Nature’s Rights Bill [HL]

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer Excerpts

Friday 3rd July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (LD)]

My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle, for providing the timely opportunity to examine this concept. As we have heard today, it involves practicality and philosophy. As she rightly said, nature is critical and we are on the brink of a mass extinction. I should declare an interest, as my daughter-in-law works as a scientist for Friends of the Dart, which I will mention later.

I have been thinking particularly about the issues around the rights of nature since the conference I went to recently, which was organised by the Real Farming Conference and the New York University School of Laws More-Than-Human Life—MOTH—programme. That conference was really exciting because we heard from agro-ecological farmers, citizen activists, scientists and local authorities. They are all taking very effective action and learning from each other about how to put nature’s well-being at the heart of their work, and that is what this Bill is about too. It is about a new way of thinking and working. As other noble Lords have mentioned, it is about economy and society working in harmony with nature.

Several noble Lords have mentioned Ecuador, and I will spend a little time on this because there are lessons to be learned. In 2008, Ecuador introduced the right of nature into its constitution; of course it has the Galápagos Islands, Amazon rainforests, volcanic landscapes, cloud forest and high elevation moorlands. In short, it has a diversity to protect that is internationally recognised as extraordinarily special. Obviously, it is a very different country from the UK, with very different strengths and problems, but there are some lessons we can learn from Ecuador.

First, there is the fact that scientific evidence is crucial. To argue the case for an ecosystem, there needs to be a sound scientific basis. Rights of nature work in Los Cedros, which is quoted by Robert Macfarlane in his book, Is a River Alive?, referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Lebedev, has shown how inadequate the typical environmental impact assessment is for industrial projects. In Los Cedros, scientists and local farmers have found many more endangered species than the environmental impact assessments had reported.

Secondly, nature’s rights need to go hand in hand with human rights. A journalist who was investigating a lot of these issues in Ecuador, Katie Surma, wrote an interesting analysis in Inside Climate News that has global application. She said that Ecuador is

“emblematic of a global trend … governments and corporations increasingly relying on criminal charges, retaliatory lawsuits and other forms of legal harassment to stifle opposition”.

Having rights of nature in its constitution has not been a silver bullet, and it is not that its Government have always been on board. Currently, multiple heads and board members of the Amazon Sacred Headwaters Alliance, which protects 35 million hectares of the Amazon rainforest, are on the prosecutors’ list and face all sorts of things, such as frozen bank accounts.

Before noble Lords think, “Well, that wouldn’t happen here”, just remember the recent direction from judge to jury to disregard motives for protest—that was about climate change—and the arrests of those holding placards reminding juries of their rights. That was a shocking abuse of a fundamental right. Human rights and nature’s rights are absolutely intertwined.

Another lesson from Ecuador is about press freedom. Reporters Without Borders documented four cases of death threats just this year between January and February towards journalists in Ecuador reporting on environmental issues, who also face increasing restrictions imposed on the press by the state. Again, noble Lords should not think that press freedoms are a given in the UK. They are compromised at the moment by SLAPPs, strategic lawsuits against public participation. There are plenty of examples of public interest activism that is quelled by a SLAPP, for example on pollution, environmental reporting and corporate accountability. I hope all noble Lords will support the very important forthcoming Bill from the noble Baroness, Lady Stowell, on SLAPPs.

Local activism is incredibly important. Perhaps the one thing for which we might thank the noble Lord, Lord Frost, in encouraging Brexit is that it really made people realise the value of their local rivers and what was happening to them once the water framework that had protected them all the time we were a member of the European Union disappeared. It took rivers to a different place—basically being used as drains by the water companies.

The “Rights of Rivers” charters and declarations have grown as a movement incredibly quickly in these last few years. Around my hometown is Friends of the Dart, which I have mentioned. It is a community interest company based in Totnes that works to protect and restore the River Dart through scientific monitoring, advocacy and community action, and it really brings people together to recognise that river. Of course, a more famous example is the River Wye, which had such issues with agricultural pollution. Herefordshire Council and Powys County Council came together to make sure that, from source to sea, that river is properly protected. The movement is at an early stage, but it is growing exponentially.

We also have local nature recovery strategies, which local authorities are putting into effect. In my home county of Devon, I can see that there will be immense beneficial effects as those strategies begin to bed down and work. I have a whole list of county and district councils which are doing all sorts of work that I will not weary the House with, as I am sure noble Lords are aware of them.

Although I support wholeheartedly the rights of nature principle, it is stronger to build it from local actions that are already happening and are effective. That will create much stronger foundations. My concern about the Bill at the moment is that it is very top-down and prescriptive and does not consider how it will mesh with the current law. Nor does it address the failure of enforcement and regulation. Current laws protecting nature are ignored. Just take the fly-tipping in Hoad’s Wood, for example, and sewage dumping in rivers. But the awareness of this and the anger that people feel have really begun to cut through, and local community action and citizen scientists are all nature’s guardians now. I worry that the approach in this Bill would mean tying up resources in lengthy legal battles.

On these Benches, we are very grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, for introducing her Bill and I look forward to discussing some of these issues in greater detail in Committee. In the meantime, I think the difference between us is that the Lib Dem approach is one of practical action and localism, and while we may legislate to have rights of nature in principle, fast action on the ground should rest at a local level.