Environment
These regulations aim to promote sustainable development and protect the environment.
You can find all 278 regulations that relate to environment here [opens in new window].
For ease of commenting we have broken these regulations into the following seven areas:
There must be no relaxation of existing legislation which protects the environment.
Not red tape, which has deragatory overtones, but essential legislation. If anything the legislation, and enforcement, needs to be strengthened to protect the environment in the long term. We don’t need short term/knee jerk reactions to whinging from developers etc. Many small towns and villages would be happy to see fewer holiday homes and ‘investment’ developments. Current legislation has been one of the reasons for small improvements – eg the otters’ revival. Keep it up!
I think we need the laws & controls to protect the environment for individuals, families and the wider community. Leave well alone!
If anything the laws should be strengthened . Many were put in place because of irresponsible pollution in the past, and the disappearance of wildlife. If this really is a green government it needs to be preserving the environment for our children – not letting companies destroy it for short-term gain.
Both the Wildlife and Countryside Acts and amendments, and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Actsare vital in this overcrowded island and must be retained infull, regardless of any red tape that might be involved.Comment Tags: wildlife
These regulations have been developed over time in response to threats to the stability of our ecosystems & habitats, fragmentation of wild-spaces impacting on the ability of species to sustain their populations, pressure on populations of flora and fauna, pollution and increases in disease affecting species pushed to the brink on our cramped island. To contemplate removing these regulations as ‘red tape’ to development seems to be ignoring their very purpose, taking Britain on a retrograde move with regards to our environmental protection. In a time of over population and increasing demands on our natural resources lifting restrictions will only serve to speed potential crashes in populations, negatively impacting on biodiversity and the impact that will have on all spheres of our own life, more so than the current financial crisis. These must be reconsidered in a measured, independent scientifically justified and unrushed manner to ensure that any changes improve protection for the environment. Not simply pushed through, which no one voted for, as would appear to be the case here.
It should not jettison hard-won planning regulations on the spurious grounds of – on the one hand – ‘red tape’ and on the other shortage of affordable housing. There are plenty of brownfield sites in towns but they tend to be bought by supermarkets, thus killing local shops and town centres. Please concentrate on that problem.Comment Tags: Spurious red tape argument
Make it impossible to develop land in areas of outstanding natural beauty, forests and national parks without the application of vigorous planning laws, as applies now. Also protect green belt.. Strict planning laws should also apply to wind farms and arrays of photovoltaic cells in fields.
Whilst there will be some anomolies within the so called “red tape”n its been put there over a lengthy time period to ensure we do not impact unsustainably on our fragile environment. The lessons of the past should serve to inform the unpredictable future facing us, much of which is man induced and avoidable. Rather than reducing constraints there needs to be a greater involvement by people in their own environments. Ireland, for instance, has 3rd party appeals against planning decisions – In England its the developer that has the upper hand simply because they have more cash and the system is loaded in their favour. No further changes to waeken our responsibility please.Comment Tags: precautionary principle works well
I am concerned about the proposal to water down environmental protection legislation. The legislation as it stands is too weak to prevent the wholesale damage to our important species and habitats, to weaken it further would be a disaster!Comment Tags: Don’t weaken environment protection legislation
I am hugely against the watering down or removal of any of the environmental legislation or that relating to the right to roam. These were laws drawn up to protect the environment, people’s quality of life and right to visit the countryside and they should be maintained and where possible enhanced, not reduced in any wayComment Tags: environment
I just added this web site to my rss reader, great stuff. Cannot get enough!
I think I am dismayed and extremely perturbed by the ill thought out”improvements this Government is trying to rush through on many issues of regulation. Law is by its nature complex and in order to not leave loopholes for unscrupulous planners -needs to be thorough and binding. The terms and conditions for holding a free e mail account are pages long so that the provider is covered and protected by law.Our rare species and environments deserve to be protected by more red tape- not less.
I do not believe that legislation that protects wildlife and the countryside is unnecessary red tape which should be removed. It is the only safeguard there is to the destruction of the countryside. Whilst there may be opportunities to streamline legislation it should not be weakened. Instead I would propose to strengthen protection of irreplacable habitats, such as ancient woodland, because you can’t just plant some trees elsewhere as compensation: once it’s gone, it’s gone!
Halt all Wind Farm construction for 5 years and use the subsidies to develope more efficient turbinesComment Tags: Halt all Wind Farms
I would be wary of removing environmental legislation anywhere, but especially on a crowded island such as Great Britain.
.
This legislation prioritises development over environmental legislation and protection. This short term view will have serious long term consequences for our already overexploited natural environment. Improvement in my view would be an increase in protection for the environment.
I fear the Government is trying to remove environmental protection to favour employersComment Tags: jim.mcg.12@btinternet.com
The environmental legislation has grown due to peoples concerns with health and well being and of course the countryside wqhich we all enjoy. I would not tamper with this legislation without the publics consent and this is not the way to ask te public. If you want to change it you should put to the people in a referendum or at election timeComment Tags: oppose changes to environmental legislation
I think the caveat regarding the need for economic development at the expense of irreplaceable habitats needs removing and the legislation needs strengthening to protect our rare environments.