Environment Bill

Nigel Evans Con

Fylde

Announced a four-minute time limit on Back-Bench contributions after Caroline Lucas's speech.

Caroline Lucas

Moved that the clause be read a Second time, initiating debate on Schedule 20 - Amendment of REACH legislation.

Nigel Evans Con

None

He proposed several new clauses including setting a state of nature target to reverse biodiversity loss by 2030, enforcing environmental objectives and commitments in all government actions, reducing plastic pollution, enabling appeals on housing targets before the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP), mandating net-zero carbon conditions for planning permissions, and creating a strategy for new economic goals that prioritise environmental protection. These amendments were aimed at ensuring stricter air quality standards, meeting interim environmental targets, improving public access to natural areas, and enhancing parliamentary scrutiny over exemptions related to plant protection products.

Nigel Evans Con

Fylde

Announces a four-minute limit on Back-Bench contributions for videolink participants, ensuring compliance with time constraints.

Rupa Huq Lab

Ealing Central and Acton

Congratulates a primary school on their essays regarding environmental topics. Raises concerns about the potential risks of leaving REACH regulation, expressing worry over harmful chemical pollution.

Luke Pollard Lab Co-op

Plymouth Sutton and Devonport

Pollard emphasises the need for urgent action on climate change, citing UN warnings about carbon emissions. He criticises the Bill's current pace as insufficient and highlights the issue of air quality, referencing Ella Kissi-Debrah’s case and the impact of PM2.5 pollution on public health and economy. He also discusses the independence of the Office for Environmental Protection and supports amendments to protect bee health from neonicotinoid pesticides.

Deidre Brock SNP

East Renfrewshire

The UK Government lacks environmental ambition. Scotland’s environmental legislation outpaces England's. The military sector, exempted from the Bill, poses significant environmental threats including illegal dumping and carbon emissions due to operations. Ministers should reconsider this exemption given its substantial environmental impact. Despite procedural challenges, it is crucial for the UK to demonstrate leadership in the lead-up to COP26 by addressing these issues effectively.

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Con

North Cotswolds

The precautionary principle must be clearly defined within the Bill. Currently, the statement of principles is toothless and may lead to oppressive measures against individuals' freedoms if not constrained properly. My amendment aims to limit its application to risks that are more than hypothetical and serious with irreversible consequences. The lack of clarity poses a risk for future ministers to misuse this principle.

Hilary Benn Lab

Leeds South

We are destroying our natural world at an alarming rate. The latest state of nature report records a decline of 13% in the abundance of UK species since 1970, with some 15% now endangered. A third of British wild bees and hoverflies are in decline, and 97% of our wildflower meadows have been lost since the 1930s. This crisis requires action to halt and begin to reverse biodiversity loss by 2030.

Philip Dunne

Welcomes the Government’s commitment to a ground-breaking piece of legislation, but calls for confirmation that targets can be established ahead of COP26. Supports amendment 28 which would require the Government to include steps in the environmental plan to improve people's enjoyment of the natural environment.

Geraint Davies

Speaks in favour of amendment 2, which aims to put into law the World Health Organisation air quality limits. Emphasises that air pollution affects people’s health and mental well-being, especially in poorer neighbourhoods where it is most severe.

Tim Loughton Con

East Worthing and Shoreham

Amendment 5 proposes to make it the duty of the Secretary of State to ensure interim targets are met, ensuring continuous incremental improvements in the natural environment. It would bring the Environment Bill target framework into line with the Climate Change Act 2008 and provide near-term certainty for business.

Jonathan Edwards PC

Carmarthen East and Dinefwr

Supports amendments that seek to strengthen the Environment Bill and hold the Government to account. Emphasises the need to protect Wales from Westminster intrusion on environmental targets, pledging support for new clause 17 and new clause 9.

Theresa Villiers Con

South West Hampshire

Supports amendments aimed at ensuring environmental concerns have greater weight in the planning system, expressing fears that the Government’s drive to build could compromise the Bill's environmental ambitions. Advocates for local input into the planning system and asks Ministers to drop proposals to remove local decision-making for growth areas.

Mick Whitley Lab

Ceredigion

Critiques the Government's environmental ambitions as insufficient, urging support for new clause 9 to adhere to broader commitments like the Climate Change Act and amendment 39 to guarantee parliamentary scrutiny on plant protection products. Expresses concern over lifting bans on bee-killing pesticides without consulting Parliament.

Florence Eshalomi Lab Co-op

Vauxhall and Camberwell Green

Ms. Eshalomi supports amendments related to air quality, citing her constituency's high levels of pollution on Clapham Road and Brixton Road in London. She highlights the harmful health impacts of PM2.5 particles and argues for stricter targets to reach World Health Organisation limits by 2030.

Chris Loder Con

West Dorset

Mr. Loder supports the Environment Bill, praising the Government's leadership on environmental issues. He discusses his constituency’s severe air pollution in Chideock and advocates for specific targets to reduce non-essential single-use plastic products sold by supermarkets.

Barry Gardiner Lab

Brent West

Mr. Gardiner supports amendments regarding the Office for Environmental Protection's independence and emphasises the need for interim targets to hold businesses accountable. He also argues against relaxing bans on neonicotinoids and advocates for companies to focus on sustainable sourcing rather than just legal compliance.

Tim Farron Lib Dem

Westmorland and Lonsdale

Argues against the current proposal, highlighting its lack of enforcement powers. Raises concerns about delayed implementation harming environmental protections and farmers' ability to negotiate trade deals. Emphasises the need for extending basic payment scheme at 2020 levels until new environmental land management scheme is available.

Saqib Bhatti Con

Meriden and Solihull East

Supports the establishment of the Office for Environmental Protection, praising it as a world-leading initiative. Believes it will deliver necessary guarantees and safeguards for environmental sustainability, ensuring future Governments are held to account. Welcomes opportunities for local people to challenge decisions made by their local authorities.

Debbie Abrahams Lab

Oldham East and Saddleworth

Supports amendments calling for an environmental objective to achieve biodiversity, human health support, and sustainable resource use. Advocates for monitoring and enforcing WHO guidelines on air quality. Calls for parliamentary scrutiny of pesticide exemptions. Supports a binding target to halt the decline in state of nature.

Sally-Ann Hart Con

Hastings and Rye

Supports new clause 11, highlighting environmental impacts of plastic waste in her constituency. Mentions measures like the resources and waste strategy and banning microbeads as progress but argues more needs to be done with targets and reducing single-use plastics.

Barbara Keeley Lab

Worsley and Eccles South

Supports amendments 21 and 28, arguing they extend the Bill to ensure public access to nature beyond just protecting it. Discusses inequalities in green space accessibility by income and ethnicity.

Ben Everitt Con

North East Hertfordshire

Disappointed by delay but supportive of the Bill's ambition, noting its interconnection with other legislation like the Agriculture Act. Concerned about overburdening public sector workers.

Alex Sobel Lab Co-op

Leeds Central and Headingley

Supports amendments to address air quality, species protection, and the OEP's independence. Highlights issues like deaths from air pollution in Leeds and risks faced by endangered UK species.

Ben Lake PC

Ceredigion Preseli

I support new clause 9, which highlights our international commitments to protect natural environments and addresses the issue of offshored emissions. Placing duties on public authorities to act in accordance with key environmental principles is crucial for maintaining high standards post-EU.

Richard Fuller Con

North Bedfordshire

Supporting the Bill’s ambitions, I urge the Minister to incorporate biodiversity considerations into legislation governing housing expansion. This is crucial for preserving local communities’ resilience and ecological health.

Jessica Morden Lab

Newport East

Supporting amendments in the group, particularly amendment 39 on bee-killing pesticides, to maintain environmental standards post-EU. Maintaining transparency and protection against harmful practices is vital for ecological sustainability.

Robbie Moore Con

Keighley and Ilkley

Supports the Environment Bill for providing a legal framework for environmental governance. Welcomes long-term, legally binding targets focusing on air quality, biodiversity, water, waste reduction, and resource efficiency. Emphasises the importance of an independent Office for Environmental Protection with adequate funding and enforcement powers.

Rebecca Long-Bailey Lab

Salford

Calls for new clause 9 to include environmental objectives, amendment 25 to ensure PM2.5 target meets WHO guidelines by 2030, and amendment 39 for scrutiny of derogations regarding neonicotinoids use. Argues that without these amendments, the bill lacks ambition and is merely greenwash.

Bob Neill

Supports amendment 2 to set a clear PM2.5 target of meeting WHO guidelines by 2030. Argues that setting this target on the face of the Bill would show willingness towards citizens and increase international influence, particularly ahead of COP26.

Margaret Greenwood

Supports amendment 23 to delete clause 24 for an independent Office for Environmental Protection. Supports amendment 25 for a PM2.5 target meeting WHO guidelines by 2030, and amendment 39 for parliamentary scrutiny of derogations regarding neonicotinoids use.

Bill Esterson Lab

Sefton Central

Supports new clause 9 for environmental objectives compliance. Highlights local impacts such as flood risks and air quality issues. Emphasises the need for a strong OEP with teeth to intervene across government.

Liz Twist Lab

Blaydon and Consett

Supports the Bill's strengthening through amendments like new clause 9. Stresses the importance of independence for OEP, targets within the Bill, and proper scrutiny on pesticide use.

Stephen Farry

Supports Government amendment 20 with reservations. Emphasises the need for an independent environmental protection agency in Northern Ireland alongside OEP independence. Supports new clause 17 to consider a holistic economic model.

Emma Hardy Lab

Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice

Ms. Hardy discusses the importance of air quality improvements in Hull, referencing a project to plant trees that benefit biodiversity and clean air. She cites studies linking air pollution to health issues such as lung growth stunting, heart attacks, strokes, heart disease, and lung cancer. Ms. Hardy argues for adopting World Health Organisation air quality standards into law.

Alistair Carmichael Lib Dem

Orkney and Shetland

Mr. Carmichael expresses regret over further delays to the Bill's implementation and urges for better use of time before COP26. He criticises the lack of progress on plastic pollution reduction, suggesting that meaningful targets and accountability mechanisms are needed.

Jim Shannon DUP

Strangford

Mr. Shannon supports amendments for clearer enforcement powers in England by the Office for Environmental Protection and seeks alignment with Northern Ireland’s provisions. He requests clarification on the rationale behind excluding defence and procurement from environmental obligations, emphasising that every Government Department should consider their impact.

Kim Johnson Lab

Liverpool Riverside

The Bill as it stands is a missed opportunity due to its failure to enshrine action on climate change. It requires ambitious targets, an independent watchdog with serious powers, and a radical vision that prioritises sustainability through massive investment and regulation.

Rachel Hopkins Lab

Luton South and South Bedfordshire

Supports amendment 25 to embed WHO targets on air quality, amendment 23 for OEP independence, and new clause 9. Focuses on Labour’s amendment 39, highlighting the importance of protecting bees from banned pesticides due to their critical role in food security.

Rebecca Pow Con

Yeovil

She highlights that applying a duty to individual decisions could overwhelm public authorities and create unnecessary complexity. She reassures concerns about precautionary principle through proportionate application respecting social, economic considerations. She supports long-term targets for biodiversity improvement but opposes setting targets of at least 15 years as it could prevent progress until then. Rebecca also opposes new clause 17 and amendment 21, stating the need for a holistic approach to all materials in waste management rather than just plastic.

Ruth Jones Lab

Newport West and Islwyn

Ruth Jones moved the clause for a Second reading, supporting the amendment proposed by Caroline Lucas. She echoed the concerns about the lack of ambition in the current Bill and emphasised the importance of legally binding targets to address environmental issues.

Eleanor Laing Con

Dewsbury

Introduced new clauses and amendments to reduce environmental impact of nappy waste, improve air quality through pesticide restrictions, publish annual policy statements on air quality improvements, monitor water abstraction's impact on chalk streams, set targets for reducing animal testing in chemical regulation, and ensure parity or exceedence of REACH Regulation protections.

Rebecca Pow Con

Celia Fiennes

Ms. Pow supports the Environment Bill's provisions on waste, resources, air quality, and water management. She highlights the ban on plastic waste exports to non-OECD countries and the introduction of a deposit return scheme for drinks containers. The Bill aims to reduce costs associated with air pollution and improve river health through reforms in abstraction licensing and sewage outflows.

David Linden Lab

Glasgow East

Emphasised the environmental impact of single-use nappies and the importance of promoting reusable alternatives. Highlighted the need to define 'environmentally friendly' terms, prevent misleading advertising, and establish schemes to reduce waste and promote reusables.

Neil Parish Con

Tewkesbury

Supported an amendment on PM2.5 air quality targets, advocating for cross-party support and ambitious goals within the Bill. He stressed the importance of a multi-departmental approach to address air pollution effectively.

James Davies Con

Montgomeryshire

Mr. Davies supported the Bill and focused on air pollution and flood risk management, acknowledging the need for serious consideration of amendments such as new clause 6 and amendment 2 to improve air quality by setting a target for PM2.5 concentrations. He emphasised the importance of ambitious targets rather than convenient ones and advocated for efficient deposit return schemes to reduce single-use plastics.

John Martin McDonnell Lab

Hayes and Harlington

Mr. McDonnell spoke in support of amendments 2, 25, and new clause 6 to tackle air pollution health crises in his area affected by Heathrow airport and major roads. He highlighted the severe respiratory disease levels among constituents, urging Ministers to work with them to ensure effective legislation that sets realistic targets and injects urgency into addressing the mounting threat of air pollution.

Charles Walker Con

Broxbourne

Mr Charles Walker supported amendment 3 to clause 82, which adds 'including damage from low flows' to the clause's provision on modifying abstraction licences without compensation. He emphasised the need for good-quality water and high flows in chalk streams to support rich biodiversity and thanked various campaigners for their work.

Rosie Duffield Ind

Canterbury

Ms Rosie Duffield highlighted the environmental concerns of her constituents, including issues related to agriculture, wildlife protection, and air pollution. She emphasised the urgency of addressing climate change and protecting future generations from environmental harm.

Virendra Sharma Lab

Ealing, Southall

Emphasised the disproportionate impact of air pollution on deprived communities and called for targeted action. Cited Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah's campaign for her daughter Ella who died from pollution-related causes.

Mark Pawsey Con

Brackley and Northamptonshire

Welcomed provisions in the resources and waste chapter of the Bill, but called for continued consultation with the industry to ensure competitiveness and improved education on environmental issues.

Feryal Clark Lab

Enfield North

Supported amendments regarding air quality, citing severe health impacts, especially in deprived areas. Highlighted the need for national legislation to support local initiatives like school streets and low-traffic neighbourhoods.

Jerome Mayhew Con

Broadland and Fakenham

Questioned whether annual reports on air quality and water abstraction would be effective, suggesting that existing reporting requirements and the Environment Agency's powers should suffice. Defended sugar beet growers' need for plant protection products exemptions.

Barry Sheerman Lab

Huddersfield

Sheerman argues for better science, private sector partnership and government leadership in implementing environmental policies. He highlights the importance of air quality improvements and mentions a new constituency service providing detailed information on pollution levels. Sheerman emphasises the need to move beyond past practices like burying waste and towards more sustainable practices.

Laura Farris Con

Newbury

Farris supports the Bill, stating it sets a framework for environmental policies. She appreciates the work of local environmental groups and the Government's stance on water quality improvements as proposed by her colleagues. Farris argues that the existing provisions in the Bill are sufficient without adding new clauses.

Anthony Mangnall Con

Tamworth

Mangnall supports the Government's efforts on waste, water and air quality. He suggests incentivising businesses to use full-cycle plastics and discusses local issues of air pollution in his constituency. Mangnall also expresses support for improving water quality.

Tim Farron Lib Dem

Westmorland and Lonsdale

Farron criticises the Bill as unambitious, particularly regarding air quality standards. He also points out that the absence of plastic reduction targets contradicts government rhetoric. Farron's amendment 30 seeks to monitor the impact of water abstraction on biodiversity and calls for clearer and more ambitious targets.

Duncan Baker Con

Broadland

Supports new clause 11 and provisions to reduce plastic pollution. Opposes amendment 4 as it uses precautionary principle unfairly against farmers.

Barry Gardiner Lab

Brent North

Supports new clause 8 for waste prevention and amendment 24 to prevent chemical dumping. Highlights risks of air pollution and calls for better reporting on environmental issues.

Alex Davies-Jones Lab

Pontypridd

Supports new clause 10 to prevent items marketed as flushable from being flushed. Highlights need for tackling root causes of climate change and supports waste prevention.

Anthony Browne

Supports provisions in Bill to reduce sewage outflows and introduce water management schemes. Urges Government to protect chalk streams by using powers given under the Bill.

Robbie Moore Con

Keighley and Ilkley

Moore supports new measures for improving water quality, addressing pollution in rivers such as the River Wharfe, advocating for statutory obligations on sewerage companies to make drainage and water management plans, setting clear water quality targets.

Kerry McCarthy Lab

Bristol East

McCarthy supports Labour's new clause 8 that would require the Secretary of State to take account of the waste hierarchy, promoting a circular economy and preventing waste from occurring in the first place. She also urges the Minister to think again on air pollution targets.

Bill Esterson Lab

Sefton Central

Esterson emphasises the importance of maintaining high chemical standards, highlighting the potential for deregulation and the impact it could have on British jobs and industries such as car manufacturing in Liverpool.

Caroline Lucas Green

Brighton Pavilion

Lucas introduces new clause 13 to address environmental harm caused by pesticides, proposing regulations prohibiting their use near buildings and open spaces used by rural residents. She also proposes new clause 18 to set targets for reducing animal testing under REACH.

Eleanor Laing Con

Epping Forest

Laing addresses technical issues with the video link and attempts to facilitate order in the debate.

Wera Hobhouse Lib Dem

Bath

Hobhouse discussed her Liberal Democrat plan for cutting carbon emissions by 2030 and reaching net zero by 2045. She praised DEFRA’s Plastic Pact initiative but noted that the Bill lacks transparency and immediate action on waste management. Hobhouse highlighted the urgent need to address plastic waste, particularly in relation to recycling and reuse. Additionally, she called for a separate Clean Air Act with new powers for local authorities to effectively monitor air pollution.

Matt Western Lab

Warwick and Leamington

Western supported amendment 24 but focused on new clauses 8 and 2. He emphasised the importance of aligning with EU legislation to tackle waste management effectively. New clause 8 prioritises prevention in the waste hierarchy, while new clause 2 addresses air quality issues. Western highlighted the need for robust frameworks and encouraged supermarkets to adopt producer responsibility models similar to Germany's Grüne Punkt system. He also acknowledged the work done by local clean air initiatives such as Clean Air Warwick.

Ruth Cadbury Lab

Brentford and Isleworth

Cadbury supported amendments to prevent regression from existing standards on chemicals and chemical regulation post-Brexit. She highlighted local efforts such as Chiswick Oasis in reducing air pollution and the improvements seen under Mayor of London's policies. Cadbury also endorsed new clause 6 for its call for cross-departmental work, emphasising the need for Government Ministers to lead on tackling toxic air pollution.

Fleur Anderson Lab

Putney

The Bill does not go far enough and has a long way to go before it is fit for purpose. The amendments before us today would give much-needed higher ambition through targets, particularly on air quality, waste management, water, and chemicals.

Christine Jardine Lib Dem

Edinburgh West

In Edinburgh West, we have two of the most polluted roads in Scotland. The Liberal Democrats’ zero carbon target is 2045 and we need to strengthen our interim targets. We need legal limits that meet World Health Organisation limits, a new duty on public bodies to do their part in tackling pollution, and a new right to clean air in domestic law.

Rachel Hopkins Lab

Luton South and South Bedfordshire

In support of new clause 8, I am concerned that the Government are refusing to explicitly put a commitment to prioritising preventive action in the Bill. The waste hierarchy refers to the priority order of managing waste: prevention; preparing for reuse; recycling; other forms of recovery; and disposal.

Richard Thomson

New clause 10 and new schedule 1 would establish the basis on which the Government could act to address the problem of waste caused by disposable nappies. It would provide clarity over misleading terms used for disposable nappies.

David Linden SNP

Glasgow East

He welcomed baby steps but called for more opportunities to discuss labelling and packaging aspects with the Minister. He asked if she would agree to meet him and the Nappy Alliance to further discuss the matter.

Mark Tami Lab

Alyn and Deeside

He emphasised the need for more substantial changes to the Bill beyond changing explanatory notes. He highlighted that Labour wants to seize the opportunity to develop a once-in-a-generation Bill.

Ruth Jones Lab

Newport West and Islwyn

She stressed the importance of putting proposed changes into legislation rather than just altering explanatory notes. She urged for immediate action on air quality issues and highlighted environmental concerns in the Secretary of State’s constituency. She also supported amendment 24, aiming to prevent Britain from becoming a dumping ground for hazardous waste.

Commons Sense

Lead MP

Debate Type

Tags

At a Glance

How the Debate Unfolded

Contributors (77)

About House of Commons Debates