Nature’s Rights Bill [HL]

Baroness Smith of Llanfaes Excerpts

Friday 3rd July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Llanfaes (PC)]

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, for bringing forward this Bill and for her long-standing commitment to environmental protection and climate justice.

I draw the House’s attention to an Early Day Motion tabled in the other place this May, entitled “National Emergency”, sponsored by Members from the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and my own party, Plaid Cymru. It highlighted the escalating risks posed by climate change and nature loss. It noted that one in four properties could be at risk of flooding by 2050, that heatwaves and wildfires are becoming more frequent and severe, and that

“the UK ranks among the lowest globally for biodiversity”.

It further recognised that

“food security, public health, and national security are increasingly threatened by climate-related impacts”.

The Motion called for “emergency legislation” to address the scale and urgency of these challenges. That is why I believe this Bill comes before us at a particularly important time and we must consider it seriously

We often speak of a climate emergency and a nature emergency, yet emergencies require more than declaration. They demand that we seriously consider new approaches and, where necessary, new legal frameworks. Time is not on our side. The systems upon which our society depends are under growing pressure and the consequences of inaction are becoming increasingly clear.

The central principle of this Bill is both simple and profound. Should nature itself be recognised in law as a subject possessing rights, rather than be regarded as property or a resource to be managed? In considering that question, we must be honest about the scale of the crisis that the Bill seeks to address and ask ourselves whether the status quo is delivering the protection that nature, and indeed future generations, require.

The noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, has already referred to examples internationally, including in Ecuador, where recognition of the rights of nature has provided a new legal mechanism for environmental protection, including the successful defence of the Los Cedros forest against mining activity. Whether or not we conclude that that model is directly transferable to these islands, it demonstrates that alternative approaches are possible and worthy of serious consideration. I believe our legal frameworks must continue to evolve if they are to respond effectively to ecological decline. As legislators, we have a responsibility to engage constructively with ideas that seek to protect the natural world, which we all depend on, and which future generations have every right to inherit in a healthy condition.

For me, the Bill poses a fundamental question: if the well-being of future generations depends on clean water, healthy soils, thriving biodiversity, resilient ecosystems, pollinators and a stable climate, should the law continue to treat nature principally as a possession and a resource? Or should it begin to recognise nature as the living foundation upon which long-term societal resilience ultimately rests?

From a Welsh perspective, this question is particularly relevant. Wales has already sought to place future generations at the heart of public policy through the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. That legislation was pioneering in requiring public bodies to consider the long-term consequences of their decisions and the world they leave behind for those who will come after us. It reflects a growing recognition that prosperity, well-being and environmental stewardship cannot be separated from one another.

In many respects, the Bill can be seen as part of that broader evolution in governance. The future generations Act asks us to think about the well-being of future generations; this Bill invites us to consider more explicitly the ecological foundations on which that well-being depends. As this legislation progresses, there will undoubtedly be important questions about how such an approach would interact with existing Welsh legislation and devolved responsibilities. But I do not think that that should be consider a blocker. Those are precisely the kinds of issues that can and should be explored in Committee.

Ultimately, the key question at Second Reading is not whether every clause is perfect, but rather, whether the principle underpinning the Bill is worthy of further examination. In my view, the rights of nature are not in competition with human rights or economic prosperity. Rather, nature is the foundation on which they depend. A degraded natural world cannot support flourishing communities or resilient economies.

There is work still to do, and legitimate questions remain. Those questions should not prevent us examining the Bill further; they should encourage us to do so. Supporting its passage today would be a sign of the recognition that the challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss require us to examine new ideas with an open mind and, where necessary, improve them through scrutiny in Committee. This is what the public, and many young people, are asking for. For that reason, the Bill merits further consideration by this House, and I am pleased to support its progression today.