Michael Gove committed to protecting the environment after Brexit - but the government have torpedoed plans that would ensure that.

A majority of 24 MPs was all it took to vote down Lord Kreb’s amendment that would have made the government keep EU environmental principles – and establish an independent way of enforcing those standards after Brexit.

Instead, the government backed a counter-amendment promising its own version of legislation on environmental principles, and a new green watchdog. This might sound similar, but in fact offers us far less than the protections we currently enjoy.

In the seven months since Michael Gove made the commitment to come up with ‘world-leading’ environmental proposals, worryingly little has happened to make his promise a reality.

Following reports of wrangling between DEFRA and other departments, it took until May for an ‘environmental principles and governance’ consultation to be launched – and immediately condemned as a dishearteningly weak vision for future protection.

Lord Krebs’ proposal, on the other hand, neatly set out a clear route for the government to guarantee delivery on its promise of a strong watchdog and the incorporation of environmental principles into UK law.

It is worrying that MPs rejected the amendment and that the government has batted this weaker commitment back to the Lords. As it stands, the Bill:

• Fails to guarantee our ‘world-leading watchdog’ will be independent of  government – suggesting we could end up with a lapdog instead
• Waters down the duty for public authorities to ‘apply’ environmental principles, to a plaintive request that ministers ‘have regard’ to our environment – what would that mean in reality?

While some will be reassured by 11^th hour prime ministerial promises to would-be rebels that Mr Gove’s vision won’t waste away entirely, it’s hard to see how government can deliver on his ambitions.

In fact, the very existence of the Minister’s welcome promise of action to protect and restore our environment has been repeatedly cited as a reason not to lock in EU protections after Brexit. Because if we have a promise, what need do we have of a reality?

But, the reality of environmental protection is what we currently enjoy – and it is not guaranteed by the current Withdrawal Bill.

The difference between what we have, and what we may get – threatened habitats, lower standards, and an erosion of principles like that of the “polluter pays” (which does exactly what it says on the tin) – means it’s important that we get that robust watchdog in place.

What’s an effective watchdog? One with the ability to act independently, take the government to court, and apply fines. And it must be backed by clear principles of environmental protection that apply across public bodies at all levels.

Currently, it looks a bit like ministers don’t want to be held to account on laws that we currently operate under. These are basic protections for our beaches, habitats and the air we breathe.

Again, we look to the Lords to fix the problems and urgently strengthen this amendment. Given the sensible suggestions agreed previously, we were glad to hear Lord Krebs has found the time and patience to spell out again to ministers how to turn promises into action.

His new proposal suggests some clear ways to beef up these weak plans. We can only hope that this time, government listen.

All we’re talking about is maintaining the rights and protections we already have. But the continued focus on visions of future greatness may obscure the fact that concrete commitments are lacking.

No-one wins if ‘green brexit’ turns out to be a mirage. Right now, the closer we get to the vision on the horizon, the more it flickers. And unless these changes become a reality, we‘ll still be in the middle of a desert with only a mirage for comfort.

Kierra Box is Brexit campaign lead for Friends of the Earth.

Comments are closed.