Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether the Government response to the Improving biodiversity net gain for minor, medium and brownfield development consultation will set out plans for addressing concerns regarding misapplication of the de minimis exemption.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
A full consultation response and impact assessment to the Biodiversity Net Gain small, medium and brownfield development consultation will be published soon. This will set out whether any changes will be made to the de minimis exemption alongside the introduction of the new 0.2-hectare area exemption.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of misapplication of the de minimis exemption on the rollout of biodiversity net gain obligations.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
A full consultation response and impact assessment to the Biodiversity Net Gain small, medium and brownfield development consultation will be published soon. This will set out whether any changes will be made to the de minimis exemption alongside the introduction of the new 0.2-hectare area exemption.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department has made an assessment of the potential impact of false applications for the de minimis exemption on delays within the planning system.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
A full consultation response and impact assessment to the Biodiversity Net Gain small, medium and brownfield development consultation will be published soon. This will set out whether any changes will be made to the de minimis exemption alongside the introduction of the new 0.2-hectare area exemption.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of unmanaged vegetation fuel loads on upland peatland and the severity of wildfires.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Healthy peatlands do not require active vegetation management such as burning or cutting. There is clear scientific evidence that burning is particularly damaging, as it degrades peatland conditions, undermines restoration and increases long-term vulnerability to wildfires. In response, the Government amended the Heather and Grass etc. Burning (England) Regulations 2021 in September last year to extend protections to more peatlands. Alongside these changes the Heather and Grass Management Code 2025 was published to support land managers selecting appropriate management approaches that reduce peatland damage, support restoration and enhance natural resilience to hazards such as wildfire.
In addition, a two-year research project, Wildfire and Peatland: Studies to Support Delivery of the Third National Adaptation Programme, has been commissioned. This work will inform delivery of the Government’s risk‑reduction objectives by identifying effective approaches for maintaining healthy, functioning peatlands and improving the resilience of these important carbon stores under future climate conditions.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what comparative assessment she has made of wildfire risks under (a) prescribed burning, (b) mechanical cutting and (c) no active vegetation management.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Healthy peatlands do not require active vegetation management such as burning or cutting. There is clear scientific evidence that burning is particularly damaging, as it degrades peatland conditions, undermines restoration and increases long-term vulnerability to wildfires. In response, the Government amended the Heather and Grass etc. Burning (England) Regulations 2021 in September last year to extend protections to more peatlands. Alongside these changes the Heather and Grass Management Code 2025 was published to support land managers selecting appropriate management approaches that reduce peatland damage, support restoration and enhance natural resilience to hazards such as wildfire.
In addition, a two-year research project, Wildfire and Peatland: Studies to Support Delivery of the Third National Adaptation Programme, has been commissioned. This work will inform delivery of the Government’s risk‑reduction objectives by identifying effective approaches for maintaining healthy, functioning peatlands and improving the resilience of these important carbon stores under future climate conditions.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will make an assessment of the potential impact of farmers and gamekeepers on fighting wildfires.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) are the lead Department for wildfire. I refer you to their response of 21 November 2025 to PQ UIN 90164.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, when her Department plans to respond to the letter sent by the Moorland Association on 4 July 2025 on concerns that her Department's restrictions on vegetation management are increasing the risk of wildfires.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The points this later raises on peatland management and wildfire have been discussed in subsequent correspondence and meetings with senior officials. The issues were also addressed in the government response to the consultation on amendments to the Heather and Grass etc Burning Regulations (England) 2021.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of his Department's weight-based Extended Producer Responsibility Scheme on the use of aluminium containers.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
In autumn last year my department published an assessment of the impacts of implementing extended producer responsibility for packaging (pEPR), including on inflation, when the regulations were laid in parliament. However, this impact assessment does not include an assessment of the impact on specific materials or sectors.
The aim of pEPR is to ensure businesses - rather than taxpayers - are responsible for the cost of dealing with packaging when it becomes waste. These regulations will encourage manufacturers to reduce the amount of packaging they use and increase recyclable and reusable alternatives. It is up to individual producers to decide whether and how much of these costs are passed on to consumers. While pricing decisions by producers will differ by product, the impact of pEPR on overall inflation is estimated to be small, increasing consumer costs by less than £1 a week per household, or 0.1%.
From year 2 of pEPR, fee modulation will be introduced and this will benefit the most recyclable materials by providing a fee discount. In contrast, less recyclable alternatives will incur an increased fee.
Since January 2025 the Recyclability Assessment Methodology has allocated packaging to fee modulation sub-categories, ensuring less-recyclable materials attract higher fees and drive investment in recyclability and innovation.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of applying a weight-based approach to the Extended Producer Responsibility Scheme on the glass bottle industry.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
In autumn last year my department published an assessment of the impacts of implementing extended producer responsibility for packaging (pEPR), including on inflation, when the regulations were laid in parliament. However, this impact assessment does not include an assessment of the impact on specific materials or sectors.
The aim of pEPR is to ensure businesses - rather than taxpayers - are responsible for the cost of dealing with packaging when it becomes waste. These regulations will encourage manufacturers to reduce the amount of packaging they use and increase recyclable and reusable alternatives. It is up to individual producers to decide whether and how much of these costs are passed on to consumers. While pricing decisions by producers will differ by product, the impact of pEPR on overall inflation is estimated to be small, increasing consumer costs by less than £1 a week per household, or 0.1%.
From year 2 of pEPR, fee modulation will be introduced and this will benefit the most recyclable materials by providing a fee discount. In contrast, less recyclable alternatives will incur an increased fee.
Since January 2025 the Recyclability Assessment Methodology has allocated packaging to fee modulation sub-categories, ensuring less-recyclable materials attract higher fees and drive investment in recyclability and innovation.
Asked by: Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party - East Antrim)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment has he made of the potential impact of his Department's weight-based approach to the Extended Producer Responsibility Scheme on levels of food inflation.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
In autumn last year my department published an assessment of the impacts of implementing extended producer responsibility for packaging (pEPR), including on inflation, when the regulations were laid in parliament. However, this impact assessment does not include an assessment of the impact on specific materials or sectors.
The aim of pEPR is to ensure businesses - rather than taxpayers - are responsible for the cost of dealing with packaging when it becomes waste. These regulations will encourage manufacturers to reduce the amount of packaging they use and increase recyclable and reusable alternatives. It is up to individual producers to decide whether and how much of these costs are passed on to consumers. While pricing decisions by producers will differ by product, the impact of pEPR on overall inflation is estimated to be small, increasing consumer costs by less than £1 a week per household, or 0.1%.
From year 2 of pEPR, fee modulation will be introduced and this will benefit the most recyclable materials by providing a fee discount. In contrast, less recyclable alternatives will incur an increased fee.
Since January 2025 the Recyclability Assessment Methodology has allocated packaging to fee modulation sub-categories, ensuring less-recyclable materials attract higher fees and drive investment in recyclability and innovation.