Draft Marine Licensing (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment etc.) Order 2026
Mary Creagh Excerpts(1 day, 19 hours ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Marine Licensing (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment etc.) Order 2026.
What a pleasure it is to serve under your chairmanship today, Sir John. I am very glad that the rain has managed to hold off so far, so let the summer begin.
The draft order, which was laid before the House on 15 April 2026, is one of the legislative measures being taken to implement the UK’s obligations under the biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction agreement—that is, the agreement under the United Nations convention on the law of the sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction—the fact that I have had such trouble pronouncing it shows why it is always called “BBNJ”. It helps to implement the UK’s obligations in relation to environmental impact assessments for activities carried on in areas beyond national jurisdiction within the remit of marine licensing. The UK must be able to meet all its obligations under the BBNJ agreement before we can ratify it. The draft order enables this by amending the marine licensing regime.
I will begin by underlining why it is so important that the House supports this legislation. The BBNJ is an implementing agreement under the UN convention on the law of the sea which aims to support the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. It is a landmark international agreement that creates a legal framework to protect the two thirds of the ocean that lies beyond any nation’s jurisdiction. These vast waters contain extraordinary biodiversity and ecosystems vital to the health of our planet; they are home to sharks, whales, sea turtles and countless other species, many of which we have not actually discovered yet.
Primary legislation was needed to implement our BBNJ obligations fully. Accordingly, the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Act 2026 was introduced last year and received Royal Assent on 12 February 2026, marking a significant milestone in our journey towards ratification. We are now taking forward the secondary legislation needed for the UK to implement the agreement. The draft order is part of that work, and it needs to be made before the UK can ratify the agreement and participate fully in the first conference of the parties, which we expect to take place in January 2027.
The draft order implements the UK’s obligations under part IV of the agreement, which requires environmental impact assessments for activities taking place in areas beyond national jurisdiction that could have a significant impact on the marine environment. Under the agreement, the UK is required to ensure that the potential environmental impacts of any planned activity in these areas are suitably assessed before a decision is taken to authorise the activity. The draft order makes provision relating to activities carried out in areas beyond national jurisdiction so that environmental impacts can be suitably considered in line with these obligations.
Currently, a small number of activities involving deposits, scuttling and incineration are already licensable in areas beyond national jurisdiction, but only two marine licences for such activities have been issued since 2011. The draft order extends the marine licensing regime to additional activities carried out in areas beyond national jurisdiction. These new activities correspond to the types of activities that are already licensable when carried out in UK waters, such as construction or removal activities. Licensable activities carried out in areas beyond national jurisdiction will include those carried out or controlled by UK persons, as well as activities undertaken from British vessels, aircraft, marine structures or floating containers.
This instrument also makes a number of amendments to the Marine Licensing (Exempted Activities) Order 2011. An exemption is added so that several of the new activities will not require a marine licence where they do not meet the threshold for needing an environmental impact assessment or a screening for an EIA as set out in the BBNJ agreement. The exemption reduces the burden on regulators and industry, while still ensuring that we can meet our BBNJ obligations by enabling the new activities to be assessed first, to determine whether they are lower impact or need a full EIA.
Steve Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con)
What is the maximum fine for a company that does not comply with this regulation?
Mary Creagh
I do not have that figure to hand, but I am sure that the magic of the officials’ box will enable me to give the right hon. Member the figure by the end of the sitting—or perhaps he knows and can enlighten the Committee.
Steve Barclay
My reading last night suggested that it was just £50,000. It is interesting that the Minister does not know what the fine actually is. What does she think the cost of complying with the EIA requirement would be for a company?
Mary Creagh
That would depend on the activity that it was being asked to do. As I said, only two of these licences have actually been allowed under—
Mary Creagh
I am sure that it is expensive. Does the right hon. Member want to tell the Committee what it is?
Steve Barclay
I fear that I may have read the legislation a little more closely than the Minister. Some media reports suggest what compliance with this regulation would involve for a company. We are talking about conducting an environmental impact assessment beyond national jurisdiction and significant further work. The cost of complying with the EIA requirement could run to a couple of million pounds. For me, the question is not the international ambition—of course everyone in the House wants our marine environment to be protected—but why the Minister is today introducing legislation the cost of compliance with which will be 10 or 20 times the cost of the fine for non-compliance.
Mary Creagh
Having been Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the right hon. Member knows the what is involved in monitoring activity in areas beyond our national jurisdiction. What we know is that this regulation will apply to British vessels, British persons and activities that are licensed and under our control. As I said, only two of these licences have been issued in the last 15 years.
We want the areas beyond national jurisdiction to be protected. Those are often areas of deep ocean, where we do not understand and have not mapped the seabed. During my extended sabbatical I went to see some of the marine science work, including marine mapping, going on at the University of Southampton. We want the high seas to be open and accessible to all. These controls are about making sure that, under this new convention, British vessels are not in breach of international agreements. With the right hon. Gentleman’s permission—
The Chair
Order. The right hon. Gentleman has a perfect entitlement to contribute to this debate, so perhaps he should wait until the Minister has concluded and then choose to make an incisive but pithy contribution.
Steve Barclay
I thank the Minister for giving way. I will take your steer, Sir John, and make this my last intervention. The Minister has tempted me to intervene once more, because the exact justification that she gave for the cost of compliance being 10 or 20 times the cost of the fine relied on enforcement, but the reason why there have been only two licences granted in the period she cited is that there is so little enforcement because this is beyond national jurisdiction. The Marine Management Organisation has no vessels in the Pacific. There is no impact assessment with this regulation. How will it be enforced in areas beyond our jurisdiction if there is no impact assessment and no additional funding for that enforcement?
Mary Creagh
I will correct the record. The magic of the officials’ box has informed me that the maximum penalty is an unlimited fine, not a £50,000 fine, and/or a term of imprisonment of up to two years. That is significant, so it certainly would be worth a company’s while undertaking an assessment, depending on the activity that it is trying to do. If it were deep sea mining and things like that, it might be financially worth it, but it is certainly worth the company thinking about it.
Of course, we do not need physical vessels to do enforcement, because we have eyes in the sky via satellite, and we can map these things. The right hon. Member for North East Cambridgeshire knows that we have satellites, because he contracted with Earth system satellites, which can map down to 100 or 200 metres. We do not need ships there; we can send ships where they are needed and take enforcement action.
Before the right hon. Gentleman’s question, I was talking about the activities that will not need a marine licence and about reducing the burdens on regulators. An exemption will be introduced for the removal of specified subsea cables carried out in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The removal of these cables has a low environmental impact and is considered to fall consistently below the BBNJ screening threshold.
Alongside today’s statutory instrument, I would like to highlight the Marine Licensing (Miscellaneous Amendment) (Scotland) Order 2026, which makes corresponding provision for activities within Scottish competence—activities regulated by the Scottish Government under devolved powers. The Scottish instrument adds new licensable activities to the licensing regime under the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 and makes other changes to that regime. That will ensure that the Scottish licensing framework aligns with the United Kingdom’s obligations under the BBNJ agreement. The Scottish order was made in March 2026 and will come into force on the same day that the BBNJ agreement enters into force for the United Kingdom.
To avoid dual regulation, so that a marine licence is not required under both our licensing regime and the Scottish Government’s marine licensing regime for the same activity, this statutory instrument provides for an exemption in relation to certain activities that are regulated under part 4 of the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010. It also makes consequential amendments to ensure that existing exemptions and registration provisions can apply appropriately to activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
The statutory instrument implements the necessary changes to marine licensing to enable the ratification of the BBNJ agreement. We are confident that its provisions will improve environmental protections in areas beyond national jurisdiction while avoiding unnecessary regulatory burden.
The Marine Management Organisation’s enforcement strategy includes a range of tools, from advisory letters to formal enforcement action, applied proportionately, based on risk and available evidence. Conditions can be placed on licences, requiring licence holders to keep records and make returns or to provide information to the MMO. It will develop intelligence gateways in areas beyond national jurisdiction to assess where there may be non-licensed activity taking place and how to address it. As it is intelligence-based, we would not be expected to say what those methods would be. Having just talked about satellites, I am sure that the right hon. Member for North East Cambridgeshire will know that that may be one of the routes.
Mary Creagh
Allow me to take a moment to reflect on the importance of approving this legislation. Without it, the UK would not be a position to ratify the BBNJ agreement. As the hon. Member for Epping Forest said, the “30 by 30” commitment was signed under the previous Government and that is an international undertaking which this Government take very seriously. It is all very well signing agreements—
Mary Creagh
The difference is that we are actually now saying where the money is coming from, how we are going to meet that target, and how we are going to aggregate the land and seas. An undertaking to do something, without having a plan to deliver it, it is not worth the paper it is written on.
Hon. Members will appreciate that future industry activity is difficult to predict in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Our consultation and previous engagement with stakeholders identified some likely activities in such areas, including telecommunications cable activity, marine scientific research, space flight activity, and deep sea mining, but not all such activities will be in the scope of marine licensing.
The right hon. Member for North East Cambridgeshire asked about licence applications and the costs. There have been only two licences granted for an activity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. One was for the Virgin Orbit launch in 2022—I am not sure if he was the Secretary of State at the time; there were so many in those two years that I cannot be expected to remember who was where at that time. It was before his time, was it?
Mary Creagh
The other was for a dye tracer study in 2015. I am not sure what that means, but perhaps they were putting in chemicals to trace something—currents, for example. We might think, “Well, that’s a bit weird,” but if it is about finding where the currents and tides go, and where the winds are blowing, it all feeds into the brilliant science and weather forecasting we are able to do here in this country. We do not anticipate many activities being covered—I know the right hon. Gentleman is concerned about the volume of activities—although the lack of past case studies makes it difficult to determine the volume of activities that might take place in the future.
The hon. Member for Epping Forest is right to raise the issue of the incredibly important marine environment around the Chagos Islands. It is home to 220 coral species—corals are on the frontline of the climate crisis and we are doing some great work, particularly in Cayman Islands, around tackling stony coral disease—855 fish species and 355 mollusc species, so it is incredibly important. However, I am sorry to say that decisions on what is or is not going to happen with the Chagos Islands are not a matter for Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs Ministers, and he is tempting me to stray beyond my brief. So with your permission, Sir John, I will leave it there, and agree it is an important protected area.
Mary Creagh
Thank you, Sir John.
This is a once in a generation step forward in ocean governance, which ensures areas beyond national jurisdiction are managed sustainably, transparently and equitably as part of that biodiversity sharing agreement that the hon. Gentleman mentioned. In the absence of this legislation, we would not have the tools to assess and manage activities and their potential impacts.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I was not going to intervene, but this is such a fascinating debate that I cannot help but bring in the fact that Harlow has a coral farm. We all agree that the order is important legislation. Despite some of the to-ing and fro-ing, there is cross-party support for it, but does the Minister agree that international support is also important? Does she get the sense that other countries across the world are implementing the same legislation?
Mary Creagh
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his ingenuity in shoe-horning in the Harlow coral farm. I am sure that an invitation for the Minister responsible for water and flooding is in the post and a visit is imminent. It genuinely sounds exciting. Of course, coral farms are important for working out which species are climate resilient and will be the coral reefs of the future. Coral is not just nice to look at when scuba-diving and snorkelling on holiday. In February, I managed to go on a snorkelling trip in Egypt with a broken wrist, for which I think I deserve some recognition. They make them tough in Coventry! Was Nemo swimming one-handed?
My hon. Friend asks a good question about the issue of coral and other states’ involvement. At all the international meetings I went to in 2024, which was my first year in post, people looked to the UK for our leadership on these UN conventions, particularly given the lack of leadership and withdrawal by other large players in the United Nations. We have been encouraged and exhorted to do that, but the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office leads on treaties, so the actual treaty could not be DEFRA legislation. We found a spot to bring in the treaty in our second year, but I am sure it will receive great acclaim. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), is soon to attend a conference in Kenya at which this SI and the further movement towards ratification will be warmly welcomed. There is also a Commonwealth summit to look at the ocean, as so much of our Commonwealth is affected and is marine facing or marine vulnerable.
The statutory instrument aims to strike the right balance, providing safeguards to protect the marine environment and meet BBNJ requirements, while avoiding disproportionate or unnecessary regulation. I am sure that hon. Members appreciate the importance of the marine environment and the need for effective and appropriate regulation of activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
Dr Hudson
I know that the Minister is winding up, and that she has spoken about Ministers going to summits and collaboration, but she spoke about the importance of implementation. I asked specifically about what the Government will do to liaise with key stakeholders in the area, such as the cable sector, marine scientists, merchant navies and so on. The UK has a global footprint, so it is important that this Government take the baton that the Conservatives passed to them and work closely with stakeholders. Can she reassure the Committee that the Government will work closely with stakeholders on the frontline?
Mary Creagh
Absolutely. I recognise that there are concerns about specified cable activity remaining exempt from regulation, but that is based on evidence provided in our consultation responses and discussions with other Government Departments, including the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. I reassure hon. Members that, as a result of that evidence and those discussions, we consider cable-related activity in areas beyond national jurisdiction to be of sufficiently low impact as to fall below the threshold, which is why we are maintaining the current cabling exemption. However, science and industry are evolving in this area, so we are working on it. In the consultation, which we held jointly with the Scottish Government and which was open for four weeks in November 2025, we had only 22 responses from industry research organisations, environmental non-government organisations, consultants and consultancies, public bodies and DEFRA arms-length bodies, which shows that this is quite a niche area.
Eighty-nine other states have now ratified the BBNJ treaty and 145 states have signed it, so there is huge international support. We have only one ocean; although we may call it different things in different places, it is the mantle that wraps around the globe. As the hon. Member for Epping Forest says, we are often blind to the treasures that it holds in its deeps, whether that is the glorious seaweed baths on the Atlantic coast, or the next cure for an ailment or disease. Our ocean is vital to so many of our industries and provides proteins for billions of people, so it is important that we protect it for the future. I commend the order to the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.
Oral Answers to Questions
Mary Creagh Excerpts(6 days, 19 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
I thank my hon. Friend for all the work he did for us during his time in DEFRA. This Government are transforming access to nature in this country, delivering three new national forests and nine new national river walks, as well as launching the Wainwright coast-to-coast walk as a national trail in March. East Worthing and Shoreham is benefiting from this—it is home to a spectacular section of the recently launched King Charles III England coast path, which at 2,700 miles is the longest waymarked and maintained coastal walking route in the world.
Tom Rutland
I thank the Minister for her answer and her kind words. The recently inaugurated King Charles III England coast path winds its way through my constituency, passing Lancing’s wonderful Widewater lagoon nature reserve, which I worked with the community—including the World of Widewater committee—to save when it was drying up last summer. Can the Minister set out what health and tourism benefits the newly inaugurated path will bring to coastal communities such as mine?
Mary Creagh
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the work he did on the protection of Widewater lagoon—holding the water on the land when it is raining and ensuring that it is there during very dry spells is one of the challenges we face. The coastal path will boost everybody’s mental and physical health, and will bring significant opportunity to his businesses in Worthing. We know that visitors to England’s coastal paths already generate £350 million in spending in local coastal economies each year and support nearly 6,000 jobs.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
Earlier this year, children from Pannal primary school went to their forest school in Sandy Bank woods, only to find that the path was cordoned off and trees had been felled. What steps is the Minister taking with her colleagues in the Department for Education and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to ensure primary schools have access to forest schools all year round?
Mary Creagh
I am very happy to look into the case that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned. It depends on the ownership of the land—sometimes there is legitimate tree felling that has to be done at a certain time of year, normally before the bird nesting season—but if he gets in touch with me, I would be happy to look into that issue.
Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
I am getting a bit of a workout this morning bobbing up and down, Mr Speaker. The nature security assessment is a cross-Government strategic analysis designed to inform planning for potential shocks. It does not make predictions or set policy; it drives a more joined-up approach across Government by identifying climate and nature-related risks, so that they can be managed and anticipated early.
Adrian Ramsay
Turning to a second report that sets out grave risks to our national security, DEFRA civil servants have said that there is a realistic possibility that by 2030, our food, water and natural ecosystems will be at risk of collapse. That conclusion could not be more stark. An article in The Times states that it was the conclusion of a 2024 report commissioned to inform the new Government, but it was not included in handover briefings. Can the Minister confirm whether she has seen that second report, and what action is her Department taking to address its stark findings?
Mary Creagh
I have not seen the report that the hon. Gentleman is talking about, but I believe my hon. Friend the Minister for farming has seen it. In December, we published the 2025 environmental improvement plan, which sets out our ambition over the next five years to accelerate progress towards our targets under the Environment Act 2021. Those include ecosystem protection, wildlife reintroductions, species abundance, reducing species extinction risk, and creating more than half a million hectares of wildlife-rich habitat, which will provide critical ecosystem services. We are also delivering our international commitment to protect 30% of the UK’s land and sea by 2030, and we will make more announcements this summer about that.
Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)
I am sure the Department is already gearing up for the biodiversity COP in Armenia later this year, but what discussions will the Department be having with the Foreign Office about the equally important desertification COP that is taking place in Mongolia, where important issues such as water shortages, the degradation of land and much more will be on the agenda?
Mary Creagh
I know that there will be attendance from Foreign Office officials on that, and I agree with my hon. Friend that the Mongolian COP in August is equally important. It is important with these COPs that we do not look at climate, desertification and nature separately. We need to bring the three Rio conventions much closer together so that we get the synergies. Desertification has not traditionally been seen as a problem in this country but, as the planet warms and our climate changes, we need to take the issue seriously.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
Our recent waste crime action plan delivers the toughest ever crackdown on criminality in the waste sector, and fixes the broken system that the Conservatives left behind. We have closed the loopholes that criminals relied on, boosted the Environment Agency with an extra £45 million for enforcement, and launched a national Crimestoppers campaign so that we can root out the waste criminals and protect communities from their harm.
John Slinger
I welcome the new powers for councils to seize vehicles involved in fly-tipping and the Government’s action to further tackle waste criminals, including guidance on covert surveillance, CCTV and drones—something on which I have campaigned on behalf of my constituents in Rugby. There have been several incidences of illegal waste sites and fly-tipping in and around Rugby, and I commend the Environment Agency for clearing it up, but can the Minister confirm how the powers will be used, how councils will be supported and, if they do not enforce action against waste criminals, how they will be helped to do so?
Mary Creagh
I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for his question. I know about the issues around Coventry and Rugby, and I share his frustration at fly-tippers. Courts now have the powers to issue up to nine penalty points on fly-tippers’ driving licences, to ensure that they think twice before doing a job for their mates at the weekend. We expect these powers to be used consistently. We have the National Fly-Tipping Prevention Group, and the Environment Agency is stepping in on serious cases through increased funding, stronger powers and joint action.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
May I thank the Minister for her commitment and for her response to the hon. Member for Rugby (John Slinger)? It is good to have a policy that seems to be working and, here on the United Kingdom mainland, it is very obvious that it is. I know the Minister is off to visit Northern Ireland; we have similar problems in Northern Ireland, but there does not seem to be the same drive or the same action taken. Will she involve herself with the Minister in Northern Ireland’s Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Andrew Muir, to ensure that he is proactive as well?
Mary Creagh
I am always happy to visit Northern Ireland, not least because I have relatives in Magherafelt. I can tell the hon. Gentleman what we are doing about digital waste tracking. It is now impossible for a cow to be registered, as happened under the legacy system. We will have identity checks, criminal record checks and competency checks, so it will not be a free-for-all. Waste carriers will have to show their permit numbers on advertising and on their vehicles.
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
It is estimated that illegal waste dumping costs the taxpayer over £1 billion. Given that this activity can and does happen at permitted sites, can the Minister assure the House that the waste crime unit has access to both the permit return data to the Environment Agency and the landfill tax returns to His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, so that that fraudulent activity can be identified? Will she meet me to discuss the Hespin Wood landfill site in my constituency?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
I am always happy to meet my hon. Friend. She is right to draw attention to the loss to the Exchequer from landfill tax fraud and evasion. Our Joint Unit for Waste Crime is made up of EA and HMRC staff, as well as other arms of law enforcement, to ensure that all intelligence sources are tapped in to disrupt waste criminals. The waste crime action plan I mentioned earlier will see the unit strengthened by £45 million over the next three years: more boots on the ground and more drones in the air.
Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)
Following the brilliant news that the River Thames at Ham and Kingston is to be designated as a bathing water area, does the Secretary of State think that Thames Water’s proposals to pump treated sewage into the river just a few metres further downstream at Teddington are compatible?
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
Given that an estimated 1,446 species in our chalk streams will become extinct without conservation efforts, will the Minister outline what steps the Department is taking to protect against biodiversity loss?
Mary Creagh
We have just announced our largest budget ever for species protection and restoration. We have lots of exciting plans to introduce and reintroduce iconic species. I am particularly excited about the glutinous snail. It is extinct in England, but exists in Lake Bala in Wales. There will be all sorts of exciting reintroductions, from rare sea grasses to exciting snails.
Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)
The great work by my hon. Friends to clean up our rivers, lakes and seas risks being undermined, particularly in the eastern region, where a biomass-fuelled power station is at risk of closure due to the end of Government support. More than half a million tonnes of poultry litter risks being spread on to the land, impacting our water networks. Will my hon. Friend meet me to discuss how we can prevent that from happening?
Mary Creagh
We are working on successor schemes to the green gas scheme. It is imperative that that poultry litter is not spread on land and that an alternative is found. I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss this topic.
Steve Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker, as long ago as September 2024, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs was notified of a category 1 incident, the most serious category of pollution incident, which occurred near Whittlesey in my constituency. When no prosecution occurred following the incident, I raised the issue on the Floor of the House in March and the Minister promised to write to me. When no response was received after a number of weeks, I escalated it to you, Mr Speaker, in a letter at the end of April. The Department committed to a reply by 8 May. We are now a further month on from that date and still there has been no reply. If the Government have changed their policy and are no longer prosecuting the most serious category 1 water incidents, should that change of policy not be notified to the House, or is it that Ministers simply, despite repeated requests, have no idea what is happening in their own Department?
Draft Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Amendment and Revocation) Regulations 2026
Mary Creagh Excerpts(1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Amendment and Revocation) Regulations 2026.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. The regulations were laid before the House in draft on 19 March. They make targeted but important changes to how we protect endangered species while supporting legitimate and sustainable trade. The regulations are a critical part of the Government’s commitment to securing nature recovery and sustainable economic growth, as outlined in the Corry review, and a practical example of that approach in action.
The UK wildlife trade regulations give effect to our international obligations under the convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora, or CITES, which ensures that international trade in wild animals and plants is legal and sustainable, and does not threaten species survival. The United Kingdom has long played a leading role internationally in strengthening the convention and combating illegal wildlife trades, and we continue to do so.
In the UK, we deliver CITES controls through a licensing framework administered by the Animal and Plant Health Agency, APHA. Each year, the agency issues approximately 60,000 permits to businesses and organisations engaged in legal and sustainable trade, ranging from the pet trade to horticulture, cosmetics, zoos, museums and orchestras. While modest in scale, this activity supports diverse livelihoods and interests across the UK, but parts of the system are complex, duplicative and rooted in processes designed for trade within the EU. The draft regulations will modernise that framework. They retain strong protections for endangered species, while removing unnecessary administrative burdens where risk is low. Additionally, they will improve efficiency for businesses and regulators, and strengthen enforcement where needed. When new powers are provided for the Secretary of State, their use will be subject to the usual parliamentary scrutiny. The measures will be tightly defined, applied in a transparent and consistent way, and informed by scientific advice, and only with a clear conservation or welfare justification to do so.
The draft instrument amends four pieces of assimilated EU law and revokes one that is no longer required. Together, the changes strengthen conservation protections, while allowing the digitisation and modernisation of admin processes. We designed the reforms using a precautionary risk-based approach, informed by consultation with environmental non-governmental organisations, industry representatives, enforcement bodies and the UK’s scientific authorities. That input ensures that protections for species at risk of over-exploitation not only remain firmly in place, but are enhanced where the evidence supports doing so.
Let me set out each of the key changes in turn. First, for some low-risk species, the existing system goes further than necessary. Export permits issued by the exporting country confirm sustainability, while import permits issued by the UK authorities add a further layer of due diligence. For the most threatened species, that extra scrutiny is absolutely right and will remain, but for species at lower risk, the draft regulations will allow for a lighter touch import notification instead, so that we keep oversight and traceability while cutting out unnecessary duplication and delay for legitimate businesses. We will identify low-risk species using the best available scientific evidence. Examples may include species of artificially propagated plants, such as orchids and cacti, from highly compliant destinations where the risk of specimens being taken from the wild is negligible. These will be kept under close review and revised if risks or trade patterns change.
Secondly, the regulations streamline the article 10 certificate system that governs domestic trade in the most vulnerable species. Many UK businesses legally breed CITES-listed species or produce derived goods for export. At present, that can require both an article 10 certificate and a separate export permit. In future, in clearly defined cases to be outlined in guidance, the draft regulations will allow an export or re-export permit to serve as an article 10 certificate for a limited six-month period, which reduces duplication while keeping necessary safeguards firmly in place.
The draft regulations also introduce an exemption from article 10 controls for three low-risk Mediterranean tortoise species—I am sorry that I do not have the Latin names to hand, because I would have enjoyed saying them—obviously, when trading them domestically, as they cannot live in the wild here in the UK. These species are widely and legally captive-bred, and they are not yet found in the wild in the UK—although who knows? At some point, that might change. The existing controls were designed to protect wild populations elsewhere in Europe, but in a Great Britain-only context, they add little conservation benefit. Importantly, all import and export controls will remain in place, ensuring continued protection against illegal or unsustainable trade.
Thirdly, the draft regulations will deliver practical improvements for touring orchestras and travelling exhibitions—as a former violinist, that is particularly close to my heart. This will be done through recognising certificates issued from other countries, as well as allowing agents to apply on behalf of performers. The effect will be to remove unnecessary duplication and, critically, to support cultural exchange without weakening important conservation controls.
Fourthly, the draft regulations set clear criteria for the temporary designation of ports of entry for CITES specimens. This mechanism will be used, for example, to support urgent conservation or animal welfare cases. These provisions cannot be used for commercial trade and apply only where the necessary staff expertise and safeguards for effective checks are in place.
We estimate that all these changes and amendments in the draft regulations will cut permit volumes by up to 30% each year, which is in the region of 20,000 fewer permits being issued every year. This should generate significant savings for businesses and the regulator, contributing to the Prime Minister’s target to cut the administrative costs of regulation by 25%.
The draft regulations also strengthen enforcement in cases of non-compliance by extending the use of civil sanctions. We will apply civil sanctions to six additional existing offences under the CITES regulations and the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979. These offences involve using, obtaining, trading or transporting CITES specimens without valid permits or with false, altered or misused documentation. This change fills a gap between issuing a warning letter and a criminal prosecution, allowing regulators to respond proportionately while maintaining a strong deterrence. However, criminal sanctions will continue to be used where they are to be deemed proportionate to the infraction. We will publish statutory guidance before the civil sanctions are brought into force, ensuring that the application is consistent and fair.
The draft regulations strengthen the implementation of our international CITES obligations. They uphold high standards of species protection and animal welfare, and they ensure that regulation is targeted where it is most needed. We will continue working closely with stakeholders to support implementation and ongoing compliance. Taken together, they strike the right balance between rigorous protection and practical delivery, safeguarding nature while allowing legitimate, responsible activity to proceed. I commend the draft regulations to the Committee.
Mary Creagh
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his important points and for contributing to the debate. I say “citeez” and he says “cites”—let’s call the whole thing off. We will have to agree to differ on the pronunciation, but I will respond on to the important work that he cited. He rightly paid tribute to Border Force and Customs and Excise officials involved in the operations to track down and detect illegal wildlife trade. Members in all parts of the House are in passionate agreement on wanting to eradicate that trade.
The other day, I had the privilege of seeing the Animal and Plant Health Agency exhibit at the Chelsea flower show. Last year, it discussed the Colorado potato beetle, which thankfully has now been eradicated. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about the biosecurity risk: if such animals got in—for instance, if somebody brought a brightly coloured beetle back from America and it suddenly hit the potato crop—we would be in a world of trouble. This year, APHA had a sniffer dog who was trained to help by sniffing out infected and diseased wood; later that day, the dog had the privilege of meeting His Majesty the King. World-leading science is going on in our Animal and Plant Health Agency.
I also thank the hon. Gentleman for the role his party played in banning keeping primates as pets. I was heading up to Manchester on an Avanti West Coast train when an animal, which turned out to be a spider monkey, escaped from its holder. Sadly, the wi-fi on the train was quite shonky, but I was pretty certain that it was illegal to have a monkey as a pet. It was being kept in a transparent cat carrier, and by the time we got to Manchester, I was feeling like saying, “See it, say it, sorted—there’s a monkey on the train.” My first thought was, “Does it have rabies? I don’t want to be bitten,” and my second was, “I’m pretty certain that this animal is not being kept in an enclosure that is suitable for its needs,” so I reported it to the British Transport Police. I also took a photo of the person who had the monkey, but given that, when asked by somebody on the train, he said that he had gotten it off a bloke at a market, I felt pretty certain that there was no CITES certificate for the monkey and that it had been brought into the country illegally. There is a point about legislation, about enforcement and about what you actually do when you see a monkey on the train.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the new deal for the sanitary and phytosanitary agreement and CITES controls. CITES is not currently in the scope of the SPS agreement negotiations. The CITES convention allows for the waiving of controls only where a comprehensive customs union agreement, such as the EU customs union, is in place, so any SPS agreement would not provide a sufficient basis for the waiving of CITES controls between the UK and the EU. However, the reforms in the statutory instrument seek to reduce the burden of CITES controls for movement to and from the UK. Border Force applies strong enforcement of CITES controls at the border and the police enforce them inland. The amendments in the statutory instrument will support their efforts by introducing civil sanctions and other changes, giving them a greater range of tools to help the targeting of efforts to tackle the illegal wildlife trade.
The hon. Gentleman asked me about the article 10 regime. We have taken a deliberately targeted and risk-based approach to article 10 certificates. We have not removed the framework because it plays an important role in controlling high-risk trade and preventing laundering. We have simplified requirements in a very small number of low-risk circumstances where there is little conservation benefit, or where there is duplicate paperwork. Those changes do not weaken protections. They apply only in a very small number of low-risk circumstances, and strong controls remain firmly in place for higher risk species and activities. We will keep that under review and consider further changes where they are supported by the scientific evidence.
On the import of annex B, we have taken a targeted and risk-based approach on those import permits as well. We have not removed the import permit framework because it plays an important role in controlling higher-risk trade and preventing laundering, but we intend to simplify requirements in limited, low-risk circumstances where there is little conservation benefit or duplicate paperwork. Import permits remain firmly in place for higher-risk species and activities, and core compliance checks, including Border Force inspections, will continue to apply.
A low-risk list will be developed and kept under review based on the most up-to-date scientific and enforcement evidence. All annex B imports will still require a valid CITES export permit, and the use of import notifications will ensure that we maintain oversight so that we can respond to changes in risk.
Dr Hudson
The Minister is talking about low risk and high risk, and I welcome her comments. Can she give categoric reassurances that the Department and all the enforcement agencies can actually flip to make sure that we can clamp down and change and classify something as high risk if it was classified as low risk initially but subsequent evidence then shows that it has become a higher risk? It needs to be dynamic. Can the Minister assure us of that?
Mary Creagh
I can absolutely give the hon. Gentleman those assurances. One of the things that we are currently discussing in CITES is the classification of funga. I know the hon. Gentleman is a fun guy—that is my attempt at a joke. I better not do that again.
Mary Creagh
Okay, I will do some more then—play to the gallery shamelessly.
Funga, as it is called, is neither flora nor fauna. It is a third form of life. With the brilliant mycologists at Kew, we are looking at how to protect fungi in the wild, and at how we bring them in and out. That is because as mushroom kits get more popular, that causes issues for some of our native plants.
The annex B imports list will be drawn up in consultation with the scientific board, and it will be readily reviewed and published. Other activity and work will continue. I can assure the hon. Member for Epping Forest that in other parts of the Department we have adopted a much lower risk appetite for certain other things than was originally recommended to us. We are also developing a process whereby the chief scientific adviser also reviews some of that. As Ministers, if there is any science advice from different agencies that we are concerned about, we have a kind of peer review process on the science.
I really do take the hon. Gentleman’s point about ferns that have almost become extinct in Brazil because of the actions of Victorian plant hunters who stole them, not for their intrinsic value, but just to grow orchids in greenhouses back here. That shows the despoliation that has been going on for at least 200 years since Darwin brought his first samples back on the Beagle. I will be going to Kew on Thursday to do the final digitisation of some of these herbarium samples. They are just incredible and our gift to the world.
Semi-complete, pre-issued permits are currently used in limited circumstances for businesses that meet strict criteria and have shown consistent compliance over time. We will seek to extend their use for certain low-risk imports and exports of live annex B and C specimens to speed up processing for genuinely compliant traders and to reduce routine administrative delay. That is not an automatic entitlement; eligibility will continue to be assessed case by case by the Animal and Plant Health Agency. Standard permits may still be required where they are appropriate. Any abuse of the system will lead to appropriate enforcement action, including revocation of eligibility to use semi-complete permits.
We are retaining annex D, which plays an important early warning role in monitoring trade in species and responding to emerging trade risks for vulnerable species—whatever is in fashion on the Instagram reels at the moment—as the shadow Minister rightly said. At the same time, we are modernising how annex D operates by digitising import permits, which will reduce time and expense for businesses. We will continue to keep those species under review, based on scientific evidence.
Moving to the shadow Minister’s questions about animal welfare—I hope that I answered the permit questions adequately—I am grateful for his co-operation on getting the puppy-smuggling ban through. That was a great moment. As a Government, we are committed to delivering the most ambitious animal welfare programme in a generation, as set out in our animal welfare strategy, published in December 2025. Our trade strategy set out that the Government will always consider whether overseas produce has an unfair advantage. Where necessary, we will be prepared to use the full range of powers at our disposal to protect the UK’s most sensitive sectors.
The 2025 puppy-smuggling Act will close loopholes in the non-commercial pet-travel rules that are abused by unscrupulous traders, and it will give us powers to prevent the supply of low-welfare pets into the UK. We will use the powers to prohibit bringing into Great Britain, puppies and kittens under six months old, dogs and cats with non-exempt mutilations; and heavily pregnant dogs and cats. We are committed to introducing those measures as soon as possible, while recognising the importance of timely development to ensure against any loopholes that could be open to abuse.
The EU accepted that in a number of areas under the SPS agreement we need to retain our own rules. We were clear about the importance of our need to be able to set those high-welfare standards. The EU introduced new rules for pet travel on 22 April. They affect the non-commercial movement of pet dogs, cats and ferrets entering the EU from Great Britain. The changes mean that the validity period of animal health certificates has increased to six months; EU pet passports are now restricted to EU residents; pets travelling without their owner must have written authorisation confirming movement within five days of the owner’s movement; and the non-commercial travel limit is now five pets per private vehicle or foot passenger, not per person.
Both Houses have tried to ban trophy hunting several times through private Members’ Bills, only to have them fall in the other place. We have engaged with a wide range of stakeholders to ensure full understanding of the issues, and we continue to engage with the relevant stakeholders to determine the most appropriate scope of a ban on the import of hunting trophies from species of conservation concern. They are listed in the appendices to CITES according to the threat that international trade poses to their conservation status. We remain committed to bringing forward a ban on the import of hunting trophies as the most effective way of delivering on our manifesto commitment. Legislative timeframes will be provided once the parliamentary timetable is clearer.
The draft regulations will modernise an important regulatory framework, so that it works effectively for Great Britain. The regulations will support legitimate trade and keep protections firmly focused on the species and risks that matter most. There will be practical improvements for businesses and regulators, while we maintain the UK’s strong record of meeting our international wildlife conservation obligations. With that, I hope that I have addressed the issues raised and that we can move to approving the instrument. I thank all hon. colleagues present for their patience and I pay tribute to my officials for their work.
Question put and agreed to.
Waste Crime: Knowsley
Mary Creagh Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I have slightly more time than normal, so I hope that we can have a bit of discussion because I am absolutely passionate about tackling waste crime. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley (Anneliese Midgley) for securing this debate and to all hon. colleagues who made such valuable points.
I say first that we have a programme called Pride in Place. Everyone’s environment starts at their front door, and if their front door has dog mess or fly-tipping on it, or if, as we have heard today, their car is covered in dust from an illegal waste site—or from a permitted waste site in breach of its permits, as the lawyer on my shoulder would say—then people do not feel at ease where they live. Those waste criminals and permit breachers violate our spaces.
Organised criminals, as we heard, are exploiting the waste sector for profit. They have moved in on a large scale over the past 15 years, on the Conservatives’ watch. They damage our environment, threaten public safety and undercut decent businesses doing the right thing, and they are making a lot of money out of it. That happened under the previous Government and was allowed to continue, so that it became a consequence-free crime.
The Environmental Services Association estimates that 20% of all waste in England is illegally managed. That costs our economy more than £1 billion. In the 2024 financial year, criminals evaded at least £150 million in landfill tax. They do not pay it, so we all pay it. Waste crime is organised crime. Waste crime is serious crime, and this Government will treat it as such. We are calling time on waste crime.
What have we done? We have put boots on the ground and we are putting drones in the air. Since coming into office, we have boosted the Environment Agency’s enforcement budget by 50%: it has gone up from £10 million to more than £15 million. When I was Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee in a previous Parliament, before my enforced gap years, I remember sitting and watching pollution happening in our country. I was really frustrated, and I understood the Environment Agency’s frustration that it was not equipped and funded to do its job. We have pursued major regulatory reforms, and we have boosted the joint unit for waste crime.
In the first 18 months of this Labour Government, the Environment Agency has stopped illegal waste activity at more than 1,200 sites. It has achieved 122 prosecutions and 10 people have gone to prison. The action plan that we announced last Friday is the next step up, and it is a scale up. We are calling zero tolerance on this crime in three different areas. First, we are preventing illegal activity before it starts, by getting better at working out how criminals act. Secondly, we will strengthen enforcement so that offenders are caught and punished. Thirdly, we are cleaning up the most harmful sites. I will come on to the site mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley shortly, but let me first take each of those areas in turn.
First, on prevention, we are tightening the rules and closing the gaps that criminals exploit. How? We are overhauling the regulation of the waste carriers, brokers and dealers regime, moving from a light-touch, paper-based regime—where campaigners registered Oscar the dog for a licence—into a full, environmental-permitted scheme. Those paper systems are going. We are going to have mandatory digital waste tracking. There will be a single UK-wide platform to monitor those waste movements—as it goes from the transfer statement on to someone else and on to someone else, as that is where it gets lost and it goes out into the environment—so that we can spot diversion and fraud earlier, further up the chain before it turns up on a motorway.
We are also removing widely-abused waste permit exemptions on three things. The first is waste tyres; we have all seen the mountains that somehow catch fire. The second is end-of-life vehicles, and the third is scrap metals, where we know there is a criminal industry with cable theft and so on. There was a similar site in Wakefield that eventually went bust, owing the taxpayer £60 million.
Matt Rodda
The Minister is making an excellent speech. I am really pleased to hear about the new strategy and determination from the current Government, in contrast with their predecessors. Would she able to address—this is a niche matter, but it is really important in some areas—the issue of abandoned boats? We have a serious problem in our section of the River Thames with sunken boats. When I walk along the river, I can often spot three or four of them. They are an environmental hazard. Fuel oil could get out of these boats—
Mary Creagh
Understood. We are talking about Knowsley, and I am not the canals Minister, but I will take that back to the Department. I am sorry to do the DEFRA silos, but this is not the first time I have heard that. My hon. Friend makes a very good point.
I was talking about tyres, scrap metal and end-of-life vehicles. We are tightening seven more activities that people currently do not need a waste permit for. We are also going after the tax evaders; it is the Al Capone method. His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs is going to expand tax-check rules to the waste sector. If someone has not paid their taxes, we are going to be asking them questions before we renew their licence. We are going across the chain on that.
Secondly, let me turn to enforcement. We are matching our preventive work with tougher enforcement. We are pursuing waste criminals with every tool in the box. We are doubling the Environment Agency’s enforcement budget, with an additional £45 million over the next three years. There will be more boots on the ground and more drones in the air to stop the criminals in their tracks. We are giving the Environment Agency new police-style powers so that it can intervene earlier, disrupt criminal networks and bring more criminals to justice before illegal operations, such as the one my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley mentioned on the motorway, become established.
Alongside that, the joint unit for waste crime—I visited it in the midlands just a couple of weeks ago, where it is doing some absolutely excellent work—is strengthening its hand. It is bringing together environmental watchdogs, police forces and the National Crime Agency; some of this involves very serious, hardcore, dangerous criminals, so we need some heavy people with us to deal with heavy people. They are getting ready to dismantle the serious organised crime networks that blight our communities.
The penalties for the crime must match the harm. The carriers, brokers and dealers reform will increase the penalties for offenders to up to five years’ imprisonment. Our manifesto made it clear that those who spoil our streets and parks should face up to what they have done and put it right with their own hands.
I am extremely keen that carriers or brokers should have their registration numbers on all their advertising and on their vans. If digitally excluded or older people give their waste to somebody, they should not get the fine. They should be able to clearly see that the van coming to pick up the stuff is a registered vehicle. We should have that confidence, because we as consumers should know that the van is compliant.
We will consult with councils on powers for them to issue fly-tippers—we have heard about them—with conditional cautions to make them clean up the mess they make. What is a conditional caution? I, too, have learned some things: it is an on-the-spot fine of up to £300 and an on-the-spot penalty of 20 hours of unpaid work. We think that clean-up squads are educating people about the harms they have caused, and that getting people to clean up is the best possible way to get them to think twice before they do it again. We will also look at putting penalty points on the driving licences of persistent fly-tippers—again, to make them think twice before they do a job for their mate on a Friday night, shall we say, that may affect their regular employment during the week. We are coming at it at all levels of the chain.
Jim Shannon
I have a quick question. Does that apply to the obfuscation of the vehicles and vans used? If it does, that will also hurt them.
Mary Creagh
Local authorities have those powers already, but they are not very confident at using them, so I have issued guidance to local authorities to say, “Come on—you’ve got these powers. Why don’t you use them?”. One of the things I hear back is that local authorities have to store the vehicles, pay for a pound, and make sure a vehicle is properly illegal before they seize and crush it. But Labour’s Merton council, in south-west London, does an excellent job on seizing and crushing, as does Sunderland city council up in the north-east. They are in my star hall of fame for seizing and crushing a lot of vehicles; I hope that, if we have this debate next year, other local authorities will be in the mix.
Clean-up costs should rest with the landowner. The polluter should pay, and we will go after the criminals to make sure they pay. We are supporting the clean-up of three illegal waste sites, which my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley mentioned, and we have published clear criteria for those sites where intervention is needed most urgently. They include an assessment of the landowner’s capability to clear up the site without Government needing to spend taxpayers’ money.
I understand why the residents of Knowsley want the site next to the M57 motorway to be included in that work. We still need to see the fire risk from Merseyside—that was covered in the last meeting we had—and the Environment Agency is in conversation with the landowner about clearing the site. We are getting cleverer at working out what happens before an illegal waste site is created, and we are going to use satellite technology, as well as drones, to be much smarter about how we move earlier on these things. In the meantime, we are monitoring the situation and working with local partners.
For local authorities that want to clear up waste sites on their land, we are looking to develop a rebate scheme for the landfill tax they pay. We will also look, with the insurance industry, at developing an insurance model to shield farmers, businesses and landowners from bearing the cost of waste dumped on their land through no fault of their own.
Let me quickly return to the issue of St Joseph’s college, because that was not on my radar—I thought, “What problems do we have here?” I have a note that refers to the development of a new golf course bringing waste material on to the site. Let me look into that as soon as possible once I get back to my desk, because if something is going on there we want to get in super quickly and get it done super fast. If it is a golf course, then let it be a golf course—not something else. The key is to raise it earlier and to call 999 or Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. If something does not look right and feels wrong, a person must tell the police. It is no good assuming that it is the council, National Highways or workmen. I have spotted vehicles fly-tipping on the M1 while driving back from Coventry at night, and I have called 999 straight away because it is clearly a waste crime in progress.
We heard about the action that was happening on the Simonswood industrial estate, with the Environment Agency. We have had investigations; the Environment Agency has stopped burning and sent reminders to all permitted sites. However, it is clear that the ongoing waste odours and problems mean that further action must be taken. I remember that when we first met, my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley told me the site was making Mo Salah sick. I am devastated that he is leaving Liverpool before we have had a chance to make things right.
On Windmill Services, the EA is looking at the next regulatory enforcement step, including revocation of its permit. The EA will conduct site visits imminently to make that assessment and there is a live enforcement case under way. Finally, on Jameson Road, there have been over 500 odour complaints in February, so clearly there is an ongoing problem. We are not going to fix this overnight, but we are doing our absolute best.
I give all hon. Members present from across the House my absolute commitment that we will tackle these rogues. We are coming for them, and we are going to put them out of business.
Question put and agreed to.
Waste Crime Action Plan
Mary Creagh Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
The Government have published our waste crime action plan for England. The plan sets out our zero-tolerance approach to prevent waste crime, pursue the criminals responsible and accelerate the clean-up effort.
People take pride in the places they call home: the streets outside their front door, the parks where children play, and the fields and riversides where they walk. But fly-tippers and waste criminals blight our communities and exploit the waste sector for profit. These people damage the environment, threaten public safety and undercut decent businesses doing the right thing.
The Environmental Services Association estimates that 20% of all waste in England is illegally managed, and that waste crime is costing our economy £1 billion each year. In 2023-24, we lost at least £150 million in revenue due to landfill tax evasion.
Since coming into office, this Labour Government have taken significant strides to tackle the waste criminals. We have boosted the Environment Agency’s enforcement budget by 50%, pursued major regulatory reforms and boosted the joint unit for waste crime. In the first 18 months of this Parliament, the Environment Agency stopped illegal waste activity at 1,205 sites, achieved 122 prosecutions and put 10 criminals behind bars.
The waste crime action plan shows how we are increasing our response to waste crime in three ways:
Prevention. We are strengthening the regulatory regime to make it harder for waste criminals. We are tightening the rules around waste carriers, brokers and dealers to close the loopholes that criminals exploit. We are introducing digital waste tracking to improve accountability and traceability. We are expanding tax-check rules to the waste sector, making waste permit renewals conditional on operators passing checks on their tax records. We are equipping councils and regulators with the tools they need to deter, disrupt and stop illegal waste activity before it emerges or escalates.
Enforcement. Offenders must face the consequences of their actions. We are committing a further £45 million over the next three years for the Environment Agency to spend on waste crime enforcement, up from £10 million in 2023-24. We are going to give new police-style powers to Environment Agency officers to intervene earlier, disrupt criminal networks and bring more criminals to justice. We are investing in satellite technology and drones to improve early detection of waste crime and build stronger evidence for prosecution. We will make fly-tippers join “clean-up squads” and put penalty points on their driving licences. Waste criminals will face penalties that reflect the full severity of the harm that they cause.
Remediation. We are directly cleaning up a small number of the worst sites, starting immediately with site-specific assessments to determine the feasibility of clearing sites at: Alan Ramsbottom Way, Hyndburn; Worthing Road, Sheffield; and Bolton House Road, Wigan.
We are also supporting the remediation of other illegal waste sites, developing a landfill tax rebate scheme with local authorities. We are working with the insurance industry to explore new models to protect farmers, businesses and landowners from bearing the cost of waste dumped illegally on their land.
Waste crime has grown more organised and more damaging. The Government’s response are stepping up to match it.
Through this action plan, we are taking a zero-tolerance approach. We will build a thriving waste sector—safe from exploitation, fair for business and fit for the future—we will catch and prosecute the criminals responsible, and we will restore pride in our communities.
[HCWS1430]
Oral Answers to Questions
Mary Creagh Excerpts(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
The hon. Member is absolutely right, but in the last five years under the previous Government, incidents rose by 20%. We are encouraging councils to seize and crush the vehicles of fly-tippers, and we will be consulting on a conditional caution so that people who do fly-tip will pick up and pay up.
Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)
Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)
There are widespread concerns that we are way off our national biodiversity targets. Does the Minister agree that there must be no further backward steps on environmental protections, and that we must set clear red lines for nature?
Mary Creagh
I agree that the environmental improvement plan that we inherited was not fit for purpose. We will oversee the largest ever investment in nature. We have banned bee-killing pesticides, licensed the first wild beaver release in England for 400 years, and announced the first new national forest for 30 years.
Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)
Environmental Protection and Biodiversity
Mary Creagh Excerpts(3 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship today, Sir Roger. For anyone who is unaware, I broke my wrist playing beach volleyball; the score was Germany 1, England nil—let us hope that is not repeated at the world cup this year. I thank all colleagues who have sent their good wishes.
I begin by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) on his excellent opening speech, and I thank other Members for their thoughtful contributions. I am not the water Minister or the oceans Minister, so I will do my best, but if I am unable to reply, we will organise the meetings that Members seek so that they get the answers they deserve.
Nature is the monopoly provider of everything we need to exist, and it is our duty to protect and restore it. In my own Coventry constituency, where there is one the poorest and most highly developed wards in the country, there are signs of water voles—Ratty is alive and well. I saw my first ever kingfisher about a mile from Coventry city centre, and there are also otters living in the canal and at Coventry golf club. Nature is all around us if we sit, look and know where to find it.
Catherine West (Hornsey and Friern Barnet) (Lab)
Does the Minister also agree that, where there is political will—such as the Mayor of London with his white storks and baby beavers, or even in progressive boroughs like Haringey that plant thousands of trees—we really have hope of making some progress?
Mary Creagh
I congratulate the mayor; he is a trailblazer both nationally and internationally through his climate and nature work. I know that Justin Beaver and his wife—I cannot remember her name, but it is a similarly cringeworthy pun—are living happily ever after. Actually, I do not know whether beavers live happily ever after; I think they are quite mean to each other. But they are definitely living happily in Ealing and providing those natural ecosystem services that we need—they are nature’s original ecosystem engineers.
In December, we published our 2025 environmental improvement plan, and over the next five years, it will accelerate progress towards those Environment Act targets. I gently say to the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson), that some of those targets do not have a baseline. When I was talking to our chief scientific adviser yesterday, I asked how we will meet some of those species targets, and we will have a baseline developed by 2028-29. It is all very well legislating, but it is also about how things are measured. As a former Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, I am all about how we measure it, because that is how the Government are held to account. I want to hold to account myself or any future Minister, whoever it may be.
Mary Creagh
I will just finish my point. Over the next five years, we will improve species abundance, reduce species extinction risk, and restore or create more than 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich land. We are also delivering our international commitment to protect 30% of the UK’s land and sea by 2030, which will help us to tackle the climate and nature crises while supporting growth.
We have heard a little about housebuilding versus infrastructure, and the system we inherited was too slow and too fragmented. Across the country, we have more than 164,000 homeless children living in temporary accommodation. In my city of Coventry alone, 2,000 children wake up to that reality every day—we have one of the highest rates of child homelessness outside London. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East (Richard Burgon) also has about 800 homeless children in his constituency.
Those realities of nature loss and homeless children have a similar root cause: political short-termism and the ducking of big decisions on land use, investment and environmental recovery, leaving the nature and housing crises to deepen. Politics has failed both, and the nature restoration fund can unlock stored housing and infrastructure while still achieving enormous, tangible environment outcomes. We want more for infrastructure and more for nature, not less.
Mary Creagh
I will not give way, as I want to respond to some of the points that hon. Members made.
The hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne) mentioned biodiversity net gain, which became mandatory in February 2024. There is emerging evidence that it is working as intended, and we will publish our response to our consultation on that shortly. Developers are seeking ecological advice earlier in the planning process so that they do not waste money trying to build on precious sites, and they are seeking to avoid biodiversity impacts when choosing between sites.
The shadow Minister talked about local nature recovery strategies, as did the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). The hard work of local authorities to finalise and publish those strategies is bearing fruit. When we came into office, those authorities were not really sure what the strategies were for, so we had to provide a lot of guidance and work with local councils and regional combined authorities to publish 28 of the 48 strategies, with the remainder fast approaching completion. Those strategies will be a new tool in driving action on the ground, and helping partnerships in the public, private and voluntary sectors to work together to focus collective efforts on where they will achieve the most.
We will also go further and faster on protected landscapes. My hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) and I saw kids from Newcastle who were out for their first ever walk in his gorgeous Northumberland national park. Making sure that our green spaces are greener, wilder and more accessible is crucial to what we want to do. On species recovery, my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall (Anna Gelderd) talked about the red-billed chough and the tough little Cornish black bee. Bees’ Needs Week is coming up soon, and I urge everyone to go to the website and get their local organisations involved. Kew at Wakehurst will host the prizegiving this year, and I encourage local groups to get involved.
Since the early 90s, we have prevented 35 national extinctions through the species recovery programme and supported 1,000 species, such as the fen orchid, the large blue butterfly and the red-billed chough. We are committed to funding that programme—there is a new round of funding until 2029. More than 200 projects have applied, and we will announce the successful ones in May. We talked about beavers, and I was thrilled to visit the National Trust’s Holnicote estate in Somerset for the release of a mother beaver and her two kits last month, which was one of two wild releases in south-west England this year. Beavers bring many benefits: creating havens for other wildlife, improving water quality and reducing the impact of flood and droughts. That is part of our mission to protect and restore nature.
On landscape recovery, the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) talked about the vital role of farmers and land managers in creating wildlife-rich environments. The plans for landscape recovery are backed by a down payment of £500 million over the course of this Parliament, which is the lifetime cost for the first tranche of projects coming through in round one. We expect future tranches to be delivered with further funding allocations. That part of the largest nature-friendly farming budget in history goes alongside significant funding for further nature-friendly farming schemes.
We heard from the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) that, last year, tree planting in England reached its highest level in over 20 years, but our woodland cover is still too low. We are committed to meet the Environment Act target to increase woodland cover to 16.5% by 2050, and the new national forest in the Ox-Cam arc is going to make his constituents closer to nature. That shows that we can build beautiful housing, a new railway line and new nature alongside each other.
This year, we will publish a new trees action plan for England, outlining how we will meet our Environment Act target and improve the resilience and conditions of trees and woodlands nationwide. We have £1 billion for tree planting and forestry sector support over this Parliament, which is the largest investment in nature in our history.
My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) raised the issue of our overseas impacts and the 30 by 30 work. Our overseas territories hold over 90% of the UK’s unique species. We reaffirmed our joint ambition with the territories to protect their ecosystems and launched the first ever co-created overseas territories biodiversity strategy with every territory Government. We have funded 43 new Darwin Plus projects worth over £7.9 million. Nature-based solutions include Saint Helena’s cloud forest, which is providing clean drinking water, the British Virgin Islands mangroves and the Falklands Islands peatlands.
We have heard about salt marshes and seagrass, and they are incredible buffers against the increasingly intense storms that are buffeting our ocean. Our ocean is also under threat from acidification and heating, and that is why we are driving to protect marine ecosystems and working for a global plastic pollution treaty. A new chair has been elected for that process, and we look forward to making further progress.
We have committed £14 million to eight projects in our ocean grant scheme to support locally led solutions to protect the ocean and the communities who depend on it. In Mozambique, for example, that is supporting local partners to establish a corridor of 20 locally managed marine areas.
I am not the Minister for chalk streams, but I want to address them very quickly and say to the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) that we will be delivering more than 1,000 targeted actions for chalk stream restoration. I will take his message back to the water Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy). On the national policy planning framework, the consultation is still live, and I think we are looking in that consultation to put chalk streams as features of high environmental value into planning policy.
We welcome and support the ambition of the curlew action plan. There are many such plans across many of our protected landscapes. I am happy to get the water Minister to meet the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers). On soils, we have committed to bringing 40% of our agricultural soil into sustainable management by 2028 and increasing that to 60% by 2030. Soil is the foundation of our food system, but also an important part of our climate system. That will be achieved via our environmental management schemes—
Woodland Creation
Mary Creagh Excerpts(3 months, 4 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell, and what a lovely debate we have had. It has not been the best part of my week—that was releasing a mother beaver and her three kids on the National Trust’s Holnicote estate in Somerset yesterday—but it has been the second best. We have had a lovely debate, with constructive and thoughtful contributions from many colleagues.
Where are we having this debate? In Westminster Hall, which is home to northern Europe’s largest medieval timber roof, built in the 1390s from 650 tonnes of English oak. It was saved from the blitz fires by former Cabinet Minister Walter Elliot, who directed the firefighters to allow the Chamber to burn but, whatever they did, to save that roof. What an amazing piece of foresight that was, and what a piece of foresight it was for Winston Churchill to demand that oaks be chopped down across England ready for the reconstruction of the main Chamber we sit and debate in. And how wonderful it is, for those of us who have had the privilege, to stand at the Dispatch Box, which was a gift from the people of New Zealand. People knew that we needed timber after world war two, and the Commonwealth—the empire, as it was then—stepped forward and stepped up.
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes North (Chris Curtis) on securing the debate. How lovely it was to hear him talk about the “tree of hope” coming out of the Sycamore Gap tree. Last year, I visited Northumberland to see where the Sycamore Gap tree stood and to hear about the national park’s plans to honour and memorialise it. The power that trees have to speak to us across the centuries and across generations cannot be overstated.
It was lovely to hear about the wetland arc in Milton Keynes. I know Bedfordshire well because I taught at Cranfield School of Management for seven happy years. I also did quite a lot of canvassing in a variety of by-elections in Mid Bedfordshire and found some places that I had not known about.
The trees and woodlands of England and the United Kingdom are more than just part of the landscape; they are part of our national identity. They filter our air, they cool the cities and they shelter our wildlife. We talked about leafiness and how it was associated with wealth, but when we walk in a city and see a glorious display of cherry blossom, we almost have public art in the street. That display of luxuriance and beauty is there just because it is there; it is not performing any function apart from providing a visual display. It is absolutely glorious to see some of the urban planting going in across our cities, and when I cycle around places, as I often do, I am always thinking, “When they designed this place, what were they thinking about for the future?” It really makes you think about how councils think about their constituents.
Trees are part of our shared national culture. They stand as symbols of endurance, wisdom and renewal. In Japan, forest bathing, which my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) talked about, is prescribed by doctors to prevent anxiety, lower stress and help heal depression. I heard about that on a visit to Wakehurst—I recommend a visit—which has done experiments on different tree scents. The Japanese cypress gives off an odour and oils that are a mood enhancer, lifting the mood and clearing the mind, as my hon. Friend said. I think I will steal that idea for the future.
Growing up in Coventry, I played every weekend in the War Memorial Park, the city’s great act of remembrance for those we lost in world war one. Every tree has a plaque beneath it remembering the people who died—a living memorial to the lost.
As forestry Minister, I regularly see the majesty and benefit of woodlands up close. I met the social enterprise Forests With Impact, launched at His Majesty’s prison Haverigg in Cumbria, which upskills prisoners to grow trees for onward planting. One of the comments from the Ministry of Justice about the prisoners who grow the seeds is that they want to know where the seeds are going. As they imagine their lives on the outside, they want to know where they can visit and say, “I grew that seed,” or, “That might have been a seed that I handled,”. I pay tribute to the last Government for some of the work done in prisons on that intimate connection between environmental justice, social justice and the criminal justice system.
I have stood beneath the spruce and pine of Kielder forest with the people who manage it, and I have heard about Forestry England, which is the largest provider of parkrun in the country, with 220,000 people a week running through our national forests. I was of course passionately against the coalition Government’s attempts to try to sell off England’s national forests—that was 16 years ago, but some of us have very long memories.
The Government’s plan for change sets out how we are going to build a stronger, fairer, greener Britain, and I gently say to the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth)—I am not sure whether she is standing in or she has had a promotion, but if it is a promotion, then many congratulations.
Mary Creagh
She is standing in—very good. However, I gently say to her that while trees have a key role to play, we have done six interest rate cuts, and inflation is set to come in on target, so the economic plan certainly seems to be going much better than it was in the days of Liz Truss.
Let us talk about woodlands. They stitch our habitats back together, and they provide corridors for our birds, bats and beetles. All Government-funded woodlands must be designed and planted to the UK forestry standard. That world-leading technical standard for sustainable forest creation and management ensures a diverse mix of species, which will not only benefit wildlife but make woodland more resilient to climate change and the ever-changing risks from pests and diseases.
Jim Shannon
There is no doubt that every one of us, including the Minister, is keen to encourage the planting of more woodlands but, by its very nature, having more woodlands, as the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) mentioned, means pests increasing in numbers, and that includes deer and grey squirrels. As someone who has never shot a deer or a grey squirrel, although I have shot many other things, including birds, I ask the Government to consider working in tandem with the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, the Countryside Alliance and individuals who are insured to ensure that deer numbers—we do want to see deer—are kept at a level where they do not become a pest and that grey squirrels are, to be honest about it, eradicated, so that red squirrels can survive.
Mary Creagh
I am glad the hon. Gentleman has raised that subject, which I was coming on to. Native wild deer are an important component of our landscape, and they play a role in healthy forest ecosystems. However, excessive browsing, foraging and trampling by deer put pressure on woodland ground flora, damage trees, and inhibit the natural regeneration of existing woodland and, crucially, the growth of new trees through natural colonisation. Trees will get on and do it themselves if we just leave them, but they cannot do it if they are constantly being yanked up by deer or grey squirrel populations.
We have to manage the impact of deer and grey squirrel populations, and it is our intention to outline plans to do that. We published our squirrel strategy last week, and the deer plan is imminent. We provide grants for capital items such as fencing and for the management of deer by lethal control. That is done through countryside stewardship grant funding where the land manager has been advised by a Forestry Commission deer officer that such action is needed.
We are funding projects relating to reducing deer impacts, and I am particularly concerned about the muntjac deer and the Chinese water deer, which are a particular feature of the east of England. They are alien, invasive species, so there are risks about hybridisation with our own native deer. One of the two—I cannot remember which one, but I think it is the muntjac—can breed three times a year, so it is constant breeding. Covid has had a very bad impact on deer management. We do not really have research on deer numbers, but anecdotally they are high, so we need to take action. I am particularly anxious about the east of England, and the steps needed there.
I want to say something about the British quality wild venison standard. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) may not have shot a deer, but I have certainly eaten quite a lot of venison. That wild, organic meat is really healthy and plays a part in creating that ecosystem. Some charities, such as the Country Food Trust, are doing really good work in that area.
Blake Stephenson
The hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) mentioned the potential introduction of the lynx as an apex predator, but active deer management is already under way in my constituency through culling. Do the Government have a preference on culling versus introducing an apex predator, or a combination of the two? What thought are the Government giving to deer management?
Mary Creagh
We have given some consideration to the question of introducing the lynx. At the moment, they are classed as a dangerous wild animal under the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976, and all dangerous wild animals have to be kept in a fenced enclosure. A massive fenced enclosure would be needed for a lynx. At the moment, the policy in the legislation makes it challenging. We need to balance that and work with stakeholders. Like beavers, they are animals that need a range, a habitat and the ability to roam around and breed. The question is: what happens when they breed and produce offspring? One pair of lynxes could end up being eight or 16. What is the management plan going forward? There are certainly some policy wrinkles in that—I will come back to deer, but that would need to be in very large forests with a lot of room to roam.
To go back to Kew Gardens, I had the pleasure of spending an hour with Kevin Martin, who is the head of tree collections at Kew. He has been going over to Kazakhstan in central Asia to collect tree seeds and do research on the seeds of the future and what our changing landscape will mean as we have hotter, drier summers and warmer, wetter winters. I also went out with somebody to look at trees, and we looked at this amazing lime tree with all its heavy nectar. He said to me, “For bees, that is like having a meadow in the sky.” Our city trees and the lime trees that grow along the embankment might be a bit of a nightmare from an allergy and pollen point of view, but for the bees of our capital city, and all our great cities, they are meadows in the sky.
Alison Taylor
Does the Minister have any comment on the lack of conifers being planted and the need to have them alongside broadleaf trees?
Mary Creagh
We need woodland creation of all types. In 2024, the proportion of conifers being planted went up to 12% of tree planting, from 9% the previous year. We need productive woodlands as part of that. Non-native forests can provide biodiversity benefits and vital seed crops for mammals, red squirrels and birds. We are working towards increasing the rate of conifer planting because, as colleagues have said, its importance to timber in our construction industry cannot be overstated. We aim to publish a new trees action plan in 2026, which will set out how our Government’s £1 billion investment into tree planting and the forestry sector in this Parliament will be used to achieve the new 2030 interim tree cover target and improve the resilience of our trees.
Jen Craft
The Minister will not have failed to notice the spectacular redwoods at Wakehurst on her visit there. Will she support Forestry England’s measures to make sure that one in five new trees planted are novel species such as the redwood and the cedar, which are predicted to cope much better with changing climate?
Mary Creagh
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The redwoods and the cedars are glorious, iconic species that can thrive in incredibly hot weather. They also give us year-round colour, because they do not drop their leaves, so less resource is needed to manage the leaf fall. Forestry England has published a list of 30 priority tree species selected for their ability to withstand extreme weather and resist pests and diseases. Of course, we have to think now about what will be able to survive 30 or 70 years into the future.
We have heard about how great trees are in towns and cities. They can reduce urban heat by between 2°C and 8°C, making a huge difference during hot weather. Those are not soft benefits; they are real public goods with real public value. Last year, tree planting in England reached its highest level in over 20 years with 7,000 hectares, or 10,000 football pitches, of new canopy. As we have heard, though, our tree cover is well below average, and we are the second largest net importer of timber in the world. Our environmental improvement plan, published in December, set a new interim tree canopy and woodland cover target that requires a net increase of 43,000 hectares from the 2022 baseline under the previous Government.
As I said, we announced the creation of the first new national forest, the western forest, stretching from the Cotswolds to the Mendips—that is really important for flood protection; I was in Somerset yesterday, looking at the fields under water—and spearheaded by the forest of Avon. Some 20 million trees will be planted across the west of England over the next 25 years. Last November, we announced the creation of two more national forests. The second one will be in the Oxford-Cambridge corridor.
The expression of interest process for community partners closed on 30 January. I am sure that the forest of Marston Vale will have applied, as will others. I shall remain completely neutral, but I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes North encouraged that application. We will launch a third new national forest competition, for the midlands or the north of England, by July 2026, so hon. Members should watch out for that. We will see millions of trees bringing peace, shade and joy to people around the country.
As we have heard, Milton Keynes has a long history of integrating trees into its living space. We must demonstrate how natural infrastructure can work alongside national infrastructure. It is very disappointing to hear about the A14 and the trees that have died. The tree-planting season is from November to February, and there is plenty of water around at the moment; we should not be planting them in the summertime.
Integrating trees into agriculture through agroforestry allows farmers to reap the many benefits that they provide, while maintaining and in some cases improving agricultural output. Our England woodland creation offer is tailored to encourage woodland creation where it is best suited, exemplifying the concept of public money for public good.
I will say a final couple of things. First, the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury, asked a specific question about APR and tree planting. I will write to her on that, because I would not want in any way to mislead the House. We do have the woodland creation planning grant, which makes thousands of pounds available to fund the groundwork before the first sapling goes in—the right trees in the right place.
Last month, we published the grey squirrel policy statement, saying how we will reduce the grey squirrel’s impact on red squirrels, as well as on our trees and woodland. I will just say that, for many of us, a cheeky grey squirrel—or five—is the only bit of nature we see in our garden, so I am not sure that they will be eradicated from towns and cities, but we need to ensure that we protect and create secure areas for our red squirrels to thrive.
We know that forestry supports rural economies, creates green jobs, supplies sustainable material and is important for tourism. We updated the “Timber in construction roadmap” last year, and we committed to planting, harvesting and using more sustainable timber at home. The Department for Education has a really good system for timber-framed buildings. I visited a timber frame production facility called Innovare—just outside Coventry—which told me how quickly it can get in and build these schools and extensions, which is particularly important for children with special educational needs who are very upset by things changing every day. Putting a frame up and then building from the inside out is a really good way to deal with that problem.
As a Government, we are supporting the Forestry Commission and University of Cumbria-led three-year paid forestry apprenticeship programme, with 21 apprentices graduating from this degree-level forestry apprenticeship just last November. Our investment in degree-level apprenticeships and training will boost rural employment.
Last year, Forest Research, which is part of the Forestry Commission, mapped England’s trees outside woodland by satellite and laser and made the results freely available for the first time. That showed that trees outside our woodlands make up 30% of the nation’s tree cover. I invite people to have a look, to log on and see what trees they have, and to check our satellite mapping; we always need citizen science feedback on all that.
Last year, I was honoured to open Forestry England’s newly upgraded seed processing unit in the constituency of the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury, in Delamere forest. The building is timber made and will be net zero carbon in operation. It has been named in honour of a long-serving member of Forestry England’s seed supply team, the late Vernon Stockton. It is the largest in the UK, and it will process cones, fruit and berries from across Great Britain, carefully selected for their genetic potential, each year producing four tonnes of top-quality seed. The forests of the future are being made in the Delamere forest tree seed processing centre.
However, we must not neglect public safety. Four months ago, following a Westminster Hall debate in the wake of the tragic death of Chris Hall, I wrote to local councils reminding them of their statutory public safety obligations and highlighted the guidance available to them on how to manage trees safely.
To conclude, I commend the work of the Parks Trust in Milton Keynes, and it is great to see a Labour Government, like the one that created that great city, and the Parks Trust carrying on with the great vision of trees, woodlands, parks and gardens close to where people live. At the end of last year, the Secretary of State visited the Parks Trust and heard more about its wetland arc project, which is bringing together local volunteers for community tree planting, increasing nature and climate resilience.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes North said, we face a nature crisis, but we are not out of solutions yet. Trees are one of our fastest, strongest and most dependable tools. I am pressing the Climate Change Committee and the emissions trading scheme, which is independent of Government, to include the woodland and peatland carbon codes as part of their future emissions trading scheme; they will make a decision on that at some point this year.
Tomorrow’s towns and cities must be richer in woodland, smarter in their use of wood and contain woods that are resilient, well designed and well connected. We will plant for the long term, knowing that what we plant today leaves a legacy for tomorrow. I thank everyone who came to this debate, everyone who loves trees and everyone who is out there right now, in the pouring rain, digging and planting these little sticks that will turn into something magical and powerful, creating a greener, fairer Britain.
Oral Answers to Questions
Mary Creagh Excerpts(4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
What steps is DEFRA taking to raise public awareness of the impact of methane-reducing feed additives used in livestock farming, such as Bovaer? What steps is DEFRA taking to ensure that all chemicals and additives are tested and proven to be safe for humans, animals and nature before being approved for use in agriculture and food?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
We have a system. Methane-reducing food products, including seaweed, oils and synthetic products such as Bovaer, are a key tool in reducing emissions from agriculture by up to one third. Bovaer is approved for use in 70 countries, including those in the EU, Switzerland, the US, Canada and Australia. We are building the market for safe, effective options and helping farmers to adopt them. Such products are approved by the Food Standards Agency, and that advice has not been changed. Bovaer has been reviewed by 100 peer-reviewed scientific studies.
Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)
Mary Creagh
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for her tireless campaigning on that disgraceful site. The Environment Agency has served a notice requiring the operator to reduce the risk of smells, and the deadline is 9 February. We expect the operator to comply. If it does not, all options, including suspension and closure, remain on the table.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
Following Storm Chandra, vast swathes of West Dorset are under water. An amber warning is in place, and we are expecting more flooding. Whole villages have become islands. Eighty-four houses in Yetminster have sewage in them. One family in Maiden Newton had only just moved back into their house following 15 months of repairs after the previous flooding, only to get flooded again within three days. Will the Minister please visit West Dorset and explain to residents how she will get the water companies and the Environment Agency to focus on flood-prone areas?
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
Mary Creagh
We said in our manifesto that we would deliver nine new national river walks—one in every region—to bring nature closer to people and make it accessible to everyone. My hon. Friend paints an amazing picture of the beautiful River Derwent. The first river walk, in the north-west, will be completed in the spring. The locations of the next walks will be subject to a competition later this year. I encourage her and all the partners she mentions to apply.
Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)
The Government’s own national security assessment warns that biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse pose serious risks to the UK’s long-term food security and may intensify natural disasters. Given that Parliament has not yet had the opportunity to debate this assessment, will the Secretary of State support my call for a dedicated debate, so that the risks and the actions across Government can be properly scrutinised by this House?
Mary Creagh
The Secretary of State and I have just spent a couple of days in Manchester looking at that with the international science panel on nature. We will report on Monday about how business can do better in tackling those risks. We are bringing the nature and climate debates together, and I am sure there will be time to debate them in the House, subject to your approval, Mr Speaker.
Antisocial Behaviour on Canals and Rivers: Bath
Mary Creagh Excerpts(4 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mary Creagh)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship this evening, Madam Deputy Speaker. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) on securing the debate and thank her for raising this important issue. I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for his insightful intervention about the canals in Northern Ireland.
May I, through my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher), send my sympathies to the parents of the little boy who died in Doncaster? His tragic story is a reminder that a senseless act of vandalism, or what looks and feels like fun in the moment, can have absolutely devastating consequences. It is also a reminder of the need for those responsible for reservoirs and towpaths to have in place a regime that makes sure the safety equipment is always there and properly maintained.
I share the concerns of hon. Members and the public about these serious matters. We have heard about significant nuisance to local people and communities that can also involve damage to property, physical threats and even assault. As the hon. Member for Bath said, the cost of living crisis is at the heart of this, because people have been priced out of houses in the gorgeous city of Bath, where there are many second homeowners and Airbnbs. I enjoyed a weekend there with my husband to celebrate our wedding anniversary, and it is lovely—we can feel that it is a very special place—but it may be very hard for people to afford local housing in her city.
The Government are committed to tackling this type of antisocial behaviour. We are proposing a range of measures in the Crime and Policing Bill, which is currently in Committee in the other place. Those new powers include a new respect order to ban adult offenders from engaging in specified activities, and increasing the maximum fixed penalty for breaches of a public spaces protection order or a community protection notice, from £100 to £500.
As the hon. Member said, and as I know from cycling up and down canal towpaths—slowly, and always dinging my bell twice when behind pedestrians—people living on the waterways are a deterrent against the types of antisocial behaviour that the hon. Member for Strangford mentioned. The natural surveillance of the people living on the boats means there is a huge disincentive to engage in criminal behaviour close to them.
As the hon. Member for Bath said, the Canal & River Trust is the responsible authority for the Kennet and Avon canal and the River Avon in Bath. It is aware of the problems and the concerns raised locally. It does not have policing powers, but it is responsible for the safe management both of its land and of waterways. It has policies governing unacceptable behaviour and site management, and those set out the expected conduct and outline when the trust can intervene or escalate issues.
Wera Hobhouse
The Minister has mentioned before that more powers will be given to the police, but often the main problem is that the police say, “We don’t have the resources to police the canal all the time,” while ultimately it is the Canal & River Trust that looks after canals, rivers and towpaths. There must be more that the Canal & River Trust can do about antisocial behaviour.
Mary Creagh
If the hon. Lady were to convene a regular set of meetings—say, quarterly—on this with the police, the local council and the CRT, I have found that the steady drumbeat of local accountability is very effective in bringing these partners together to tackle these issues, alongside the community of users and canal dwellers.
Jim Shannon
I thank the Minister for all that she does and for her answers to the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) in trying to find a way forward. I mentioned the street pastors in Strangford. I am not sure if every town and city has street pastors, but there are many people from the churches who have an interest in young people and issues relating to them. I am a great believer in rehabilitation and working with young people—they are not all bad. It is just a thought, but if somebody can work alongside them, perhaps we can address some of the antisocial behaviour issues.
Mary Creagh
What the hon. Gentleman says is so true. I know from my enjoyment of the Coventry canal running through Foleshill that lots of communities fear canals. They do not think it is a blue space for their recreation. They do not feel ownership of it. The difference between the usership of the canal that runs through Foleshill—through the poorest part of my constituency; the poorest part of the city of Coventry—and the canal that runs through King’s Cross St Pancras, where I have cycled up and down many times, is staggering. Communities can feel ownership or exclusion. Everywhere is safer where everybody feels that they can belong. Unpicking some of those barriers and working with communities that may be typecast, such as young people, is a positive solution, ensuring that people do not want to litter, leave their beer bottles or engage in antisocial behaviour.
Having read about this beforehand, it seems to me that there is an issue with stag parties on boats—there certainly has been in the past—which sounds quite tricky. We must also ensure that people have competence, so that if they hire a boat that is supposed to go only 3 or 4 mph, they actually know what they are doing, because they are quite difficult to steer. One does not want to go too fast, as I discovered when I had to have the tiller taken off me when we were going through a very narrow bridge. I am always grateful to have training in these issues.
Canals, towpaths and river banks are shared spaces, freely accessible to anyone, and that is absolutely right. They are used by walkers, anglers, joggers and cyclists. As a cyclist, I see antisocial behaviour on canal towpaths. I am very conscious of trying to avoid it—of slowing down and, particularly when tackling bridges, of going super slowly so that there is no unexpected surprise for people who may be wearing headphones. The trust has published its towpath code and encourages all users to be respectful and considerate. Pedestrians have priority, cyclists are urged to slow down, dog walkers should keep their dogs under control—because that is quite tricky—and people are encouraged to take their litter home with them. There are, however, a mindless minority who use canals and towpaths inconsiderately. We have seen instances of fires being lit, littering, fly-tipping, drunken behaviour, loud noise at night from moored boats, speeding boats, blockages on the towpath and out-of-control dogs.
The trust works closely with Avon and Somerset police, and Bath and North East Somerset council, to address safety and community concerns. It is engaging to develop the antisocial behaviour action plan that manages the competing demands of waterway users and local residents fairly. We saw an example of that recently in London, where the trust worked with the police to remove an illegal encampment from the River Lea Navigation that had caused significant disruption to the local community and to other boaters nearby. The Government fully support the trust and law enforcement agencies in dealing with antisocial behaviour, and we intend to strengthen the powers available to them to do so.
One issue raised this evening is the statutory powers available to the trust to enforce its rules. I have heard the hon. Lady’s concerns that the powers are inadequate and fragmented, and can lead to lengthy and costly enforcement. The trust recognises this challenge. In December 2024 it established an independent boat licensing commission to review its licensing regime. The commission published its report in November 2025, with 36 recommendations to make licensing fairer, simpler, more enforceable and better aligned with the trust’s charitable objectives. It recommended that the trust should: clearly define the navigation requirement for continuous cruising boat licences, to replace the current vague legal requirement for “bone fide navigation”; seek powers to introduce differential charging or rationing for moorings in areas of high congestion; seek powers to use force as a last resort, with safeguards, following a court order to remove a boat from a waterway; have the civil powers to levy fines on licence holders in response to breaches of terms and conditions, and on towpath users for antisocial behaviour such as fly-tipping; have the right to fit a tracking device to any vessel that is not complying with movement requirements, particularly in congested areas; and make the case to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for consolidating the legislation by which the trust operates.
The trust is looking at those recommendations, determining which to prioritise, recognising that many will require new or amended legislation that will need wider consultation. Where legislative change may be needed, the Government are ready to support the trust. We are in regular touch with the trust, including through quarterly formal meetings with the CEO and the executive team. We will use our engagement to support them in identifying quick and robust solutions.
As an independent charity, the trust makes its own management and operational decisions. Since taking over its statutory duties from British Waterways in 2012, it has received Government support as it establishes its role and builds greater financial independence. The canal network presents a considerable challenge, but the trust has a significant commercial and charitable portfolio. This is a main source of its income, rather than filling shortfalls. Harnessing the diverse uses of the canal network will be vital to maintaining it for the future.
The trust has proved to be commercially dynamic, doubling the value of its property endowment from Government, from around £500 million in 2012 to £1 billion today. Last year that endowment provided around £50 million of revenue a year, while boat licences provided around £55 million. The Government currently provide the trust with an annual grant of £52.6 million. That amount represented 22% of the trust’s total income in the last financial year. The grant primarily contributes to the trust’s waterways infrastructure maintenance costs, which, as the hon. Lady says, are considerable but which also keep certain heritage skills alive. I remember that Stanley Ferry up near Wakefield was the site of the last lock gate makers in the country, and their incredible craftwork can be seen on locks across the country—Members might want to look out for their badge when they are next at a canal lock. The Government have agreed to provide the trust with a further 10-year grant of £401 million from April 2027. That will continue to support the trust’s canal infrastructure maintenance, helping to keep the waterways safe and navigable.
In closing, I thank all hon. Members for contributing to the debate, and I agree that we must take action to tackle antisocial behaviour, in all its forms, on the canals and towpaths. People deserve to enjoy these blue walkways and amazing places. Who would have believed that it is possible to see a kingfisher on Coventry canal right next to the old Cash’s silkworks, one mile from the heart of Coventry city centre? It was a sight I never thought I would see—my first ever kingfisher.
People deserve to live free from nuisance, intimidation and damage to their property and to feel safe in the place they call home. Dignity and respect are not optional extras but the foundations of strong, decent communities that have pride in where they live. We will keep working until every neighbourhood feels safe, including those on the canals in Bath and across the country. The Canal & River Trust is playing its part by working closely with local authorities, police and other agencies to tackle antisocial behaviour on the waterways. It is also working to strengthen and streamline its licensing powers to ensure fairness for all users. We will continue to support this work through grant funding, assisting with any legislative changes that may be necessary.
Question put and agreed to.