering nature and to make other changes so they can deliver this.“But the government will need to go further and faster, and bring forward legislation to achieve these changes.“It must also give these landscapes the resources they need, including doubling AONBs’ woefully inadequate funding.“We’ve waited more than two years for a response that still does not have a clear timetable with commitments to bold action. At this rate, hopes of meeting the government’s promises to restore nature by 2030 will soon evaporate.“These are landscapes for everyone, and we all need to make our voice heard during the consultation to make sure the government backs its rhetoric with action.”Want us to report on an issue that matters to you? Contact us by clicking here. More

Ministers have given the go-ahead for farmers to use a banned bee-harming pesticide in England for the second year running.The government went against the advice of its own scientific advisers, who said they did not see the justification for applying the neonicotinoid to sugar beet this year.A single teaspoon of thiamethoxam is toxic enough to kill 1.25 billion bees, according to biology professor and insect expert Dave Goulson, and wildlife chiefs warned the decision could devastate already-struggling bee populations.Environment officials announced they would permit the use of the pesticide to try to combat a virus transmitted by aphids.They say the UK’s sugar harvest could otherwise be at risk this year and that “its exceptional temporary use will be tightly controlled and only permitted in very specific circumstances when strict requirements are met”.Neonicotinoids are considered so harmful that they were banned by the UK and the EU in 2018, but since then 12 countries, including France, Denmark and Spain, have also granted emergency permits for neonicotinoid treatments to go ahead.This time last year there was an outcry when ministers first gave beet farmers the green light to apply the pesticide, although eventually it was not used because a cold winter killed off the aphids.Wildlife experts warned the decision “sounds a death knell for millions of bees and other insects” and flies in the face of government pledges to halt biodiversity loss.The Pesticide Collaboration, which encompasses environmental organisations the RSPB, Friends of the Earth, Buglife and the Wildlife Trusts, said the would harm of wildlife and that the government should increase protection for bees and other wildlife from the harm caused by pesticides.Minutes from a meeting of the Expert Committee on Pesticides say members agreed that the requirements for emergency authorisation had not been met and that pesticide water pollution caused by the decision would harm river life.Even minute traces of neonicotinoid chemicals in crop pollen or wild flowers “play havoc with bees’ ability to forage and navigate, with catastrophic consequences for the survival of their colony”, according to the RSPB.A recent study showed that even one instance of exposure of a “neonic” insecticide significantly harmed bees’ ability to produce offspring.A third of the UK bee population is thought to have vanished in a decade, yet up to three-quarters of crop species are pollinated by bees, studies show. Thiamethoxam is a seed treatment, taken up by the whole plant, including the flower, pollen and juices from the plant insects forage on, wildlife experts say.Sandra Bell, of Friends of the Earth, said: “Allowing a bee-harming pesticide back into our fields is totally at odds with ministers’ so-called green ambitions.”Joan Edwards, of The Wildlife Trusts, said the decision was “a clear betrayal of promises made to protect the natural world and comes at a time when nature declines are worse than ever”, adding: “Less than two months ago the government adopted a legally binding commitment to halt the decline of wildlife by 2030 within its flagship Environment Act – the authorisation of this neonicotinoid flies in the face of this commitment and sounds a death knell for millions of bees and other insects.”A Defra spokesperson said: “This decision has not been taken lightly and is based on robust scientific assessment. We evaluate the risks very carefully and only grant temporary emergency authorisations for restricted pesticides in special circumstances when strict requirements are met.“Strict criteria remain in place meaning this authorisation will only be used if necessary.”The government also says work on gene editing will help develop crops that are more resistant to aphids.The Independent has asked British Sugar, which made the emergency application, to comment.Have you got a story you would like us to report on? Contact us by clicking here. More

Many rivers in England contain a “chemical cocktail” of pollution which poses a risk to public health, according to a new parliamentary committee report.The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) raised concerns over sewage, agricultural waste and single-use plastic in the country’s waterways, saying this could harm swimmers and wildlife. It said England’s rivers were “in a mess” – and none had received a clean bill of health for chemical contamination. “Disturbing evidence suggests they are becoming breeding grounds for antimicrobial resistance,” the report said.Experts said it provided a “scathing snapshot” of the water quality of England’s rivers and the risks were being exacerbated by the climate crisis.Agricultural waste was the most common form of pollution stopping rivers from achieving good ecological status, while sewage was having the same effect on over a third of water bodies, the EAC report said.It also found a major source of plastic pollution in rivers were tiny particulates worn away from brakes and tyres that get wased into watercourses from busy roads.Single-use plastics were “clogging up” drains and sewage works, while water companies appeared to be dumping untreated or partially treated sewage in rivers “on a regular basis”, the report – published on Thursday – said.Bacteria found in sewage and animal slurry – that can end up in rivers – can make people ill, the EAC said. “Poor monitoring arrangements mean that river users cannot currently make informed decisions about when it is safe or not to use rivers,” it said.“The prevalence of plastic pollution, the prescence of persistent chemicals and spread of antimicrobial pathogens in rivers in England are all of grave concern.” Surfers Against Sewage told the EAC poor water quality was a public health issue, as it risked exposure to harmful viruses and antimicrobial resistant bacteria that could cause sickness and even long-term health effects.It was important for both public health and wildlife to clean up their waters, the report added.Philip Dunne, the Tory chair of the EAC, said: “Our inquiry has uncovered multiple failures in the monitoring, governance and enforcement on water quality.”“For too long, the government, regulators and the water industry have allowed a Victorian sewerage system to buckle under increasing pressure.”The report said the sewerage system was “overloaded and unable to cope with the increasing pressures of housing development, the impact of heavier rainfall and a profusion of plastic and other non-biodegradable waste clogging up the system”. Professor Rick Stafford, the chair of the British Ecological Society policy committee, said: “Sewage and agricultural waste not only cause disease, but disrupt the nutrient dynamics of rivers, causing excess algae and harming biodiversity.“Poor water quality can also greatly impact many charismatic river species, including salmon and otters, which have only recently recovered in many UK rivers.”The EAC report said the build-up of excess nutrients from animal waste and sewage was reducing oxygen levels in rivers – which can cause fish to die.Professor Hannah Cloke from the University of Reading said the report gave “a scathing snapshot of the state of the water quality in England’s rivers”.The hydrology professor said she was “appalled that we have reached a point where every single river in the country is considered dangerously polluted by chemicals”. Last year, another report said England’s rivers, lakes and streams had some of the lowest water quality in Europe and warned the climate crisis was worsening conditions.In response to the EAC report, Professor Nigel Watson from the Lancaster Environment Centre said: “The risks to public health and to wildlife from poor water quality are exacerbated by the impacts of climate change. “Discharges of untreated sewage have become increasingly commonplace as a result of more frequent intense rainfall and storm events, despite those discharges only being permitted by law in exceptional circumstances.”Rebecca Pow, the environment minister, said the report highlighted “many areas” being tackled by the government, who she claimed was going “further and faster” than any others to protect and enhance the health of rivers.“Our Environment Act puts in place more protections against water pollution than ever before and we are the first government to instruct water companies to take steps to significantly reduce storm overflows, which we have also put into law,” she said, adding the government would take action against water companies failing to reduce pollution. More

Some of the UK’s largest conservation charities have written to Boris Johnson urging him to make New Year’s resolutions to tackle the crises facing nature and the climate.The National Trust, the RSPB, the Woodland Trust and the Wildlife Trusts are calling for urgent action including protecting peatlands, paying farmers to restore nature, and taking steps to preserve the oceans.Warning of a “huge gulf between rhetoric and reality” in the government’s approach to tackling climate change, they said the momentum gained in November’s Cop26 talks in Glasgow must not be lost.The charities’ leaders are asking the government to make seven promises: Restore peatlands more quickly and ban burning of upland peatUrgently bring forward the long-promised ban on the use of peat for horticultural purposesEmbed climate and nature objectives in agricultural support schemesEnsure that the UK’s protected sites network is big enough and managed so that it protects habitats, species, environments and the carbon stored in themIncrease protection for the marine environment to harness its carbon-storing potentialRaise targets for tree cover in line with the recommendations of the Climate Change CommitteeMake it obligatory for climate risks and hazards to be taken into account in all public decision-makingThe eco charities also want farmers to be paid for taking action to tackle the nature and climate crises.It’s claimed that these pledges would ensure the government can reach net zero carbon emissions and halt the catastrophic decline in nature.Craig Bennett, chief executive of the Wildlife Trusts, said: “2022 needs to be the year when the government steps up with renewed commitments and investment.“There’s still a huge gulf between rhetoric and reality to tackle climate change.“We urgently need to cut carbon emissions deeper and faster, and ensure nature recovers across 30 per cent of land and sea by the end of the decade.“The UK needs to ban new coal mines, set an end date for oil and gas exploration and production, put greater investment in nature restoration, and ensure agricultural and fishing industries are supported so that they can help solve – rather than worsen – the nature and climate crises.”Last month the government announced a consultation on a ban on the sale of peat for use in domestic horticulture in England and Wales from 2024, and for professional use by 2028.And a year ago ministers unveiled a partial ban on the burning of grouse moor peatlands in England. They have also promised eco-incentives for farmers in a new “agricultural roadmap” along with a major tree-planting push. But the letter urges them to go further and more quickly, saying: “November 2021 was a key moment in the global effort to keep 1.5 degrees alive, and an opportunity to set the bar higher in terms of recognising the vital importance of nature for addressing and adapting to climate change.”Beccy Speight, chief executive of the RSPB, said two-thirds of the UK’s high-carbon, wildlife-rich places were unprotected and slowly being destroyed, adding: “The UK government needs to turn its rhetoric on the global stage into reality for our countryside.”A government spokesperson said: “We are absolutely committed to tackling climate change, with the UK having cut emissions faster than any G7 country over the past three decades.“We are taking action to limit rising temperatures with new pledges to cut carbon and methane emissions, end deforestation, phase out coal, and provide more finance to countries most vulnerable to climate change.“Our Sustainable Farming Incentive will reward farmers and land managers for using more environmentally friendly farming practices. We are also consulting on plans to phase out the use of peat in the horticulture sector, and are promoting sustainable management practices on all peat habitats.” More

A plan by Boris Johnson’s government to change the regulation of chemicals after Brexit risks making the UK a “dumping ground” for harmful substances, experts and campaigners have warned.Environmentalists responded with alarm to the government’s policy paper setting out how the UK’s new, post-Brexit chemical safety regime will diverge from the EU’s REACH system.It showed that of ten potentially hazardous chemicals added to Brussels’ list of “substances of very high concern” this year, only four would be added to the UK’s list.Zoe Avison, policy analyst at the Green Alliance campaign group, warned that the government’s proposals “will almost certainly see hazardous substances falling through the cracks”.On Thursday, the Green Alliance wrote to MPs on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee and the Environmental Audit Committee urging them to “urgently investigate” the government’s plan.Campaigners told The Independent in March about the risk the UK could be a “dumping ground” for dangerous substances after Mr Johnson ditched Theresa May’s plan for “associate membership” of EU agencies, including the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and its database known as REACH.Thalie Martini, chief executive of Breast Cancer UK, said the published proposals amounted to a “major weakening” of safety regulation – warning that the British public would be less well-protected from chemicals linked to breast cancer than before Brexit.She said that the proposed system “lacks public scrutiny, undermines the consumer’s right to know and could lead to years of regulatory delays that result in the UK becoming a dumping ground for hazardous chemicals”.Experts are worried that the government proposals will see a new UK regulator relying on voluntary data submitted by chemical companies to assess the level of risk, and will be slower to take action against them.Dr Michael Warhurst, executive director of CHEM Trust, said the government was putting in “unnecessary layers of information requirements” from firms – warning that it will lead to “regulatory inaction on a range of harmful substances”.The expert added: “This will open the door to consumers and the environment having greater exposure to harmful chemicals than in the EU, and a second-rate system for regulating chemicals post-Brexit.”A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) denied the new regime could put consumers or the environment at risk.They said: “We are committed to maintaining an effective regulatory system for the management and control of chemicals, which safeguards human health and the environment and can respond to emerging risks.”The spokesperson added: “We have published our interim approach to the Candidate List in UK REACH. This approach aims to ensure we have a single, coherent approach to nominating substances for the Candidate List in UK REACH.”In October, the government bowed to pressure to introduce tougher action against water companies dumping untreated sewage following outrage over plans to weaken legislation aimed at protecting Britain’s rivers and seas. More