Environment Bill
Public Bill Committee, 10 March 2020.
Morning
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Ordinarily, the public would be invited in for the initial brief announcement and then have to go out again, so we thought we would save them the effort. There are a couple of preliminary points. Please turn off your mobile phones. I have a tendency to send Members to the Tower if they allow their phones to ring. I am checking my own, as well. I am afraid that tea and coffee are not allowed, so those who want a tea or a coffee will have to go outside to have it.
We will consider the programme motion and the motion on reporting written evidence for publication and then have a quick chat in private. It is easier than yanking people in and chucking them out again. We will try to take the motions without too much debate.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Written evidence will be made available in the Committee Room. I take it that the Committee is happy to receive it.
Examination of Witnesses
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us. We shall now hear oral evidence from the Aldersgate Group and the Broadway Initiative. Before we start, I would be grateful if you would be kind enough to identify yourselves for the benefit of the record.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you—and thank you for giving your time this morning. We have limited time, as you are aware, before I will have to draw the sitting to a close. Concise answers—I have already urged my colleagues to ask concise questions—will help us to get through the business.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Good morning. I would like to start with some thoughts about the Office for Environmental Protection. You will have seen from the structure of the Bill that the office will be set up by the Government, essentially, and will have certain powers, but many people say that, in other areas, it lacks independence or teeth. What is your view of the structure of the OEPQ ?
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q You reflected on the independence of the OEP and have suggested that concerns might be raised about its funding and funding cycle. Are there amendments you would like to see to the Bill to establish that independence in a clearcut way? Along with the OEP’s potential independence, would you like to see something specific in the Bill that protects its remit and funding cycle so we can be assured that it will not be subject to the vicissitudes of the Department or the Exchequer?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Thank you so much for coming in; it is really appreciated. I have two points to pick up, one of which was raised by Ms Norberg. I think you suggested that the Office for Environmental Protection, the overarching body that will hold public bodies to account, ought to be more like the Office for Budget Responsibility, but that body does not have the enforcement functions that the OEP will have. Do you have any views about that?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q The OBR and what we are proposing for the Office for Environmental Protection are quite different in terms of functions. The Office for Environmental Protection is more like the Equality and Human Rights Commission and very much set up on those lines. Do the others have views on that?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Could I widen it out a bit? Industry and business have been very engaged in the development of the Bill, which is much appreciated. One of the strong messages we got from your two groups, in particular, was that you wanted legally binding targets and strong direction in the Bill. Why do you feel that is so important? Can you help the Committee understand whether the Bill is strong enough and why you want that?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
May I just interrupt you there for a second? I might bring the other gentleman in from the Broadway group—
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Minister, if anybody brings him in, it will be me. May we please finish hearing what is being said and then you can come back in?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Ms Norberg, do you wish to add anything before I go back to the Minister?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Leading on from what you were saying about the interim targets, how do you strike the balance? At the moment, you have very long-term targets of at least 15 years. I accept what the other witnesses were saying about how that gives business certainty, because decisions are made on a long-term basis, but if your target is way into the future, the danger is that you do not drive progress in the interim. The Aldersgate Group clearly supports interim targetsQ .
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q Mr Lockhart-Mummery, you also spoke about objectives. I am interested to know how those objectives would fit with targets and interim targets, and how that would pull the whole purpose of the Bill together. Perhaps in your answer you could say a little bit more about that as well?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q But you would also support interim targets further downstream?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Can I come back to Mr Baxter first? In the brief you gave us before this sitting began, you mentioned two ways that you thought the Bill could be improved. Although you raised earlier the importance of the selection or election of the OEP chairman and so on, your focus in the written evidence was more on structural issues. Could you flesh out what you meant byQ
“enhancing the coherence between the different governance elements so they are mutually supportive and aligned to drive environmental improvement to a common purpose”?
That sounds like management-speak. Can you try to bring it alive and explain what you really have in mind and what the benefits of it are?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Can I just explore that a bit more? On page 13, in part 1, the principle objective of the OEP is pretty clear:
“to contribute to—
(a) environmental protection, and
(b) the improvement of the natural environment.”
Page 1 of the Bill is about making provision to improve the natural environment and environmental protection. Those two seem to be very closely aligned, are then not?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Mr Lockhart-Mummery, you said early on that the Bill needed clear objectives at the beginning. Given what Mr Baxter has just said, do I take it that you want to see a fleshed-out opening paragraph that talks about not just improving the natural environment but what the benefits that we are looking for from that should be?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q That sounds as if what both of you are saying is that you want to see an introductory paragraph that lays out, before the stuff that is quite process-y, the benefits that we are trying to drive out through this Environment Bill a bit more clearly.
Ms Norberg, your earlier statement was slightly different. It was less on the ambitions of what the output would be and more on further improvements to strengthen the regulatory framework and the target-setting process. There is quite a lot of detail in terms of the targets and interim targets, is there not? How much more process can a Bill really have?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Q Thank you very much. Mr Graham, I am conscious of the fact that there are a number of other Members who want to come in. I cannot allow one Member to dominate the entire proceedings.
I am going to do something now that I should have done at the beginning—I apologise for this. Before I bring in Deidre Brock, will Ms Norberg and one or others of you gentlemen, very briefly, identify whose interests you represent?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you very much. I apologise; I should have asked that at the beginning for the record, and because there are people in this room who may not read everything that they should have read into just the bald titles.
Deidre Brock (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh North and Leith)
ReturningQ to the OEP, what are your thoughts on the relationship between the OEP and the environmental governance bodies, including the Committee on Climate Change, the Environment Agency and Natural England? Major budget cuts have clearly been made at Natural England recently, and the organisation has expressed concerns about its ability to monitor environmental breaches. What are your thoughts on how that works, or does not work, in the Bill?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Ms Norberg, do you want to come in?
Deidre Brock (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh North and Leith)
Q You sound a wee bit equivocal or dubious about whether the OEP has sufficient powers to enforce this properly. That is the impression I am getting; correct me if I am wrong.
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Ms Norberg, in the event that, in the future after the passage of the Bill, the British Government—for whatever reason—do not perform very well and do not do the things that we believe they should, who should be the main accountable individual or group of individuals for thatQ ?
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q I am trying to say that you presumably want the Government to be accountable for this, through Parliament and, ultimately, to the electorate in our elections. Do you agree?
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q So, going back to what we were talking about at the beginning around the Office for Environmental Protection, and thinking about accountability, what is your sense of giving more power to Parliament, as opposed to the Government? My reading is that that might actually impact on that accountability.
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q You mentioned independence. Do you think there is a danger that if you were to increase the distance between the OEP and the Secretary of State and the Department, you might end up in a situation in which the Government are trying to do one thing and the OEP is trying to do something else? Obviously, in all government there is a natural tension all the time, but I suppose my point is: do you not feel that, in our parliamentary system, we should hold the Secretary of State to account fully for all the decisions that get made, including those relating to the chair and the nature of everything we are talking about? Do you not worry that if you were to increase that distance, you might reduce accountability for that individual, because they may say, “Look, the Office for Environmental Protection did this, but I did not agree”?
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q So it should be a bit like an environmental National Audit Office, which is the way I like to think about it?
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Following on from that question, clearly the duties of the OEP in investigation and enforcement are very important. We have a regulatory environment that finishes in December this year. The OEP will not be up and running in January next year. Do you have concerns that there will be a governance gap in the interim? How do you feel about the independence of enforcement, investigation and action that is taken on potential breaches in that interim period?Q
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Q This is a different subject, but something you alluded to earlier was the need for a broader strategic aim. Other countries have an overarching environmental objective as part of their environmental legislation. The shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Test, has tabled an amendment that at the start of the Bill there should be a clause stating an environmental objective. Do you think that would improve and strengthen the Bill?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Before I come back to the Front Benchers, are there any other questions from either side?
Ruth Edwards (Conservative, Rushcliffe)
IQ am interested in the witnesses’ views on the whole system of environmental governance and how well it works together, including the targets, the environmental protections and the Office for Environmental Protection. Do you think that it works together holistically? Are there any gaps? It would be good to get your views on that.
Marco Longhi (Conservative, Dudley North)
You referredQ to objectives earlier. Is there not a risk that you could look at these objectives and set targets a little too early —putting the cart before the horse—before we have had a chance to delve into the detail and heard everybody’s expert advice?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
On the assumption that it is on the same subject, I call Ms Edwards.
Ruth Edwards (Conservative, Rushcliffe)
Q You talk about having a healthy environment as an objective. How would you legally define a healthy environment? If it is on the face of the Bill, we need legal certainty about what the concept means. Otherwise, are we not just creating legal confusion and vagueness?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
We are nearing the end of this session, I am afraid. In the context of what we have heard this morning, Dr Whitehead, do you have any further questions?
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q One thing we have not heard this morning, in the context of how the OEP and the targets that are to be set might work, is the fact that all this is taking over from the environmental protections that were there through the European Union when we were members. Do you think the Bill allows for the transition of those protections to a UK context to be sufficiently enforced and, ideally, enhanced? Or do you think there needs to be anything else in the Bill that can perhaps ensure that there is no regression in standards as we move forward with these new arrangements?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you. In the light of all of that, are there any final questions from the Minister?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q On a related point, do you think it is important to have an equivalent governance framework to the OEP in Scotland and Wales? Northern Ireland is already committed to joining the OEP, as is set out in the Bill. The other two have close liaison with all the teams and countries, but at the moment they have said they are going to set up their own bodies. How important is it, from a business point of view, that they function in as similar way as possible?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you very much indeed. Ladies and gentlemen, that brings this session to a conclusion. Ms Norberg, Mr Lockhart-Mummery and Mr Baxter, thank you all very much indeed for coming along and affording the Committee the benefit of your observations. We are deeply grateful to you.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Once again, good morning. We now hear oral evidence from the Food and Drink Federation, the Federation of Small Businesses and Veolia. We have until 11.25 am when the House will sit. For the benefit of the record, I would be grateful, gentlemen, if you identified yourselves and the nature of the organisation you represent, starting with Mr Curtois. I hope I have pronounced your name correctly. If not, please correct me.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you, gentlemen. We are grateful to you for coming along and giving us the help that we are likely to need. We will start with Dr Whitehead.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q Good morning, gentlemen. The Bill is generally recognised as having some good bits, on recycling materials and end-of-life concerns about materials in the part on waste and resources, but it has been widely criticised because it concentrates on those particular elements of the waste hierarchy rather than looking at ways in which the waste hierarchy could be driven up, as reflected in the waste and resources White Paper. Do you have any views on that? Do you think that there are any ways in which the Bill could be strengthened to emphasise the point that, actually, recycling is not the end of the road, as far as waste is concerned, and that other things—reuse, redesign and minimisation—have an equally important part to play?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Mr Bellamy, does the FDF have a view on this?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you. Does the FSB have a view, Mr Poole?
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q Clause 52, in the context of recycling and minimisation of waste, provides for charges for single-use plastic items. Do you think this clause clarifies its purpose sufficiently? Is it about minimising single-use items, or is it about reducing the role of plastic in single-use items? First, do you think that a clause such as this would work in reducing single-use items in the food and drink industry, for example? Do you consider that it might be prudent to concentrate on the fact that single-use items can be made of more things than plastic and that amendments to the Bill might make that clear in terms of how the single-use environment might develop?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Mr Bellamy, food and drink have been mentioned, so perhaps you might like to have the first crack at this one?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Finally in response to this point, Mr Curtois.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Mr Bellamy clearly highlighted the legal requirements already in place on a lot of waste and recycling issues. There is the waste strategy, which has the reuse, recycle, longer-life element to it, which is very strong. Will you give us business’s point of view on how the Bill will move us towards what we call the circular economy? What opportunities will that provide for businesses in particular? Maybe you could give special thought to the Bill aligning all local authority recycling collection services across the country. What sort of opportunities might that, among other measures, offer businesses?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Mr Bellamy, you appear to be in the firing line this morning.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Sorry about that.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
There is no requirement on everybody to answer every question, but gentlemen, do either of you wish to add anything to that?
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
I want to follow up on the Minister’s question about a more collaborative, joined-up approach. Obviously, Andrew, local authorities will be your key partners, and you touched on small businesses and the challenges that they may face. Can you go into detail about your resourcing, and the support needed to deliver on the recycling targetsQ ?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Mr Bellamy, do you want to add anything to that?
Robbie Moore (Conservative, Keighley)
We have talked a little bit about recycling this morning, but I am interested in the steps taken by the food and drink industry and the small business sector to reduce the use of plastics. From your perspective, what are the unintended consequences of reducing plastic use, and how will the Bill support you with those unintended consequencesQ ?
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Q I will speak to two areas. First, when I engage with people in both the food and drink industry and the waste compressing industry, one issue is the lack of reprocessing facilities, but the second—and usually more important—issue is the quality of the bales of material. When they show me a bale from France and a bale from the UK, the French bales are much cleaner than the UK ones. Are the provisions in the Bill going to improve that so we can have better recycling?
Secondly, you alluded to the market in waste pushing up the cost of these bales, which is a disincentive to invest in reprocessing. Do you think that the provisions in this Bill will pull that back? As an adjunct, there is the issue of transfrontier shipments of waste—that is, waste being sold overseas. Again, do you think the provisions in this Bill will help us end that practice and engage in reprocessing in order to create a circular economy in the UK?
Cherilyn Mackrory (Conservative, Truro and Falmouth)
IQ am interested to see that the Bill provides a balance between the detail and the direction of travel. My question is to do with how much of a carrot or stick approach the industry needs from Government. The industry has come on in leaps and bounds in this direction in recent years, but in terms of consistent labelling and practices between different local authorities, how much of a stick or carrot approach do you think the industry needs from Government? Or is industry able to take charge on this?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q Can I ask the FDF about food waste? It is mentioned peripherally in the Bill in terms of the separate collections and so on, but there is nothing more. There is a food strategy being worked on by Henry Dimbleby and others, which may have stuff in it. Is there scope for more specific provisions in the Bill? For example, Courtauld is still voluntary. Progress is being driven by the good guys rather than there being an obligation on everyone. You referred to the figures produced by WRAP. Could the Bill do more on that?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q Is that the mandatory food waste audits? When you refer to reporting, are some companies such as Tesco already doing audits of key items at least? Do you mean that at least the big companies report on the amount of food waste in their supply chain?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q So basically it is making mandatory what some companies do on a voluntary basis.
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q What often happens, though, is that some companies do it. There has been an issue in the past over things being reported in aggregate rather than identified specifically, and there has been no naming and shaming of individual supermarkets. Anecdotally, some supermarkets are clearly driving down those food waste figures while others are not doing their bit. That is always the problem with the voluntary approach.
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q Are you saying that it is not a good thing?
Saqib Bhatti (Conservative, Meriden)
MrQ Poole, you spoke a lot about trust and transparency, and the Bill has a careful balance between detail and direction, but a lot of details will be prescribed through secondary legislation. I just wanted to garner your opinions on the importance of public consultation, so that we can garner expert views to develop detailed policies through secondary legislation.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Can I come back, Mr Curtois, to your earlier point that you thought there was masses in the Bill in terms of recycling, but less on residual waste and how that should be treated. What would you hope to see in the Bill that would cover that?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Can I ask Mr Bellamy a separate question? It is really about your members and their attitudes to eliminating avoidable waste of all kinds. Do you think the introduction of charges for any single-use plastic item will incentivise a shift towards the direction that the Government want to go in, or do you think your members will resist that?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Would you support the traffic light system, which clearly identifies for every consumer exactly which bit of plastic can be recycled and which cannot?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Andrew, can your members respond to the challenge with the speed that is needed to achieve these net carbon targets?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
In one way—
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Mr Graham, I am sorry, but I going to take a brief, final question from Ruth Edwards. I have tried to get everybody in. This will be the final question.
Ruth Edwards (Conservative, Rushcliffe)
Q Thank you. I will be very quick. I want to return briefly to the issue of public consultation. How important will that be in determining the type of deposit return scheme that would be delivered by the Bill through the secondary legislation that it will bring in?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Q Mr Poole, I assume the FSB’s members will have an interest in recycling.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Q A final word, Mr Bellamy.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you Mr Curtois, Mr Bellamy and Mr Poole. The Committee is indebted to you. I am afraid that brings us to the end of this morning’s proceedings. The Committee will meet again at 2 pm.
Examination of Witness
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. For the benefit of the record, I shall ask our councillor guest to identify himself in a moment. I am advised that there may be a Division on the Floor of the House. That is probably slightly private information, but I do not see any reason why the public should not know what is going on. If the Division bell rings, it will not mean that an inmate has escaped; it means we will all have to go over the road and vote. There will be injury time; whatever we have to take off for the vote, which will be 15 minutes, we will add back on again.
We have half an hour for this session with the representative of local government. By the way, the other thing I have to mention, in case anybody is concerned, is that we have endeavoured to let some daylight into the room by opening the blinds. Apparently, that interferes with the broadcasting quality, so if I have ruined the picture it is entirely my fault. We felt we were enough like mushrooms as it was without having complete darkness in here.
Without further ado, the Local Government Association. Councillor Glanville, would you like to introduce yourself and explain, for the benefit of the record, what you represent, please?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
We are most grateful to you for coming in.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Good afternoon, Mr Mayor. What consultations on the Bill have taken place while you have been a representative on the Local Government Association committee that has been dealing with Bill? Where have been the main disagreements with regard to local government interestsQ 48?
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q That is very clear, certainly in terms of the ability of local government to deliver on the challenges set by the Bill. Are there particular areas that relate to the powers that local government has at the moment to do things that may be within, or possibly outside, some of the particular asks that the Bill will put on local government? Are there areas where local government may not have powers at the moment, for example on planning, in terms of biodiversity gain, and so on, and where further work will be needed should such aspirations be placed on local government as a result of the Bill?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
I will come back to you if I can, Dr Whitehead.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Thank you very much for attending—it is much appreciated. The Government are committed to funding all new burdens on local authorities through the Bill, so I want to get your view quickly on that. I would also be interested to know, in the light of that, what opportunities the Bill offers local authorities, perhaps particularly referencing the fact that lots of local authorities have committed to their own climate and environmental standards, and to tackling the climate crisis. How do you think it might help you to deliver those?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q So this is very much what is termed a framework Bill. I get the impression that the local authorities would welcome more public consultation and engagement to get this right for you and for the businesses that we heard from this morning.
Jessica Morden (Labour, Newport East)
Can I ask two things? The Minister said that all new burdens would be met. What is the figure that you said initially that local government would need to do the work set outQ in the Bill?
Jessica Morden (Labour, Newport East)
Q Waste crime is obviously a big problem, with organised criminals dumping vast amounts of waste. What powers, duties and resources does local government already have, and what does it need? Does the Bill address that issue adequately?
Robbie Moore (Conservative, Keighley)
Many local authorities have declared climate emergencies. How will the Bill help local authorities to address those self-declared climate emergencies?Q
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
First, I am particularly concerned with the new duty in clause 54 that local authorities are going to have to collect food waste every week. Most local authorities now have bi-weekly collections. Many do not collect food waste at all, so that would be a big investment in vehicles and staffing and then in anaerobic digestion facilities. You said that there is a £700 million gap for recycling. Is that inclusive of food waste or is another figure needed for local authorities to be able to fund the food waste duty that the Bill puts on them?Q
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Q I have a second question on air quality. The Mayor of London has committed to reach World Health Organisation standards by 2030. The Bill fails to set legally binding targets. What steps should local and national Government take to meet that ambition to meet WHO air quality limits by 2030? Do you think the Bill could be amended to make that happen?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Four people still want ask questions and we have fewer than eight minutes in which to do that, so short questions and short answers, please.
Saqib Bhatti (Conservative, Meriden)
You spoke about the Bill being ambitious, and legislation such as this should be ambitious. You talked about opportunities. Local councils up and down the country are doing Q things to be environmentally friendly. How does the Bill enhance the current activity? Are you looking at things such as procurement to assist in that?
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
Clauses 95 to 98 seek to create local nature recovery strategies across England. How will that help local authorities provide a more effective and joined-up nationwide strategy for nature recovery? We heard evidence earlier from Veolia, which has a number of refuse and recycling centres in your patchQ .
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
It was were talking about how it would like a more joined-up approach with the council and, along with others on the panel, about how businesses need more support to be able to deliver their recycling and waste strategies.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
I fear this is likely to be the last question.
Cherilyn Mackrory (Conservative, Truro and Falmouth)
IQ will make it quick. Putting aside the specific issue of funding, which I believe has already been addressed this afternoon, can you tell me what else is important to ensure that local authorities can effectively deliver this Bill?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you, Mayor Glanville. Rather than chop you off mid-flow, I will terminate this session now. You are probably aware that the Committee has authorised the receipt of written submissions, so if there is anything that occurs to you that you wish us to have on behalf of your association then please put it in writing and let us have it.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you for joining us this afternoon. Please could we now change over as swiftly as possible as I will try to start the next session at 2.30 pm, when it is supposed to begin.
Examination of Witnesses
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We are now going to take evidence from Natural England, the Wildlife Trusts, the Country Land and Business Association and the National Farmers Union. We have one hour, I am afraid—and that is all—to accommodate what I am sure will be a very great deal of interesting information. Without further ado, Dr Mitchell, please identify yourself and give us a flavour of what the organisation you represent does, for the benefit of the record.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Before we go any further, for some reason, we have a problem with these microphones. Please project if you can, and if we can crank up the sound, that would be helpful as well. Mr Law, please.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Dr Young, by a process of elimination, you are—
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you very much. I should have said this at the beginning and I will say it now: if any Members and, indeed, any guests for that matter—it seems to be a bit fetid in here—wish to take their jackets off, you are welcome to do so.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q A particular issue that concerns all of you in different ways is the nature recovery network, and it is the Bill’s intention to lay the foundation for that. Do you think that local nature recovery strategies actually do provide that mechanism to secure nature’s recovery on the land?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you. It will not be necessary for every member of the panel to answer every question, but to set the stage and for ease of reference, I will on this occasion simply work from, in my case, right to left—in your case, left to right. Ms Hammond, please.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Thank you for coming in. I want to go back to the local nature recovery network strategies and how they link to national strategies. Clause 98(5)(b) includes a very specific reference, that the local nature recovery strategies
“could contribute to the establishment of a network of areas across England for the recovery…of biodiversity”.
That is newly added since the previous Bill, in response to engagement with stakeholders. I want to know, first, whether you welcome that and what you think about it and, secondly, going on a bit, your view of the overall measures in the Bill in driving us towards this nature recovery environmental improvement.
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Q I just have one question. I think there is general consensus that we do not want a lower standard of environmental protection after the end of the end of the transition and the implementation of the Bill. Do you feel that the Bill replicates our current level of environmental protection—the level as it was when we were a member of the EU—or will it deliver a lower level of environmental protection?
Ruth Edwards (Conservative, Rushcliffe)
My question is particularly directed at Dr Young and Mr Law. Do you believe that 10% is the correct level of improvementQ for the biodiversity net gain targets?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
You are saying that 10% is the minimum but also the maximum.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Any advance on 10%, Dr Young?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
I want to come on to the thorny issue of conservation covenants and potential abstraction compensation. May I start with one question to Mr LawQ of Natural England? From your point of view, what could conservation covenants deliver on the ground? If you could be as concise as possible, that would be great.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q You clearly see it as a positive. Can you give us one example of what could be delivered? Bring it alive for anybody watching this great programme.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q That is not quite a specific example, but it gives us some structural ideas. Ms Hammond, you welcomed the idea; you are in favour of it. Can you give us an idea of how your members would benefit from conservation covenants?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q And access to an enhanced environment for members of the public, as well.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Thank you. Dr Mitchell—
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Just a moment, before we move forward, you are quite entitled to ask specific questions of specific people, but does anybody else want to comment on the issues that have been raised so far? Yes, Dr Young.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Right, Mr Graham, if you would like to carry on.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Dr Mitchell, in your written evidence you expressed, as did Ms Hammond, considerable concern about the powers to amend or revoke licences for the abstraction of water. As I read it, the changes recommended in clause 80 are all about where the modification is to protect the environment. For example, you might have a member who owns land high up in the Welsh hills, and it may be thought helpful for people living in Shropshire, Worcestershire and Gloucestershire to have a catchment area or enlarged reservoir for water, to avoid people being flooded downstream. In that situation, is it right that your members should be compensated?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q It is very specific about the situations. The Bill spells it out clearly:
“No compensation where modification to protect environment”.
It then goes on to specific issues and I gave you an example of one. Surely, in the situation I gave you, it would be wrong to expect the taxpayer to compensate the farmer?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q So it is a general concern rather than a specific issue.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Is that the same for Ms Hammond?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Okay, point understood.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Q Are there any wildlife implications, Dr Young?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
That is fine. I just want to make sure you are not missing out on something.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q I understand, but that is a hypothetical risk. You have not given a specific example of one, although I gave you a specific example where I think the public interest would be at stake.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
It is a significant issue, but we are going to have to move on.
Jessica Morden (Labour, Newport East)
Q The Bill loads lots more powers and responsibilities on bodies such as Natural England. Given the big cuts you have faced, how much more do you anticipate you would need to take on the new responsibilities?
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Dr Young, what role could local nature recovery strategies play in targeting funding under the environmental land management scheme? How could those two things interactQ ?
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Otherwise it would be apples and oranges.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Q Dr Mitchell, do you want to say something on farms operating under different regimes?
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q On this point, let us think about food production. Without making the point too bluntly, I think everybody is thinking a lot more about food production now than they were six months ago, and that is a good thing. On food production—you mentioned this earlier—what difficulties are there, or what questions are still open, around farmers producing food, the environmental land management scheme and the local nature recovery strategies? From the CLA’s perspective, how do you think of that network of things? It is quite complicated, and I want to get a sense of how you see all those things, particularly in relation to food production.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Q Ms Hammond, you are nodding. Before we move on, do you want to comment?
Deidre Brock (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh North and Leith)
In your view, is there sufficient clarity in the Bill regarding the OEP and its role, particularly its relationship with environmental governance bodies, including Natural England, the Environment Agency, the Committee on Climate Change and so on? If you do not think there is sufficient clarity, what would you suggest might be included to make that happenQ ?
Deidre Brock (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh North and Leith)
Q Given the experiences of Natural England and, so far, little detail around the setting up of the OEP and its funding—I know there is a commitment to multi-year funding, and so on, but little real meat to flesh it out—are there safeguards is the Bill to ensure that the funding will be protected?
Marco Longhi (Conservative, Dudley North)
My question is for Dr Mitchell. To clarify a point you raised earlier around covenants, as I understand it, the Bill suggests that these are voluntary. That for me is the key point. You raised a concern about farmers inadvertently signing up. Do you have any further thoughts about that? I assume that they will be advised by the legal profession about what they will be taking up in that respect.Q
Robbie Moore (Conservative, Keighley)
Q I want to return to nature recovery strategies to clarify a point that was made earlier. Do you agree that nature recovery strategies are only part of the picture when it comes to ensuring biodiversity recovery? For example, biodiversity net gain, tree-planting measures and so on will all be key. It was mentioned earlier that clause 98 contains the word “could”. Do you agree that it is appropriate to use “could” rather than “should” because this is part of a wider range of measures to reach the end goal?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
We are expecting a Division in about two minutes.
Saqib Bhatti (Conservative, Meriden)
Q I will try to be quick. We started the discussion by talking about more clarity on local nature recovery strategies. As the discussion has evolved, it has become clear how complex these things are. My challenge is that the Bill is not the place to have further clarity; it is in the secondary legislation where you will have public consultation and contributions from experts.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Order. Ladies and gentlemen, you will have noticed that there is a Division in the House. Because we are within two minutes of the end of this session, I invite witnesses to submit any written evidence that you may feel you have not aired. Thank you for your attendance. We will resume after the vote, with injury time added.
Examination of Witness
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
I apologise for the delay, which was due to Divisions in the House. I am afraid there may be a Division on Third Reading as well, but we will cross that bridge when we come to it. Good afternoon, Mr Wojtulewicz. For the benefit of the record, please identify yourself and the organisation that you represent.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you very much. I apologise again for keeping you waiting.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q Good afternoon. Before our break, we were talking about local nature recovery strategies. There is obviously a requirement in the Bill to have regard to such strategies in planning, but not a duty to use them. Do you feel that that is likely to translate into clear requirements on developers, or might there need to be some clarification in the Bill about how that might proceed?
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q In the context of recovery strategies, one suggestion is that permissions for, say, residential building could require a target of a specified percentage of canopy cover on developments. As a number of people have said, it is significant that the section in the Bill on trees deals with cutting them down but is silent on planting them. Do you think that a target for a specified percentage of canopy cover on developments might be welcome among builders if it could be incorporated into plans in a clear way?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Welcome. Thank you very much for coming. I know that many house builders have already done some really excellent work on biodiversity and net gain, voluntarily, off their own bat. What is your view about mandating it to get environmental improvement? Do you think the 10% specified in the Bill is the right level?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q The Bill is a framework Bill, so the 10% is signalling that this is the direction of travel. I just want to hear you say whether you are pleased about that. Is there a good direction of travel? All the nitty-gritty about exactly what you are asking will be set in the regulations and secondary legislation, and I hope you will put into that. I have met lots of house builders, and my impression is that they welcome this because it signals a paradigm shift in the way our development will go.
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
Q Currently, the Bill is not explicit enough about irreplaceable habitats. There is some concern about unique habitats, which can be paved over, as long as developers can show net gain overall. How well founded are those concerns?
Saqib Bhatti (Conservative, Meriden)
Q Following on from the Minister’s question, I would like a bit more clarity. I understand that the biodiversity net gain concept is being embraced, and you welcome that. It is a minimum of 10%, so there is potential, if a developer wants to go higher than 10%, that they can do that. As a federation, you are not against that; you are embracing that. Am I clear about that?
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Q The Bill creates space, as you said, for local nature recovery strategies, which can be used in both the planning and development phases. During those phases, who will have responsibility for ensuring that those strategies are being followed?
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Q And you are not finding it in the Bill as yet?
Cherilyn Mackrory (Conservative, Truro and Falmouth)
Q On that point about the importance of clarity, as an ex-councillor myself I understand the differences between local authorities when it comes to the planning process, although there are guidelines, such as the national planning policy framework and so on, that they can refer to. This is a framework Bill, as the Minister has already said, and it shows the direction of travel. One important point is the consistency that will be established between local authorities, and the mandatory net gain. Will that be helpful for developers? Can you outline the opportunities that you think your sector can gain from that direction of travel?
Cherilyn Mackrory (Conservative, Truro and Falmouth)
Q Does that mean that there is an opportunity there for the sector to up its game a little bit in how it demonstrates, particularly to people at a parish council level, how they can enhance the natural environment? I am thinking particularly of more rural areas, where you have developments going up on the edge of a village. That can be very contentious, as I am sure you are aware, but if developers were given the opportunity to say, “Because of this legislation, we are now going to do this,” do you think that would potentially help those relationships?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Mr Wojtulewicz—if I have pronounced your name correctly.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Thank you for joining this session. For all of us, housing and planning is such a massive constituency interest and concern. My experience of the past 10 years as MP is that, time and time again, developers appear to have been behind the curve. When you look at the provision of broadband, so often houses were built without it. When we look at solar panels, the same thing. Electric charging, the same thing again.
There are outstanding exceptions to that. For example, a housing association called Rooftop based in Evesham has done some things in my constituency that are largely social and affordable housing that have solar panels and electric charging points. However, it is not always the norm and the Bill seems to me to open the way for house builders and developers to think proactively about what sort of contribution they can make to a net zero carbon future. How do you think this Bill might help house builders and developers adopt that approach and come up with creative ideas that deliver the homes we want while boosting the goals of this Bill to protect and improve the environment?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Just to be clear, that does risk sounding a bit like “Well, we’re not going to do that sort of thing because it all costs us a little bit of money and our profits will be reduced slightly.” Looking at the salary of Persimmon’s chief executive, one wonders whether all of that story is necessarily accurate. Don’t you think there is a case for house builders to get ahead of the curve and do things that everybody wants to see and people expect in their houses now, and if they have got it already, their houses would be more popular and sell for more money?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q That is a separate issue, isn’t it?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q What we are talking about is retrofitting on developments that were not ready.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q I am encouraging you, Mr Wojtulewicz, to look at the positive opportunities for your members and for you to identify what they are, rather than complaining about the additional cost that might be involved.
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q Do you want to have one last go very briefly at identifying what opportunities you see from the clarity of the Environment Bill on house building or carry on with a series of negative comments?
Richard Graham (Conservative, Gloucester)
Q We will interpret that as meaning that your members are ready to play their part.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q On a slightly different topic, the question of building waste wood in the waste stream has been a live issue for quite a while, and the extent to which legislation should be introduced to ban waste wood from the waste stream—that is, other things need to be done to it higher up the waste hierarchy. That issue particularly involves wood that has been used in building. Very often builders just put their wood in waste streams when they have finished building the property or properties. Do you have a view on that? Do you think legislation is required, possibly in this Bill, to ensure that that wood does not go into the waste stream and is used higher up the hierarchy or are there things the building industry could do to make sure it does not happen?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
To go back to the 10% target, I thought you were being quite enthusiastic about quite a lot that could be done from the house builders’ side of things. As parliamentary species champion for the swift, I was glad that you mentioned swift boxes, which are great, but there has been a 57% decline in swift breeding pairs since 1995, according to the RSPB. That is just one example, but if you look at biodiversity loss across the board, some people would argue that 10% is only really keeping things at a standstill. Do you feel that if you were pushed to do more, you would be able to respond and try to meet a higher target? If a 20% target was in the Bill, what would be needed from your point of view to enable you to help with thatQ ?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
I think Brighton and Hove has just done it, and Exeter. I am working on Bristol.
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q On the skills side, it is one thing for a developer to bring in an ecologist or someone to advise on these measures at the smaller scale of things. To what extent is any of this taught at construction college? Should it be? Should we teach builders about biodiversity and things that grow, instead of just teaching them about bricks and mortar?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
We will have one final, brief question from Saqib Bhatti.
Saqib Bhatti (Conservative, Meriden)
Q Building on whether it is 10% or 20%, the fact of the matter is that, whether for the house-building industry or other industry, the tier 1 suppliers and operators lead innovation and set the standards that trickle down through the industry. Certainly, if a single small business of constructors achieves a net biodiversity gain of 10%, that will not trickle up immediately. It will take time. Is it not better to have a minimum of 10%, letting those who want to do more to do so and letting the skills from tier 1 guys, like Barratt Homes, who have been doing this, trickle through and become the industry standard?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Mr Wojtulewicz, thank you very much indeed for enlightening us with the information you have given the Committee, to enhance our understanding. Thank you also for your patience in staying with us during the Divisions. We are most grateful to you. Can we now have a swift change of team, please, for the final session of the afternoon?
Examination of Witnesses
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Good afternoon, ladies. I apologise for starting half an hour late, from your perspective, but we will finish at 5.30 pm on the dot. For the record, may I ask you to identify yourselves and the organisation for which you work, and its purpose?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you all very much indeed for joining us.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q I know that there has been a considerable amount of discussion among environmental and green groups about how the Office for Environmental Protection will work within the Bill, and to what extent it will be sufficiently independent to carry out the function that is widely regarded as the function that it should carry out on environmental protection overall. How do you think the OEP could be strengthened in the Bill, and do you think that the Bill has it right regarding the teeth that the OEP will need to hold the Government and public authorities to account?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
It is not necessary for every member of the panel to answer every question, but in answer to this first question it may be helpful for you to set your stall out a bit as well.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q Following on from that, the OEP is substantially seen as the guarantor, as it were, that the standards of environmental protection that existed when the UK was a member of the EU will not only be continued but will be enhanced. Do your concerns about the OEP’s independence and other such matters relate to ensuring that we have that proper standard of environmental protection following the UK leaving the EU? Or do you have other concerns about the question of regression or otherwise in terms of environmental law, as we are now on our own in environmental law rather than substantially under the carapace of EU directives?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Before we proceed, Ms Chambers, you indicated that we would not talk about a particular clause today. In so far as we have the time you are entirely within your rights to comment on anything that is relevant.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Welcome, everyone, and thank you for coming. I just wanted to get some clarification, because there seems to be a view that in leaving Europe we are going to have lower environmental standards, but the whole point of this Bill and, indeed, the OEP is that it will enable us to have higher standards. First, we will roll over all the environmental law; we will then create our own measures, and it is quite clear to me that the Bill enables us to do so. At EU level, the Commission can issue judgments on a breach of law, but they are not legally binding on member states. Do you not think that the court order remedy in this Bill would be stronger than that?
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q But it can ultimately issue fines if it so desires, and before that, the OEP will try to remedy any problems through discussion, advice, analysis and scrutiny. It will only go to the upper tribunal if it really needs those extra teeth, and that opportunity is there.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q But as I hope I made clear, that is the last step; remedy is the first step of the OEP. I hope it is very clear now that we have left the EU, and as a sovereign nation we will be responsible for setting our own environmental laws. It is then the role of Parliament to scrutinise those laws.
That leads me on to the whole issue of the targets, and what we will be scrutinising in order to improve the environment, which is the focus of the Bill. We have a triple lock within the system, and I just wanted your views on how you think that will work. We call it a triple lock because we have five-yearly improvement plans; we have annual reporting on how those five-yearly plans are going to get to the long-term targets; and we have the Office for Environmental Protection analysing all of that to drive environmental improvement. We think that is very strong, so I wondered what your views on that were.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q To get our SSSIs, the 75% in good and favourable condition, is in our 25-year environment plan. The first phase of the Bill is the 25-year environment plan. It is called the environmental improvement plan. That is what I call the second side of the Bill. It is in the Bill. This actually provides all the levers and all the tools to do exactly what I think you all want us to do.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q But targets will be the legal force; the setting of the targets is the legal duty.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q But wouldn’t you agree, on the environment, it is an ever-changing, flexible scene? That is why we have interim targets.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you. The Minister invited you to set out your concerns, and you have done so very lucidly, if I may say so. We cannot engage too long, however, in a bilateral discussion.
Deidre Brock (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh North and Leith)
Q I would like to direct this to Ruth Chambers. In your submission to the Committee, Greener UK points out that the requirement to have due regard to the environmental principles policy statement does not apply to decision making but is also subject to wide-ranging exemptions. I am speaking specifically of those mentioned in clause 18 regarding the Ministry of Defence and HM Treasury. It specifies
“the armed forces, defence or national security”
and
“taxation, spending or the allocation of resources within government”.
Could you elaborate a little more on your concerns regarding that? Perhaps Ms Newsom and Ms Plummer would have something to add.
Robbie Moore (Conservative, Keighley)
Q I want to turn the conversation back to the OEP. Can you explain why the Committee on Climate Change and the Equality and Human Rights Commission have similar independence, if not slightly weaker, to the OEP? Have those bodies not clearly shown that the independence of the OEP set out in the Bill is credible?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q Could I ask about the global footprint issues? As you may have noticed, I have tabled a couple of amendments: 76 and 77. There are two aspects to this. One is our consumption—the consumption of commodities, how they are produced overseas and the fact that we are contributing to climate change, environmental degradation and deforestation as a result. The other side of the coin is that we are financing, British companies are financing or UK Export Finance is financing quite a lot of this work as well. Do you think that there is a case for going global in terms of this Bill? I am trying not to ask too leading questions, but my view would be that there is not much point in putting your own house in order at home and talking about planting trees here if the Amazon is being razed to the ground because of British consumption or British financing. I think that Greenpeace put something about this in its note to the Committee.
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q I want to ask our visitors about regulatory complexity when it comes to environmental regulation. I do not know how many bodies there are, including Natural England and this new OEP. I would like you to describe how you feel it works. Do you think we need fewer? Do you think the OEP can help bring together some of this work? I am interested in your views on that.
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q That makes sense to me, but do you not fear, as a lot of businesses, landowners and farmers do, that there are so many different types of environmental regulator that it is difficult to keep up? It creates its own inefficiencies. Might it be easier if we had a more simplified structure? That does not mean you regulate more or less; it means you regulate more simply. Is that something you think would benefit the environmental outcomes? It is my contention that it would, because it would be clearer and easier for everybody, from Government to individuals, to follow what needs to happen.
Bim Afolami (Conservative, Hitchin and Harpenden)
Q You have anticipated my next question on the UK. Do you think it would be simpler, from a regulatory perspective, and more effective, if the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland devolved Governments worked with the Office for Environmental Protection that we are setting up, rather than setting up duplicate versions of their own?
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
Q I want to go back to the brief conversation about the interim and long-term environmental targets, which you touched on, Rebecca. As you know, provisions on that will be in the Bill. Do you think the clauses give a sufficiently clear direction of travel on the sort of targets that will be set?
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
Q I am putting you on the spot here, and the Bill is quite broad, but are there any specific, target-related things that you want to see in it?
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
Thanks. Rebecca?
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
That is really helpful.
Abena Oppong-Asare (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead)
That is very helpful; thank you.
Alex Sobel (Labour/Co-operative, Leeds North West)
Q I have just one question—I know we have had a long sitting, because of the vote. The clauses on environmental principles have been widely criticised for being creatures of policy, with many carve-outs and exclusions. Do you agree with those criticisms, and if so, what would your recommendations be to improve the Bill and ensure that we do not have carve-outs and exclusions?
Robbie Moore (Conservative, Keighley)
Q How important do you think it is that businesses are brought on board throughout the process in relation to meeting the global footprint target and in relation to the due diligence requirement?
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q Turning to another part of the Bill, as you know there is a section concerning single-use plastics and proposals to raise a tax on them to discourage their use. Is the emphasis on plastics in single use the right way round in the Bill? Should we perhaps think about single use, which might include plastics, and legislate for that? What are your thoughts on that? Are there ways to legislate to take that view into account?
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q I will try not to take too long; I know that people want to get home. One part of the plastics concern in the Bill is about transfrontier exports. As a result of the powers that could be in the Bill, it is suggested that restrictions could be placed on the export of plastics to non-OECD countries, but there are potential problems even within OECD countries as far as receiving exports of plastics is concerned. One view is that we might resolve the issue simply by setting a date for the banning of plastic exports, provided we have the resources and plant to recycle and reprocess plastics within the UK. Do you have a view on that? If so, what date do you think that a ban might properly be introduced, taking into account what we would need to do in the meantime to accommodate that ban within the UK?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Ms Newsom? You are nodding.
Alan Whitehead (Labour, Southampton, Test)
Q So you might favour something in the legislation that requires attention to the waste hierarchy, for example, in terms of the passages on waste and resources.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
I need to bring the Minister back in. Ms McCarthy, do you want to come in briefly?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
We are having a sitting on Thursday, when we may be looking at things such as the waste hierarchy, so I can probably save my question for that. It was mentioned earlier today that, because there is already technically a waste hierarchy that is enforceable in law, we do not need anything here. I would like to return to that, but I think we can do it at the Thursday sitting. I am flagging it up now in case Thursday’s witnesses are listening.
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Final questions or statements from the Minister.
Rebecca Pow (Conservative, Taunton Deane)
Q Thank you all for your input. I know that all your organisations have engaged previously, and it is invaluable. We have had a lot of talk today about targets. I partly get the impression that you think we should have much stricter, tighter and more defined targets set in the Bill. We will set legally binding targets in the four areas specified as well as the PM2.5. Do you feel that the intention is that we fully engage further with NGOs, the public and experts to set these targets as we go through, and potentially learn lessons from other areas where targets have been set but have not worked very well? What is your view on that, in order to help us get the right targets? Do you think that is the right way to do it?
Roger Gale (Conservative, North Thanet)
Thank you very much indeed. I think that brings the proceedings fairly neatly to a conclusion. As I have said to everybody else and will say to you, earlier this morning the Committee passed a resolution agreeing to accept written submissions. If there is anything that you feel you missed out or wish you had said, please put it in writing and let the Committee have it, and it will be taken into account.
Ms Chambers, Ms Newsom and Ms Plummer, thank you very much indeed, both for your patience and for the information you have given to the Committee. We are all grateful to you, and look forward to a successful resolution.