Debate on the Address

Julie Minns Excerpts

Wednesday 13th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dr Savage]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. We must be telepathic, because my very next paragraph is as follows.

Five days ago, Sir David Attenborough celebrated his 100th birthday, and I am sure that colleagues would like to join me in wishing Sir David the warmest congratulations on his long, wonderful and highly influential life. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] He has spent much of his century on this planet showing us what the natural world looks like, but in the course of that long lifetime the UK has become one of the most nature-depleted countries on earth. I am sure the House has heard these facts before, but I remind Members that we have lost 38 million birds in the past 50 years; wildlife abundance has fallen by a third since 1970; we have lost 93% of our wild flower meadows; and only 15% of our rivers are in good ecological health. I am sure that those statistics cause Sir David great distress and anxiety, yet we continue to treat nature as though it were expendable.

I would like to pick up on some aspects of nature that are particularly worthy of our attention. Rivers are the lifeblood of our natural world, yet too many of them are in an appalling state. I commend the clean water Bill mentioned in the King’s Speech, which is a good start, but it does not address the underlying problem. Water is a vital public good that should not be owned and operated primarily in the interests of shareholders, many of whom are based overseas, extracting returns from an essential service while communities downstream live with the polluted consequences.

It is promising to see reforms coming down the pipeline, so to speak, that would see Ofwat replaced—something the Liberal Democrats have been calling for since 2022. However, my constituents need to see that legislation enforced more rigorously. South Cotswolds is the ninth most polluted constituency in the country, so my constituents want real transparency on what is being discharged and when—not just for how many hours, but in what volumes. They deserve bathing water designation for the sites that they have swum in for generations, and a Government who are willing to ask the deeper question: is the ownership model fit for purpose? The Government have to get upstream of the problem and ask whether profit-making monopolies, focused on short-term gains, can ever serve the long-term greater good of customers and nature.

On energy security, instability in the middle east, gas price volatility and the direct hit on household bills demonstrate why home-grown renewables are the right choice for the climate while also paying a security and peace dividend. However, I would like to see the public brought with us on the transition, not pushed away. In my constituency, a huge solar farm has been proposed that would industrialise thousands of acres of farmland.

I absolutely support renewable energy—I have spent decades campaigning for climate action—but the transition works best when communities have ownership and agency. I would like the Government to address the barriers facing community groups that want to supply local customers directly. Liberal Democrats believe that communities should be able to generate clean energy, sell it to local households and keep the benefits locally.

Food security is national security. To quote again from the Joint Intelligence Committee report:

“Without significant increases in the UK food system and supply chain resilience, it is unlikely the UK would be able to maintain food security if ecosystem collapse drives geopolitical competition for food.”

Let that sink in for a minute. We are talking about the very real prospect of food and water shortages, not just in other countries but right here, if we carry on with the current trajectory.

What is to be done? Farmers are facing a tough time at the moment. Energy costs have risen sharply, fertiliser prices remain volatile, and rural crime is a growing burden. The abrupt cap and closure of the sustainable farming incentive was a decision that pulled the rug out from under farmers who had been planning to enter the scheme, with small-scale family farms being the hardest hit. That matters far beyond the farm gate.

Around 70% of the UK’s land is under the stewardship of farmers. If we want cleaner rivers, healthier soils and more pollinators, then farmers need reliable and well-funded support for environmental stewardship into the future. Disrupting that support harms not just farms but the rest of us. I would like to hear about a good food Bill. Food is essential and we need to secure its future.

The national security assessment is explicit that ecosystem collapse is potentially irreversible; once those habitats are destroyed, they cannot be recreated with an offset calculation on a spreadsheet. Degraded ancient meadows and woodlands, fragmented hedgerows and lost wetlands and peatlands cannot simply be replaced elsewhere. We will pay the cost of their losses for generations.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

I agree with much of what the hon. Lady is saying, but I would like to highlight a little glimmer of hope. Last week I visited RSPB Geltsdale in my constituency, which has successfully rewiggled and restored an ancient landscape—it is wonderful to see it blooming. Does she agree that while it is difficult, it is not impossible to reverse many of the changes to our rural landscapes?

[Dr Savage]

Absolutely. Nature is very resilient; when we leave her alone, or give her a bit of a helping hand by rewiggling rivers, for example, or through rewilding projects, she does come back. We just need to stop pummelling nature from every direction with chemicals, and in the many other ways that we assault the world of nature.

There is a word that the Government’s national security assessment uses repeatedly: cascade. Ecosystem degradation creates cascading risks. Water insecurity leads to food insecurity, which leads to geopolitical instability, which leads to conflict and, yes, even immigration—the risks compound. However, the same logic can be applied in reverse. Investment in nature creates cascading benefits. Healthier rivers mean healthier soils, and healthier soils support pollinators; pollinators, in turn, support food production. Thriving ecosystems buffer communities against flooding and drought. This is not just idealism; it is the conclusion of the Government’s own intelligence analysts.

My asks of this Government are simple: restore proper funding for sustainable farming, bring in a good food Bill, and deliver a right to local supply for community energy. On the international stage, I ask them to implement the long-promised measures under the Environment Act 2021 to remove deforestation-linked products, such as unsustainable palm oil, from our UK supply chains. Britain signed international commitments to halt forest loss by 2030, and those promises now need action; 2030 is just around the corner.

My constituents are not asking for miracles, but they are asking for urgent and radical action to protect nature. They are asking for rivers that are safe to swim in, farmland that can feed us, landscapes that function and communities that are resilient in the face of a more uncertain world, all of which is eminently doable with political will. The cost of inaction will far outweigh the cost of action; nature is the foundation on which our present and future security, prosperity and wellbeing ultimately rest. It would be a fitting gift, on the occasion of Sir David’s 100th birthday, to hear that the Government had found the political will to do what is necessary for our national security, and for the security of future generations.

Ordered, That the debate be now adjourned.—(Deirdre Costigan.)

Debate to be resumed tomorrow.