All 1 Debates between Marco Longhi and Abena Oppong-Asare

Thu 12th Mar 2020
Environment Bill (Fourth sitting)
Public Bill Committees

Committee stage: 4th sitting & Committee Debate: 4th sitting: House of Commons

Environment Bill (Fourth sitting)

Debate between Marco Longhi and Abena Oppong-Asare
Committee stage & Committee Debate: 4th sitting: House of Commons
Thursday 12th March 2020

(4 years, 8 months ago)

Public Bill Committees
Read Full debate Environment Act 2021 View all Environment Act 2021 Debates Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: Public Bill Committee Amendments as at 12 March 2020 - (12 Mar 2020)
Abena Oppong-Asare Portrait Abena Oppong-Asare
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Q George, do you have any comments on that?

George Monbiot: No, I will leave the space for—[Laughter.]

Marco Longhi Portrait Marco Longhi (Dudley North) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Q Building on what you said a few moments ago, do you feel that the Bill sufficiently empowers all Government Departments to protect and improve our environment?

Dr Benwell: “Empowers”, possibly; “requires”, not quite yet. We are hoping that the environmental improvement plan will be cross-departmental, and that it will contain specific actions that are demonstrably capable of reaching a target, just as we do with carbon budgets. That environmental improvement plan should set interim targets that are binding, and it should say, “These are the steps we are going to take to get there in the Department for Transport, in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.” That will give us the confidence that stuff is going to happen, rather than waiting 14 years and then realising we are going to miss it.

George Monbiot: To add one small and specific thing to that, clause 86 contains what appears to be a very heavy reliance on internal drainage boards and a potential enhancement of their powers. Those drainage boards are not accountable to any Government Department, so there is a remarkable democratic deficit there. If you go ahead with clause 86 in its current form, you are effectively letting go of governmental control over a very important and large area. They are a quite extraordinary, almost feudal set of organisations; for instance, there is a property qualification for voting in internal drainage board elections. They really are effectively a law unto themselves, with appalling environmental credentials and very poor flood prevention credentials as well. If you want departmental responsibility, I would disband the internal drainage boards—as they have done in Wales—and bring their duties into the Environment Agency or another statutory agency.