Coffey informed that scrapping housebuilder pollution rules is a step backward, says watchdog

Coffey informed that scrapping housebuilder pollution rules is a step backward, says watchdog

Plans to ​rip up pollution rules for housebuilders are⁤ a “regression” which will degrade England’s‌ rivers, the government’s​ environment watchdog has said.

An amendment tabled by the government to the levelling up bill orders local authorities to ignore‌ nutrient pollution from‍ new developments in ‍ecologically sensitive⁤ areas⁣ in ‌England, including the Norfolk Broads ⁢and the Lake District.⁣ These nutrients, when untreated, cause⁢ algal⁢ blooms that choke the ‌life⁣ from rivers.

Under the current system, which ​is derived⁤ from EU ⁢law, developers are not allowed to add more pollution to already-polluted‍ protected areas, unless they buy‌ “credits” which‌ are used to improve ⁣nearby wetlands.

In a letter ‍to the secretaries of ‍state‌ Thérèse Coffey and Michael Gove, the ‍chair of the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP), Dame Glenys Stacey, said their proposed ⁣amendment, which they claim will ⁢unlock 100,000 new homes,⁢ would degrade the environment.

She wrote: “The proposed⁤ changes would demonstrably‍ reduce the level of​ environmental protection provided for in⁢ existing environmental law. They are a ​regression. Yet the⁤ government has not adequately ‍explained ‌how, alongside such weakening‍ of environmental law, ‍new policy measures will ensure it still meets its ‌objectives‍ for water quality​ and protected site condition.”

Campaigners have previously called the OEP, which replaces the EU‍ in enforcing environmental ⁣law, “toothless”. It has written to the environment secretary and her predecessors on numerous occasions to express concern that ​her department’s⁢ plans will contravene environmental law.

However,​ Coffey has been able to ignore it and proceed with ​her plans regardless.

Stacey has demanded the ministers face parliament to explain⁢ themselves and tell colleagues how⁣ they plan to prevent rivers being choked by pollution.

The⁢ solicitor and civil servant said the​ ministers were contravening ⁣their promises to parliament, ‍referring to: “Gove’s statement‍ to parliament, ​under section 20 of the‍ Environment Act 2021, that ⁣‘the bill will​ not ⁢have ‌the effect of ‌reducing the level of environmental protection⁢ provided for by any existing environmental​ law’”. She said that the “amendments now run counter to these commitments”.

She said: “It is essential to clarify‌ the⁤ section ⁤20 statement made‌ to ⁣parliament in light of the government’s ⁢intention to ​weaken⁣ the‍ habitats‌ regulations. If necessary, ministers should make a statement‌ equivalent to that⁤ required by section 20(4) and confirm⁣ that they are no longer able‍ to say that the​ bill would not reduce the level of environmental protection​ provided for by any existing environmental law, but that ‌the ​government nevertheless wishes parliament to proceed.”

She said England’s important wildlife areas‌ were ⁢already at risk, writing: “Many⁣ of England’s⁣ most important protected wildlife sites⁢ are ​in ‌a parlous state, with their condition well below where​ it needs to be. This is often due to…

2023-08-30 11:56:05
Original⁤ from www.theguardian.com
‌ rnrn

Exit mobile version