Petitions

Monday 7th October 2024

(1 week, 2 days ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Monday 7 October 2024

Protection of the Amazon rainforest

Monday 7th October 2024

(1 week, 2 days ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The petition of the residents of the United Kingdom,
Declares that the Amazon is the world’s largest rainforest and makes up half of the planet’s remaining tropical forests, home to about three million species of plants and animals and 1.6 million indigenous people; further notes that the forest is the world’s largest natural carbon sinks, absorbing and storing an amount of carbon equivalent to 15 to 20 years of global CO2 emissions from the atmosphere; and further declares continued deforestation of the Amazon is contributing to the forest’s inability to recover from droughts, fires and landslides.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to encourage the Brazilian Government to protect forest land and end large-scale deforestation, to prevent nearly half of the Amazon rainforest from collapsing and that these irreversible consequences for the Amazon and the planet are avoided.
And the petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Martyn Day, Official Report, 30 April 2024; Vol. 749, c. 230.]
[P002964]
Observations from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Kerry McCarthy):
The Government believe we need urgent action to protect and restore forests globally. Forests are essential for the lives and livelihoods of over 1 billion people worldwide, including many indigenous peoples and local communities. Globally, forests harbour 80% of our terrestrial biodiversity and, when sustainably managed, can deliver a significant portion of what is needed to keep global heating within a 1.5° pathway, as agreed under the Paris agreement.
The Amazon rainforest plays an unparalleled role in regulating climate locally, regionally and globally, and provides numerous other benefits for biodiversity, and for the lives, livelihoods, health and wellbeing of people across the region and worldwide.
Brazil and Colombia have made important progress in reducing deforestation in recent years, but there is much more to do globally. Commodity-driven deforestation and continued rates of forest loss in the wider Amazon biome pose risks of crossing key “tipping points”, with significant impacts for people, nature, and climate at local and planetary scales.
The UK has played a central role in efforts to improve the stewardship of global forest landscapes, including by helping galvanise partners behind a commitment to halt and reverse forest loss and forest degradation by 2030. Lasting impacts can only be achieved if we work in partnership with forest countries to find solutions that support their needs and those of local communities. As we approach United Nations framework convention on climate change COP30, we are engaging closely with and encouraging partners, including Brazil, to step up our collective efforts towards delivery of the 2030 goal, including by addressing the significant drivers of large-scale deforestation and forest degradation.
Through our international climate finance programming, we are helping partners across some of the world’s most critical forest biomes to deliver locally led visions of sustainable forest stewardship that works for people, while delivering for climate and wider environmental goals.
In August, UK and Brazil Ministers issued a joint statement on international climate co-operation. This reaffirms our shared commitment to deepening collaboration to halt and reverse deforestation and forest degradation by 2030 in the context of sustainable development, as agreed through the first global stocktake at COP28—an assessment of progress made against global warming since the Paris agreement in 2015.

Portishead railway branch line

Monday 7th October 2024

(1 week, 2 days ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The petition of residents of the United Kingdom,
Declares that reopening the Portishead branch line is necessary to reduce traffic on the congested roads between Portishead and Bristol; further that reducing such traffic would lead to lower C02 emissions, thus benefitting the environment and further that this branch line is needed to encourage investment and economic growth in Portishead and the greater Bristol area.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to recognise the considerable work already performed to reopen the Portishead branch line, to recognise public funding already invested in it, and to consider the resource needs of the Portishead branch line when providing funding for transport in this area—[Presented by Sadik Al-Hassan, Official Report, 11 September 2024; Vol. 753, c. 6P.]
[P003009]
Observations from the Minister for Rail (Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill CBE):
I am aware that the reopening of the branch line to Portishead is a long-standing aspiration of local stakeholders and residents, and recognise the benefits that the project could bring to the local community, as well as the wider environmental and economic benefits the petition has outlined. I also recognise and appreciate the work and funding already invested in the project, noting that this includes £13.8 million of Government funding towards the development of a business case and detailed design.
The Chancellor has been clear about the state of the nation's finances, and the Secretary of State for Transport announced in July that she has commissioned an internal review of the Department’s capital portfolio. This will support the development of a long-term strategy for transport that delivers a modern and integrated network with people at its heart.
The Government want to ensure that rail investment meets the needs of rail users and communities alike. Individual schemes will be assessed on their alignment with Government priorities, the strength of their business case, and their affordability.

Proposals for the A21 level crossing at Robertsbridge

Monday 7th October 2024

(1 week, 2 days ago)

Petitions
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
The petition of businesses of Hastings and the wider area of East Sussex south of Robertsbridge,
Declares that suppliers of businesses based south of Robertsbridge utilise the A21 as the main road in and out of Hastings and its environs to deliver raw materials and goods, and in turn businesses use the A21 to deliver our products across the UK and overseas; and further that the building of a level steam crossing on the A21 will have a severe impact on the timeliness and efficiency of the transport of goods in and out of the Hastings area.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to request that the planning permission be withdrawn.
And the petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Helena Dollimore, Official Report, 11 September 2024; Vol. 753, c. 5P.]
[P003008]
Observations from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Lilian Greenwood):
Transport and Works Act orders are granted by the Secretary of State under the Transport and Works Act 1992 and they are the usual way of authorising guided transport schemes including amendments to heritage railways in England and Wales. In the case of the level crossing on the A21, a TWAO application was made by Rother Valley Railway to the Department for Transport for a TWAO in April 2018 to reinstate a section of heritage railway track between Udiam and Robertsbridge which would complete the rail link between Bodiam and Robertsbridge Junction and link the existing sections of track to the main line. This included the introduction of a number of level crossings across the public highway including the A21 at Robertsbridge. An opportunity was provided for anyone to make comments on this application and following receipt of objections the then Secretary of State held a public inquiry into this application in July 2021.
The public inquiry was chaired by an independent planning inspector organised by the Planning Inspectorate and interested parties were given a chance to present their cases to the inspector. Once the inquiry concluded, the inspector provided a recommendation to the Secretary of State on whether to approve the application and proposed modifications on 19 January 2023. Informed by this, a decision was made to approve the TWAO by the Secretary of State on 19 April 2023. A copy of the decision letter and inspector’s report, which included consideration of the level crossing on the A21 can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/bodiam-to-robertsbridge-junction-order-transport-and-works-act-order.
The introduction of a level crossing across the A21 was given extensive consideration during the public inquiry. The inspector considered the proposals put forward for a level crossing over this road and its compliance with the design manual for roads and bridges. This sets out standards, advice notes and other documents relating to the design, assessment and operation of trunk roads, including motorways in the United Kingdom. Specifically, the proposed level crossing falls into a category that required a “departure from standards” application, which was considered independently by National Highways’ safety, engineering and standards division.
As set out at paragraphs 22 to 24 of the decision letter, National Highways, following an extensive review of the “departure from standards” submission made by RVR, formally approved the departure from standards on 2 August 2022. The Secretary of State at the time noted that National Highways’ initial objection to the order scheme dated 31 May 2018 was withdrawn on 4 August 2022 and that it was satisfied that the queues and delays likely to be associated with the operation of the A21 level crossing are unlikely to adversely affect the free flow of traffic on the A21. The inspector concluded that the effect of the proposed level crossing on the free flow of traffic and congestion on the A21 would be acceptable and would not weigh materially against the order scheme which was agreed.
An application under the TWA can be made to the Secretary of State seeking the revocation of an existing TWAO, and the usual rules and procedures applying to an application for a TWAO would apply. Alternatively, a TWAO can be revoked or amended using powers under section 7 of the TWA, for reasons relating to delivery of defence infrastructure, safety or where the order appears to be spent. As the need to revoke the order does not relate to defence infrastructure and it could not be described as spent, our sole power would be if it appears necessary or expedient in the interest of safety, or in consequence of the abandonment or neglect of any works. There is no suggestion of abandonment or neglect of any works. On the issue of safety at level crossings, this was considered extensively through the public inquiry and by the then Secretary of State and is addressed in the decision letter. There is no suggestion that the safety position considered then has changed.