(1 day, 7 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered environmental protections and biodiversity trends.
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Roger. Unfortunately for everyone involved, this will be one of my longer speeches, so I had better not take too many interventions. Let me also say at the outset that this speech is intended first and foremost to support and encourage the Minister in the task ahead of her. She has one of the most important jobs for the whole Government and for the future of the country.
On that upbeat note, I turn to the litany of despair that constitutes a brief review of biodiversity trends in this country. Not a single one of England’s rivers is in good overall health. The same is true of our sea floor. Just 7% of our woodland is in good condition. Half of England’s hedgerows, which now should be bursting into bud and sprays of blossom, have been ripped up and grubbed out. Eighty-five per cent of our heathland is gone, as are 95% of our chalk downland meadows—the European equivalent of tropical rainforests. Our traditional orchards have declined by 81%, and 85% of England’s salt marshes have also been lost.
It is little wonder that one in six species in these islands is at risk of extinction. The scale of the wealth that we have squandered in pursuit of vapid notions of progress is staggering. It is more than just depressing; it is an existential threat to our way of life. The Government’s recent national security report on biodiversity loss confirmed that the collapse of nature is putting at risk the ecosystem services on which our society depends.
Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. He is making it clear that biodiversity and our natural environment are in complete crisis. Given that, would he agree that the slogan “Back the builders, not the blockers” is one of the worst slogans that the Labour party has ever come up with? People do care about local democracy, biodiversity and nature, so that slogan should be put in the bin, where it belongs—the recycling bin, of course.
Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)
Order. In the time available for this debate, that almost constitutes a speech. I had intended to say this after the hon. Gentleman moved the motion, but I had better say it now: please understand that any person who intervenes in this debate will be expected to stay until the end. It is not a case of speak and go.
Chris Hinchliff
I completely agree with my hon. Friend. As I was saying, the ecosystem services—including water, food, clean air and critical resources—are all at risk. Even our soils, the very substance of growth, have lost around half their organic carbon, threatening the sustainability of our agriculture and our ability to keep our citizens fed.
More than that, however, the collapse of England’s biodiversity is a threat to our culture, national identity and one of the essential components of happiness. As iconic species continue to disappear from these islands, I wonder how many of us in this room will see a swallow or mayfly to herald summer this year?
Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
Does my hon. Friend hope, as I do, that the Minister will work with expert organisations such as Northumberland national park to determine how we can best protect ground-nesting birds such as the curlew, which is mainly resident in my constituency of Hexham?
Chris Hinchliff
I completely agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of protecting our curlews, and the curlew action plan is a hugely important step, which the Government should be looking at. I also wonder how long it will be before the screaming sky falls silent, as each year, fewer swifts return to grace the air above our towns and villages.
Even our English language is losing its power, as the colours of the countryside are allowed to run dry. How could Brontë have conjured Heathcliff to love Cathy without the wild of the Yorkshire moors? How could Tolkien have fathered an entire fantasy genre without a shire worth fighting for? What hope is there for a future Vaughan Williams with so few larks left to ascend? Worse still, what stories will we have left to enchant the next generation of children with when the Hundred Acre Wood has been declared a blocker, Ratty and Mole have been evicted from their river home by decades of effluent, and—this is probably only a matter of time—someone tries to redefine Watership Down as grey belt?
All in all, the scale of the nature crisis is difficult to overstate, and any move to lower standards risks turning that crisis into a catastrophe. Yet, despite all this, we still get senior politicians declaring war on what little remains of our wildlife, with repeated suggestions that even this dire baseline is somehow too high. We continue to hear the unevidenced claim that Britain is held back not by a broken economic model but by bats and newts, and that profiteering developers would build genuinely affordable homes for all if only the last remnants of the natural world were less burdensome.
Liz Truss may be gone, but the spirit and lazy rhetoric of deregulatory Trussonomics bulldozers inexorably onwards with a planning and infrastructure Bill that sought to allow developers to pay cash to trash nature, despite having no meaningful evidence to substantiate the claim that environmental protections slow down infrastructure. Then, after we managed to head off the worst of that, we have had the wholesale rejection of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee’s recommendations on species protections, as well as a nuclear regulatory review based on fundamentally flawed evidence that inflates the costs of environmental protections and downplays ecological risks. I would welcome the Minister taking this opportunity to distance the Government from that particular exercise in scapegoating nature for developer incompetence.
Each additional deregulation and attack on environmental protections is a blow to the very root of what it means to be English. It is a truly bleak vision for our country to suggest that the only way to secure investment, build infrastructure or deliver homes is to rip up our environmental protections. Such measures are not only bad policy but directly contradictory to the manifesto we were elected on and deeply unpopular. Only 14% of British people think politicians are aligned with their values on nature, and three quarters of young people actually want more of the UK countryside protected.
Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate. He may know that Sheffield is well known for being the outdoor city and is one of the few major cities in the UK that has a national park within its boundaries. I support him in his red lines for nature campaign. Does he agree that protecting nature is vital, not just to protect our green spaces, but to make sure that communities have access to the right types of space, so that they are happier and more fulfilled?
Chris Hinchliff
I thank my hon. Friend for her support for the red lines campaign. She is absolutely right about what makes life worth living. Investing in our country, strengthening standards and restoring our natural world will do far more to improve the lives of ordinary people than a short-sighted race to the bottom. That is the Labour tradition: action to correct market failure, not dogmatic deregulation.
There is a nature-loving majority in this country, including the millions of members of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, wildlife trusts, national trusts and so many more. Our Labour Government should be working alongside those groups, not squaring up to them. At the end of the day, there is a lot more of them than there are developer lobbyists. Let us stop this endless cycle of skirmishes. It does not have to be like this. Enough is enough.
Chris Hinchliff
I am very sorry, but I had better make progress at this point.
Today, I am calling for clear red lines for nature: no further weakening of environmental protections, no funding cuts to environmental bodies and no more collapsing biodiversity but instead a fully funded nature recovery plan to meet our legally binding targets. There are no more branches left to prune without killing the tree. There can be no more backward steps. Hand wringing will not protect habitats. Lip service will not stop extinction. Let us have a little optimism and idealism instead.
We know from projects such as Knepp and trailblazers such as my constituents at Finches Farm in Benington that with decisive action our biodiversity can come booming back again. Across the country, we have a vast, untapped pool of potential crying out for employment and meaningful, healthy work. It is ready to contribute to leaving the world in a better state than we found it, and there is so much work to be done: restoring our meadows, orchards, coppices and temperate rainforests; relaying hedgerows; re-wetting the lost marshes; re-wriggling our rivers; bringing back the species that haunt our islands; saving the curlew and red squirrel; and monitoring, measuring and enforcing our essential environmental protections. There is enough skilled work to deliver a huge boost towards full employment across every region of the country. Like new Labour’s “New Deal for a Lost Generation”, we need a green job guarantee to deliver essential environmental restoration work now and brilliant careers for years to come.
Now is the time for the honesty to admit that, for generation after generation, we have spent down and frittered away the vast wealth that was the natural inheritance of these islands. The truth is that the reality of GDP growth has been little more than a heaping up of virtual wealth—a hoarding of digital zeros in the bank accounts of the wealthy, while the real world around all of us suffered. Any further weakening of environmental protections will only push us over the edge into total bankruptcy. We cannot retreat a single step further. We must defend these last red lines for nature for the sake of every generation to come. My plea to the Minister is simply this: defy the lobbyists, side with the public and the planet over profit, and give us our nature back.
Several hon. Members rose—
Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)
Order. We are faced with a very difficult situation. I have to call the Front-Bench spokespeople at 5.10 pm, which means, given the number of people on the speakers’ list, I am going to start with a time limit of two minutes. That may not get everybody in. I am not going to call anybody who has already intervened, for a start, and if anybody else feel like dropping out and intervening, I would welcome that. I do not normally do this, but it may help if I give Members the batting order as it stands at the moment: on the Opposition Benches, we have Danny Chambers, Olly Glover, Edward Morello, Tim Farron, John Milne, Roz Savage and Jim Shannon, and on the Government Benches, we have Barry Gardiner, Terry Jermy, Martin Rhodes, Michelle Welsh, Rachael Maskell, Tristan Osborne and Anna Gelderd. It is up to you how you play this, but I am going to stop calling Back-Bench Members at 5.10 pm.
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
I promise I will be as quick as possible. There is so much I would like to say about biodiversity net gain and the importance of the natural environment to people in Winchester, but I will speak only about a specific issue with one of our chalk streams that I believe the Minister could help us with. The beautiful River Meon runs through a little village called Droxford. For various historical reasons, it is classified as a public highway, and that means that people drive 4x4s along the river for a few hundred metres. It is not a shortcut to anywhere—it is not simply a river crossing—but it is damaging the riverbed. It also disrupts the spawning of the very rare Atlantic salmon that come from southern chalk streams.
For over two years now, I have been working to try to stop the traffic from damaging this very precious habitat. The South Downs national park wants it to stop. The local people want it to stop. Lib Dem-run Winchester city council wants it to stop. For various reasons, we cannot get the Conservative-run Hampshire county council either to change the designation of the river so that it is no longer a highway or even just to put in a traffic regulation order to prevent people from driving 4x4s along the stretch of river. I would really appreciate a meeting with the Minister, maybe with some of the various stakeholders, to work out how we can cut through this red tape, because it is ecological vandalism, it provides absolutely no benefit to the environment and there is overwhelming support to stop the damage.
Barry Gardiner (Brent West) (Lab)
The speech by my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) was one of the finest on the environment that I have heard in this House for a long time. One day, the Government will see sense and he will become Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
I will cut most of what I wanted to say. The national security assessment, mentioned by my hon. Friend, says:
“Cascading risks of ecosystem degradation are likely to include geopolitical instability, economic insecurity, conflict migration and increased inter-state competition for resources.”
Why is that not the subject of a great debate in Parliament? Yesterday, we had the Prime Minister’s vital statement on Iran. The whole House sat in a packed Chamber to discuss the US bombing of that evil regime and the security implications for the world. Yet we have our own national security assessment telling us that global ecosystem degradation and collapse is one of the most serious threats to UK national security, and we still have had no debate on it.
The collapse of biodiversity over my lifetime is not a matter of spreadsheets. It is felt in silent fields that were once singing meadows, in poisoned waters that were once shimmering streams, in children who have grown up in a depleted world without knowing how much has been lost, or how abnormal is the world they inhabit. The monitoring and enforcement system currently in place under environmental regulators lacks capacity and is chronically poor.
Take our water sector: of the 2,778 serious pollution incidents reported in 2024, officials downgraded 98% as “minor incidents”, yet only 496 were actually attended or inspected before being downgraded. There can be no doubt that the regulatory system is as rotten as the pipes the water companies have abandoned since 1989. I welcome the Red Lines for Nature campaign as far as it goes, but that is scarcely far enough when it talks of no further weakening of environmental protections and no funding cuts to environmental bodies.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I also praise the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) for his passion for nature and the topics we are discussing.
My constituency has seen some of the fastest housing growth in the country: 8,000 new houses added between 2011 and 2021. I understand the need for housing, but a major concern for local residents is how to balance the objective of more housing with the objectives of protecting our green environment and ensuring that amenities are there to protect the housing. The constituency has many wonderful and rare habitats that require protection. If we fail to do that, there will be wide-reaching, catastrophic impacts to our environment.
The Letcombe Brook chalk stream is a precious habitat running from Letcombe Regis to East Hanney, providing water for local use. The Letcombe Brook project does great work protecting it. The River Thames, which also runs through my constituency, has often been subject to sewage dumping, due to the well documented issues with Thames Water.
I pay tribute to local organisations that do so much to protect nature and make it accessible. I recently met members of the Earth Trust in Little Wittenham, who took me on a walk around the Wittenham Clumps. Their work is transformative, including the recent restoration of a neglected coppice in Little Wittenham wood into a thriving, biodiverse habitat, encouraging bees with new apiaries on their farm and levelling up opportunities for environmental education by removing barriers of cost and transport to resource-stretched schools.
In the towns in my constituency, Sustainable Didcot, Sustainable Wantage and Sustainable Wallingford are doing fantastic work to lead community climate change action through projects on waste, transport, food, biodiversity and social justice. Finally, the Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust manages nature reserves, monitors species and runs projects to support declining species such as water voles. All those organisations need Government support to ensure that they can continue to play their part in protecting nature and our environment.
Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)
Norfolk is home to some of the finest natural environments anywhere in our country. In my constituency we are fortunate to have the Brecks, a unique biodiversity hotspot in the UK, vital for rare and threatened species. It supports more than 12,500 species of plants and animals, 2,000 of which are endangered. Like many hon. Members, I am passionate about chalk streams—in my case the River Nar and the River Little Ouse. Around 85% of the world’s chalk streams are found in England, many of them in my constituency. Sadly, after 14 years of neglect under the previous Government, our rivers are in a sorry state.
Currently, extensive areas of the Brecks enjoy habitats regulations protections, allowing rare birds, plants and butterflies to be protected from further harm. The same can be said for some of our chalk streams. If the recommendations in the Fingleton review are accepted in full and transferred more broadly as a planning framework, as has been suggested by some, that is under threat. The hard work that I have seen being undertaken by Natural England, Norfolk Wildlife Trust and Norfolk Rivers Trust, alongside farmers and landowners, risks being undermined.
No one is saying that we should not build more houses, and no one is saying that we should not be investing in clean energy and infrastructure, but economic growth and environmental protection should not be mutually exclusive; in my opinion, they depend on one another. The potential cost to our economy if we do not protect these areas is staggering and terrifying, particularly for areas such as my South West Norfolk constituency. Wildlife trusts in Norfolk have highlighted to me the devastating financial costs of environmental damage, warning of a 12% reduction in GDP. In my constituency, that would be due to flooding, water treatment wastage, loss of tourism and the permanent destruction of agricultural land. Nature has never been at odds with development and planning.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I join other Members in congratulating the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) on this important debate. I, like many others, would love to speak about a whole host of things, but given the time constraints, I will just talk about chalk streams.
Chalk streams are globally rare ecosystems; there are approximately 200 in the world, and 85% of them are in England. They are internationally significant freshwater habitats and should be a conservation priority. In West Dorset, our chalk streams—the River Frome, Wraxall brook and West Compton stream—are in decline, alongside the salmon populations in them, because we have not had proper environmental protections or biodiversity being properly prioritised. The Rivers Trust sewage discharge map shows that the South Winterbourne was affected by storm overflows 223 times in 2020, for a total of more than 2,641 hours.
My proposal is that we introduce a blue flag style standard for chalk streams, mirroring coastal bathing water classifications—clear, public facing measures that are visible and easy to understand. Mandatory, regular testing and enforceable consequences for failure would help rebuild public trust and provide the transparency that people rightly demand.
Given that I have spoken far faster than I thought I would, I will also make a plea for the upcoming water White Paper to make water companies statutory consultees on all new planning projects, and to make rainwater harvesting mandatory on all new builds. Pre pipe solutions are the key to taking the strain off our sewerage system. The water White Paper is a fantastic opportunity for the Government to do those three things. If they do them, it will be brilliant for the public.
Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)
Three for the price of one! I call Martin Rhodes.
Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)
Thank you, Sir Roger. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) on securing this debate. Much of his speech focused on England and on rural areas. As the Member for Glasgow North, I hope to open up the debate slightly, in terms of crossing the border into Scotland, the rest of the UK and the world, and also into urban as well as rural.
Often, there is a focus on climate rather than nature based solutions to help mitigate and adapt to the environmental crisis that we face. Many argue that the protection of nature is hampering economic development. Not only are they compatible but, more fundamentally, the decline of nature will undermine economic development. Wetlands protect us from flooding; mangroves protect us from storm surges; and peatlands store carbon and regulate water flow. This is our natural infrastructure. They are essential not only in tackling climate change but in limiting damage to built infrastructure, reducing insurance costs and strengthening economic resilience.
In 2022, parties to the United Nations convention on biological diversity signed the global biodiversity framework. This landmark agreement, among other ambitions, seeks to conserve 30% of land and waters by 2030—“30 by 30”, as it is commonly known. However, much more needs to be done if we are to achieve those ambitions. Analysis from the Natural History Museum reveals that we are not sufficiently protecting the most critical ecosystems upon which global biodiversity—and indeed humanity—relies. In areas delivering the most vital ecosystem services, biodiversity is decreasing faster.
I thank my hon. Friend again for securing this debate. Nature has an essential role to play, helping us to mitigate and adapt. Our national and international commitments can enable us to progress towards other biodiversity targets, including those focused on restoration, resilience building and nature’s contribution to people and the economy more broadly. We must continue to champion this cause.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
It is an honour to serve under your guidance this afternoon, Sir Roger. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff), who made a fantastic speech.
Some 70% of our land mass in this country is agricultural land. We are achieving nothing for biodiversity if we do not work with the people who work that land. The most damaging thing the Government have done on this issue over the last 12 months—it was indeed 12 months ago—was to close the sustainable farming incentive with no notice whatsoever.
We are pleased that the Secretary of State has announced the reopening of SFI in June, but it is worth bearing in mind that that will only be for up to two months and there is no guarantee, even in the Department’s statement on the issue, that it will last two months. If the money runs out before then, people will be excluded from applying. That means that we are back to first come, first served. Those farmers who are wealthier, who have more time on their hands and who have staff will be able to get in, and smaller farmers, particularly in the uplands areas, will not be able to do so. That will be damaging for biodiversity.
The limitations on the scheme are deeply concerning. They are meant to incentivise farmers to have part of their farm for environmental protection and part of their farm for food production. This is the error that we have been making for the last 40 years—the idea that we either produce food or care for the environment. We absolutely must do both; that is what farmers want to do. I fear that this scheme is wrong-headed.
Some 55% of the food we eat in this country is produced in this country. That is dangerously low given the international situation; this is something we already knew. We need to support farmers not just to care for the environment, but to feed us.
The Government limit the June window to farms up to 50 hectares, which excludes upland farmers on less than minimum wage who farm the commons at the top of mountains. That is foolish. I ask the Minister to rethink. My final word is this: the greenest thing we can do is to keep Britain’s farmers farming to care for our environment.
Michelle Welsh (Sherwood Forest) (Lab)
Protecting our natural environment and biodiversity is essential for our fight against climate change and our drive towards sustainability, and for future generations to enjoy the spaces so dear to people. I often hear from constituents about their concerns regarding the protection of species and habitats, sewage dumping and the threats of global warming, deforestation, droughts and flooding. I know from representing such communities that there are often competing demands when it comes to our green spaces, especially as, across the country, there is a need for stronger local infrastructure and affordable housing; but that should never be to the detriment of our environment and biodiversity.
Whyburn Farm and Misk Hills in my constituency is an unfortunate example of this. Located in Hucknell, this is a green space treasured by the community and a vital space for nature, health, wellbeing and local history. Many of my constituents regularly use this space to exercise and enjoy activities. Ashes have been scattered there; there have been first dates, first steps and memories of sledging. Its beautiful views even inspired Lord Byron’s work.
Ashfield district council has put in a local plan that will use greenfield sites, when brownfield and greyfield sites were available. That will cause damage to our local environment. The Planning Inspectorate rightly rejected this plan, but it has left the area of Whyburn Farm and Misk Hills vulnerable, which is why we have a speculative planning application. The developers have shown an utter disregard for the community, refusing to meet with them and ignoring local knowledge.
Recognising Whyburn Farm and Misk Hills as a country park would transform the community in Hucknell by ensuring that there is green space for absolutely everyone. In my constituency of Sherwood Forest, more than 4,000 children live in poverty. I ask the Minister to meet with me to discuss how a solution can be found before we lose this space altogether, and I urge the Government to consider introducing new ways for communities to have a voice in the protection of their environment.
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I thank the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) for leading this debate.
I would like to focus on the biodiversity net gain industry, or BNG, which has been threatened by changes in Government policy. BNG is one of the most effective tools we have for restoring nature at scale, and it is working. Projects like rewilding on the Knepp estate in my Horsham constituency show what can be achieved when landowners are empowered to invest in habitat restoration. They have built a thriving habitat bank and are supporting neighbouring farmers through major restoration projects. Crucially, all of that depends on a functioning BNG market. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests with regard to the Knepp estate.
Across England, more than 5,160 hectares have already been restored thanks to mandatory BNG, generating jobs, investment and genuine ecological recovery. That is why proposals to exempt sites under 0.2 hectares are so deeply concerning; they could severely undermine the emerging nature markets just as they are beginning to deliver results. The industry wants to work with Government, and has recommended an exemption for sites under 0.1 hectares. Doubling that is a mistake that the Government should address.
I say gently to Ministers that environmental protections are not barriers to growth; they are the foundations of long-term sustainable growth. Weakening BNG now would undermine nature recovery, destabilise green investment and damage the rural economies that depend on it. Nature-based solutions are not optional extras, but an essential part of our climate infrastructure. That is why we must defend BNG and empower rewilding and restoration projects across the country.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
The power of the speech by my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) must resonate around Whitehall and warn the City, developers and all who seek to profit from our natural habitats.
Today, I want to talk about York. York is described as a humane city and the Strays of York are green fingers that reach into its heart. Walking along the river, we barely see bricks and mortar. We have our own biometric marker, the tansy beetle—an iridescent, beautiful beetle, about a centimetre in length. It is known as the jewel of York, and yet it is the barometer of all that is going wrong. Flooding caused by the grouse shooting up on the moors is destroying its habitat. We are left with so few beetles in the country, because we will not find them anywhere else. Yorkshire Water has failed to manage our water system, and drought is causing the tansy beetle’s habitat to dry and the tansy plant, the only one on which it lives, to wither. The pollution coming down the River Ouse is also causing real strain.
The tansy beetle has its own action group to conserve this precious jewel. In 2016, 46,000 of the beetle were found. The group’s work raised that to 91,000 by 2023, and yet today the beetle is at risk. We cannot let those who profit from our system and destroy our natural habitats rob us of these precious parts of our nature. It is so important that the Government take action. We need not a national security assessment, but a nature security assessment.
Dr Roz Savage (South Cotswolds) (LD)
We are told that access to green and blue space improves mental health and could save the NHS more than £2 billion annually. We are told that urban nature provides around £823 million a year in air pollution removal benefits. We are told that England’s natural capital is valued at around £1.3 trillion, and we are told that ecosystem services deliver more than £37 billion in annual benefits. I want to discard my prepared remarks and speak more idealistically. That same idealism led me to abandon a normal life and row alone across our three oceans to raise awareness of the environmental crisis. It is this mindset of putting a price tag on our natural assets that has led us to the predicament—this heartbreaking situation—that we find ourselves in.
To reduce our natural environment to mere pound signs is an insult—a very anthropocentric perspective, where we value nature according to what it delivers to us. I suggest that we have a moral duty to future generations to halt the extinctions. It is not our job to play God—to decide which species are worth saving and which are not based on whether we find them useful, charismatic or cuddly. Every single species plays a crucial role in the web of life that we are far from fully understanding.
I thank the Minister in advance for her remarks today—in many ways, I feel that I am preaching to the converted, because I know that she already gets this. I wish that we could get any other Minister or Secretary of State into this Chamber to hear these arguments; we need to put respect for nature at the heart of all decision making across Government if we are truly going to get on track for the future that the next generations deserve.
Tristan Osborne (Chatham and Aylesford) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) for his passionate speech. Chatham has a proud maritime history and connection with the oceans, as well as the beautiful chalk streams of the escarpment that flow into the River Medway.
Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)
Chalk streams are rare and irreplaceable. In Hampshire, we have some of the most iconic ones in the Test, the Itchen and the Loddon. Does my hon. Friend, like me, welcome the inclusion of chalk streams for the first time in the national planning policy framework, and will he join me in urging the Government to find other ways to protect and restore such vital habitats?
Tristan Osborne
I could not agree more. I am proud that chalk streams are part of the portfolio that we are looking at to safeguard our natural world.
However, as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for the ocean, my focus is on a different ecosystem—one that is no less important than our terrestrial ecosystems. I want to ask the Minister several questions on oceans. Last summer, we celebrated with David Attenborough the ban on bottom trawling in this country. Will the Minister provide an update on when we can expect to implement that ban in UK waters?
Enhanced marine protected areas are also key. We should celebrate the fact that the UK recently signed the UN global ocean treaty, but are we looking to enhance our marine protected areas to protect our species within those? Lastly, we know that microplastics and plastic pollution are a significant problem in oceans around the world; as part of the circular economy review that we are shortly to publish, can we reduce the amount of plastics being fed into our oceans and environment? Ultimately, the Earth and the oceans do not belong to us; we belong to them. We are custodians of the future for generations to come. I hope that our oceans will be part of that tapestry.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) for securing this debate. Some 12% of species are threatened with extinction in the countryside we live in, as he underlined very clearly. The 50% loss of biodiversity since the ’70s is a serious problem. I want to give an example of what my council, Ards and North Down borough council, does. The council has a strategy of planting and rewilding council land; indeed, it is actively trying to purchase other land for the same purpose. I am always very pleased to see the Minister in her place—I wish her well, including for her recovery. I ask her what the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will do to help councils to make more of a difference, if councils are willing to step up and do something.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
The Wood Lane playing fields in my constituency are in difficulty because the council faces bankruptcy and is looking to sell property. Does the hon. Member agree that something needs to be done about that?
Jim Shannon
I certainly do, and I will hand over to the Minister to respond at the end of the debate.
Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)
Nature underpins our wellbeing and our economy, and in South East Cornwall we truly understand that. Take the Cornish black bee: hardy, resilient and well suited to our Atlantic winds, it heads out to gather pollen even in unfavourable conditions, and that determination feels very familiar to Cornish people. The Cornish chough tells a similar story. Once lost from Cornwall, it returned in 2001, and its comeback shows that, with the right protection, species can recover.
I am proud to serve as a seagrass champion, because seagrasses are one of the most powerful natural climate solutions: they absorb and store carbon at a remarkable rate, soften wave energy and reduce coastal erosion—something extremely needed since the start of this year, as Cornwall has been battered by back-to-back storms that have severely impacted my region. Protecting seagrass meadows is a practical climate action and a sound economic policy.
In my local area, fishing and farming have shaped the economics of our villages and towns for generations. They rely on healthy soils, clean water and abundant seas, so clean water remains a priority. The proposal for designated bathing water in Lostwithiel is therefore very welcome, and I encourage residents to engage with the consultation on that before it closes at the end of the month. However, my constituents are rightly frustrated by the impact of sewage discharges, and confidence in South West Water has been undermined by a history of poor transparency. I call for decisive action to improve its operations, alongside meaningful engagement with local residents, businesses and me.
On Dartmoor, biodiversity and traditional land management are closely linked. Will the Minister provide further information on how the sustainable farming incentive could play a part in protecting the Dartmoor ponies, which were at risk under the previous Government? Finally, I ask her to continue to focus on rural and coastal areas that have long been forgotten and to use Cornwall and our unique natural heritage as a pilot area in future Government schemes. I look forward to working with her in Cornwall in the future.
Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson. You have five minutes.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I commend, as we all do, the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) for securing this important debate—it could not be more timely.
I start by asking the Minister why this Government refused to publish the full national security report on global biodiversity loss. The reason for that refusal is pertinent to today’s debate; it seems to be a refusal to be honest with the public about the inextricable links between nature, climate change and our national security, and how vulnerable it makes our country and society when we do not act on the evidence. That evidence states that biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse have severe consequences for food and water insecurity, crop failures, fisheries collapse and intensified natural disasters. That is cause for alarm and action.
Instead of responding with urgency, however, the Office for Environmental Protection has confirmed that not only do the Government remain largely off track to meet their environmental commitments, but, worryingly, they have committed to
“doing little that is new or different”
to change that. The latest State of Nature data shows decline, with one in six species at risk of extinction. We have heard that just 14% of England’s rivers are in good ecological health. Action on nature loss and climate breakdown cannot be dealt with in silos. That is why the Liberal Democrats, led by my hon. Friend the Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage), have pushed for an annual climate and nature statement from Government.
The Conservatives and Reform, meanwhile, refuse to accept that climate change is one of the greatest drivers of nature loss and propose the rolling back of climate legislation. There seems to be a similar siloed approach from this Labour Government—this time a nature-blind approach. While we commend the Government’s drive towards decarbonisation, the loss of nature is also accelerating climate change by disrupting habitats that capture and store carbon, such as peatlands and woodlands.
Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)
My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. Does she agree that habitat loss will not be helped if the Government accept recommendation 19 of the Fingleton review, which will weaken the duty to support our national parks? Our national parks did not stop the building of Sellafield, or of Trawsfynydd in Snowdonia national park; the Quantocks national landscape did not stop the building of Hinkley. We need to protect our national parks and landscapes.
Pippa Heylings
More than 20 leading nature organisations, including the Wildlife Trust, the National Trust and the RSPB, have warned that the changes my hon. Friend mentions would weaken environmental law by effectively allowing developers to pay to destroy protected wildlife.
I would like the Minister to respond on proposed recommendations 11, 12 and 19 of the Fingleton nuclear regulatory review. We do not want any more of the damaging framing of nature as a blocker to growth, or any more actions such as the weakening of key biodiversity safeguards in the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025. As my hon. Friend said, the proposed exemptions to biodiversity net gain risk hollowing out one of the most important tools for nature recovery. That is not just the case with nuclear energy; the Prime Minister has said that he also wants environmental deregulation across the entire industrial strategy, which would risk breaching level playing field provisions in the EU-UK trade and co-operation agreement.
Liberal Democrats take a different view. We would accelerate environmental land management schemes with an extra £1 billion a year to support nature-friendly farming, as my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) said. We would halt and reverse nature’s decline by 2030 and double nature by 2050. We would strengthen the Office for Environmental Protection, and properly fund Natural England and the Environment Agency.
We have heard much about chalk streams, the jewel of our natural heritage, which is why I brought forward legislation with cross-party support to nominate the UK’s chalk streams as UNESCO natural world heritage sites. I hope the Minister will support that legislation. Nature is our joy and our pride, and it underpins our economy, our health, our food security and our safety.
Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I congratulate the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) on securing this important debate. We have heard many powerful contributions from across the Chamber.
As the Member of Parliament for Epping Forest, I recognise the importance of biodiversity and protecting our environment. Epping Forest, the heart and lungs of north-east London and our part of Essex, hosts 55,000 ancient and veteran trees, and has a wonderful mix of ancient woodland, open grassland plains, heathland and wetland habitats. It hosts 10 bat species, nine native reptile and amphibian species, over 1,500 fungal species and 28 butterfly species. However, it is sadly affected by actions, including fly-tipping and antisocial behaviour, that can significantly impact wildlife and nature. I urge the Minister to work closely with the Home Office to help to tackle, deter and prevent such rural and semi-rural crimes.
Epping Forest is not immune to the Government’s intrusion into the green belt with centralised housing planning and excessive solar development, which harm our biodiversity, food security, and the communities that depend on it for leisure, sports and access to local environments. This is not the answer. The Government must work to build on brownfield first and protect nature and biodiversity.
The previous Conservative Government’s Environment Act 2021 established legally binding targets, including on increasing species abundance so that by 2042 it is far greater than in 2022, and at least 10% greater than in 2032, and on restoring or creating more than 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitats outside protected sites by 2050. It also set the framework for local nature recovery strategies, seeking to agree priorities for nature’s recovery, map the most valuable existing natural areas, and create or improve habitats and meet wider environmental goals. All local authorities should have published their strategy before the end of last year, but some have not. Will the Minister update us on when all the strategies will be published?
Our Conservative environmental improvement plan built on that Act. It committed to protect 30% of our land and sea by 2030, supporting the COP15 global target to protect 30% of global land and ocean that we agreed. We also announced the species survival fund—£25 million of funding specifically to protect our rarest species, from red squirrels to water voles. In farming, we provided the innovative farming in protected landscapes funding, which helps biodiversity and nature restoration. The previous Conservative Government laid the foundations. The current Government must continue that work in earnest.
The recent Government report “Global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security” highlights the danger of inaction and raises serious questions about the UK’s preparedness if action is not taken or is not successful. I hope that Ministers will take the report very seriously and consider how some of the Government’s actions, such as the family farm tax, have pressured food production and supply.
Habitat loss and ecosystem collapse are also threatening countries and their resilience across the world. It is extreme folly for the UK Labour Government to surrender the Chagos islands to Mauritius and charge UK taxpayers £35 billion in the process, for the British Indian Ocean Territory is home to one of the most pristine marine ecosystems on Earth. Mauritius does not have the record to maintain these high conservation standards. In the 2024 environmental performance index, Mauritius ranked 109th for marine key biodiversity area protection, 83rd for marine habitat protection and 131st for marine protection stringency. Quite apart from the adverse defence implications, I am deeply concerned by the Labour Government’s wilful blindness to the fact that Mauritius does not have the record to steward one of the world’s most delicate ecosystems.
The Government report highlights how ecosystem degradation can threaten UK national security, and we know that biodiversity and food security depend crucially on strong biosecurity. Just last week, foot and mouth disease was confirmed in Cyprus. The Government must be vigilant and not hesitate to take action. We need to act at many levels, in the UK and internationally, to protect our ecosystems for the sake of national and international security.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship today, Sir Roger. For anyone who is unaware, I broke my wrist playing beach volleyball; the score was Germany 1, England nil—let us hope that is not repeated at the world cup this year. I thank all colleagues who have sent their good wishes.
I begin by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) on his excellent opening speech, and I thank other Members for their thoughtful contributions. I am not the water Minister or the oceans Minister, so I will do my best, but if I am unable to reply, we will organise the meetings that Members seek so that they get the answers they deserve.
Nature is the monopoly provider of everything we need to exist, and it is our duty to protect and restore it. In my own Coventry constituency, where there is one the poorest and most highly developed wards in the country, there are signs of water voles—Ratty is alive and well. I saw my first ever kingfisher about a mile from Coventry city centre, and there are also otters living in the canal and at Coventry golf club. Nature is all around us if we sit, look and know where to find it.
Catherine West (Hornsey and Friern Barnet) (Lab)
Does the Minister also agree that, where there is political will—such as the Mayor of London with his white storks and baby beavers, or even in progressive boroughs like Haringey that plant thousands of trees—we really have hope of making some progress?
Mary Creagh
I congratulate the mayor; he is a trailblazer both nationally and internationally through his climate and nature work. I know that Justin Beaver and his wife—I cannot remember her name, but it is a similarly cringeworthy pun—are living happily ever after. Actually, I do not know whether beavers live happily ever after; I think they are quite mean to each other. But they are definitely living happily in Ealing and providing those natural ecosystem services that we need—they are nature’s original ecosystem engineers.
In December, we published our 2025 environmental improvement plan, and over the next five years, it will accelerate progress towards those Environment Act targets. I gently say to the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson), that some of those targets do not have a baseline. When I was talking to our chief scientific adviser yesterday, I asked how we will meet some of those species targets, and we will have a baseline developed by 2028-29. It is all very well legislating, but it is also about how things are measured. As a former Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, I am all about how we measure it, because that is how the Government are held to account. I want to hold to account myself or any future Minister, whoever it may be.
Mary Creagh
I will just finish my point. Over the next five years, we will improve species abundance, reduce species extinction risk, and restore or create more than 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich land. We are also delivering our international commitment to protect 30% of the UK’s land and sea by 2030, which will help us to tackle the climate and nature crises while supporting growth.
We have heard a little about housebuilding versus infrastructure, and the system we inherited was too slow and too fragmented. Across the country, we have more than 164,000 homeless children living in temporary accommodation. In my city of Coventry alone, 2,000 children wake up to that reality every day—we have one of the highest rates of child homelessness outside London. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East (Richard Burgon) also has about 800 homeless children in his constituency.
Those realities of nature loss and homeless children have a similar root cause: political short-termism and the ducking of big decisions on land use, investment and environmental recovery, leaving the nature and housing crises to deepen. Politics has failed both, and the nature restoration fund can unlock stored housing and infrastructure while still achieving enormous, tangible environment outcomes. We want more for infrastructure and more for nature, not less.
Mary Creagh
I will not give way, as I want to respond to some of the points that hon. Members made.
The hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne) mentioned biodiversity net gain, which became mandatory in February 2024. There is emerging evidence that it is working as intended, and we will publish our response to our consultation on that shortly. Developers are seeking ecological advice earlier in the planning process so that they do not waste money trying to build on precious sites, and they are seeking to avoid biodiversity impacts when choosing between sites.
The shadow Minister talked about local nature recovery strategies, as did the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). The hard work of local authorities to finalise and publish those strategies is bearing fruit. When we came into office, those authorities were not really sure what the strategies were for, so we had to provide a lot of guidance and work with local councils and regional combined authorities to publish 28 of the 48 strategies, with the remainder fast approaching completion. Those strategies will be a new tool in driving action on the ground, and helping partnerships in the public, private and voluntary sectors to work together to focus collective efforts on where they will achieve the most.
We will also go further and faster on protected landscapes. My hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) and I saw kids from Newcastle who were out for their first ever walk in his gorgeous Northumberland national park. Making sure that our green spaces are greener, wilder and more accessible is crucial to what we want to do. On species recovery, my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall (Anna Gelderd) talked about the red-billed chough and the tough little Cornish black bee. Bees’ Needs Week is coming up soon, and I urge everyone to go to the website and get their local organisations involved. Kew at Wakehurst will host the prizegiving this year, and I encourage local groups to get involved.
Since the early 90s, we have prevented 35 national extinctions through the species recovery programme and supported 1,000 species, such as the fen orchid, the large blue butterfly and the red-billed chough. We are committed to funding that programme—there is a new round of funding until 2029. More than 200 projects have applied, and we will announce the successful ones in May. We talked about beavers, and I was thrilled to visit the National Trust’s Holnicote estate in Somerset for the release of a mother beaver and her two kits last month, which was one of two wild releases in south-west England this year. Beavers bring many benefits: creating havens for other wildlife, improving water quality and reducing the impact of flood and droughts. That is part of our mission to protect and restore nature.
On landscape recovery, the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) talked about the vital role of farmers and land managers in creating wildlife-rich environments. The plans for landscape recovery are backed by a down payment of £500 million over the course of this Parliament, which is the lifetime cost for the first tranche of projects coming through in round one. We expect future tranches to be delivered with further funding allocations. That part of the largest nature-friendly farming budget in history goes alongside significant funding for further nature-friendly farming schemes.
We heard from the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) that, last year, tree planting in England reached its highest level in over 20 years, but our woodland cover is still too low. We are committed to meet the Environment Act target to increase woodland cover to 16.5% by 2050, and the new national forest in the Ox-Cam arc is going to make his constituents closer to nature. That shows that we can build beautiful housing, a new railway line and new nature alongside each other.
This year, we will publish a new trees action plan for England, outlining how we will meet our Environment Act target and improve the resilience and conditions of trees and woodlands nationwide. We have £1 billion for tree planting and forestry sector support over this Parliament, which is the largest investment in nature in our history.
My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) raised the issue of our overseas impacts and the 30 by 30 work. Our overseas territories hold over 90% of the UK’s unique species. We reaffirmed our joint ambition with the territories to protect their ecosystems and launched the first ever co-created overseas territories biodiversity strategy with every territory Government. We have funded 43 new Darwin Plus projects worth over £7.9 million. Nature-based solutions include Saint Helena’s cloud forest, which is providing clean drinking water, the British Virgin Islands mangroves and the Falklands Islands peatlands.
We have heard about salt marshes and seagrass, and they are incredible buffers against the increasingly intense storms that are buffeting our ocean. Our ocean is also under threat from acidification and heating, and that is why we are driving to protect marine ecosystems and working for a global plastic pollution treaty. A new chair has been elected for that process, and we look forward to making further progress.
We have committed £14 million to eight projects in our ocean grant scheme to support locally led solutions to protect the ocean and the communities who depend on it. In Mozambique, for example, that is supporting local partners to establish a corridor of 20 locally managed marine areas.
I am not the Minister for chalk streams, but I want to address them very quickly and say to the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) that we will be delivering more than 1,000 targeted actions for chalk stream restoration. I will take his message back to the water Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy). On the national policy planning framework, the consultation is still live, and I think we are looking in that consultation to put chalk streams as features of high environmental value into planning policy.
We welcome and support the ambition of the curlew action plan. There are many such plans across many of our protected landscapes. I am happy to get the water Minister to meet the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers). On soils, we have committed to bringing 40% of our agricultural soil into sustainable management by 2028 and increasing that to 60% by 2030. Soil is the foundation of our food system, but also an important part of our climate system. That will be achieved via our environmental management schemes—