Key Facts

• Amendment 146 aims to add requirements for the Secretary of State to produce a strategy and publish guidelines for local nature recovery strategies.
• The Government's proposal includes publishing an environmental improvement plan and establishing a national habitat map.
• Natural England will play a key role in supporting the establishment of local nature recovery strategies.
• The Bill's section 'Tree felling and planting' only addresses tree cutting down but not planting.
• There are no amendments in the group for discussion.
• The Prime Minister’s 10-point plan highlights tree planting as crucial for net zero targets.
• Tree planting requires extensive care, management, and stewardship to ensure carbon sequestration goals.
• The government has committed to planting 30,000 hectares of trees annually by 2025.
• An England tree strategy will be launched in spring 2021 following extensive consultation.
• The Woodland Trust supports putting an English tree strategy on a statutory footing.
• Clause 101 places a duty on local highway authorities to consult before felling street trees.
• The penalty for illegal felling will be increased to an unlimited fine.
• Court powers will be enhanced to compel replanting of illegally felled land.
• Potential buyers and new owners of illegally felled land must be made aware of their obligation to replant.
• Conservation covenants are private agreements entered into voluntarily.
• They cover conservation of natural or heritage features of the land.
• They can bind subsequent landowners for lasting benefits.
• Applications to be designated responsible bodies will be assessed by the Secretary of State against published criteria.
• The clause requires responsible bodies to report annually to the Secretary of State.
• Reports must state whether any conservation covenants were held during a relevant period, including number and area covered by each covenant.
• Regulations can be made to require additional information if needed in the future.
• Amendments 3, 187, 198, and 174 aim to protect or enhance chemical regulation standards.
• The amendments seek to prevent regression in protections as defined by REACH Regulation articles and annexes.
• Specific attention is given to the precautionary principle under Article 1(3) of the REACH Regulation.
• The UK government decided to recreate its own series of REACH regulations instead of seeking associate membership in the ECHA.
• The EU's REACH regulations have been a substantial achievement with over 23,000 chemicals registered in the European database.
• Close harmony on chemical standards across Europe is beneficial for safety and environmental protection.
• Estimated cost of accommodating new duplicate UK regulations: £1 billion.
• Database recreation in the UK will take six, seven or eight years to be comprehensive.
• New clause 11 seeks to ensure regulatory parity with EU chemical regulations and associate membership for the UK in ECHA.
• Daniel Zeichner opposes changes to the UK REACH regulatory framework.
• Amendments 187, 3, 198, and 174 aim to protect environmental standards.
• New clause 11 seeks dynamic alignment with EU chemicals regulations.
• Daniel Zeichner supports Alan Whitehead's amendment.
• The amendment seeks to remove sub-paragraph (4) from schedule 19 to prevent future removal of protected REACH provisions.
• There is concern that current protections may be easily amended or removed by future governments.
• The table in paragraph 6 of schedule 19 lists different articles relating to protected provisions.
• Article 35 covers workers' access to information on chemical safety from their employers.
• Articles 31 and 32 apply only to substances such as individual chemicals and mixtures, not to substances in articles like electronic equipment.
• The ECHA has an annual budget of approximately £100 million with 400 staff, while the UK government has promised only £13 million.
• Amendments 227 and 228 aim to ensure decisions in chemical regulation are based on strong science.
• Rebecca Pow agrees with the importance of science but argues that bypassing the agency's expert assessment could lead to undesirable consequences.
• The Committee voted against both amendments.
• Amendment 229 aims to mandate transparency in decision-making processes.
• Paragraph 5 of schedule 19 outlines consultation requirements with timely publication of responses.
• The affirmative procedure will apply to legislative changes resulting from consultations, providing higher levels of explanation and scrutiny.
• Amendments aim to protect specific articles of REACH from amendment by the Secretary of State.
• Articles 26, 27, 30, 32, 33, and 34 are proposed for protection.
• These articles deal with public access, transparency, supply chain communication, and animal testing alternatives.
• Amendment 149 seeks to remove subsection (1)(b) from clause 127.
• Subsection (1)(b) allows for different provisions for different purposes or areas.
• Clause 127 sets out scope and procedures for regulation-making powers.
• Letter from Rebecca Pow to Dr Alan Whitehead regarding Resource efficiency requirements (Schedule 7).
• Letter from Rebecca Pow to Daniel Zeichner regarding new burdens on local authorities (Clause 54).