mcld.co.uk

The UK is currently distracted by the Conservative Party's contest for a new leader. I spotted in a BBC News article that Liz Truss, the front-runner,

"would launch a new UK survey of wildlife to understand which species are endangered"

...but no further explanation. Nor anything on Liz Truss' own website. Eventually I found the following statement in her article for the Conservative Environment Network:

"I will commission a nationwide nature survey [to] build an evidence base in a better way than the EU-derived Habitats Directive to help us understand UK-specific habitat & species issues, like what species are endangered & what we can improve."

Now what does this mean, I wondered? Firstly, UK wildlife is very well surveyed already, and a lot is known about which species are endangered. Secondly, within a leadership campaign, these kind of campaigning announcements aren't given out by accident - it must mean something, a message either to win party members over to her side, or to signal allegiances within the Tory party. But what?

It's worth remembering that Liz Truss was previously in the UK government as Environment Secretary. We can presume she has some knowledge of these issues, though her record as an environmental champion is decidedly mixed. I highly recommend this Buglife blog from 2015 about the Habitats Directive and Liz Truss. This was, of course, back way before Brexit. The article quotes The Telegraph newspaper as reporting:

"The Government will also seek to emasculate European directives that provide the main protection for British wildlife. Liz Truss – the reappointed, but hitherto unremarkable, Environment Secretary – is not expected to provide much resistance. But, then, nature conservation has never featured much in the Prime Minister’s [David Cameron's] greenery."

So, that's a perspective from back in 2015. Even back then, as Environment Minister she "cut taxpayer subsidies for solar panels on agricultural land, as her view was that the land could be better used to grow crops, food and vegetables" (wkp). So at least there's some consistency, depressing as this silly claim is. (Solar energy is not in competition with land for food. Land for biofuel, land for golf courses, and land for grouse shooting all take up dozens of times more space, why is she not concerned about those?) The 2015 and 2022 Trusses are also consistent in cutting funding (e.g. to the Environment Agency) and insisting it as a good thing.

What are the possible explanations for the 2022 Liz Truss, out on the campaign trail, actively pushing for a new "nationwide nature survey"? Some candidate explanations:

1. Just a simple post-Brexit update? After disentangling from the EU, it's sensible to refresh the UK's Habitats Directive in a more customised UK-specific way. This is a sensible idea but it doesn't explain at all why Truss would be shouting about it on the campaign trail. After all, many other laws are probably in a similar situation.
2. A genuine reflection of the need to update the species lists because everyone knows they're a bit out of date (as mentioned in the Buglife blog linked above)? Again, it's hard to imagine that this justifies putting it in your manifesto; but since Truss has background in the domain, maybe.
3. She needs at least one "green policy" to show to some voters, and needs something that sounds nice and caring but doesn't impact on other plans? Could be. She's already shown her ignorance and NIMBYism about green energy, showing off ideas about stopping farmers from installing solar panels in their fields (the farmers are not happy she's saying this!), so it's clear she's not going to have much to win the green Tories over.
4. In order to delay action? i.e. let's not take any new conservation measures until a big multi-year consultation and survey is complete.
5. In order to reduce the protection of some species/habitats, i.e. to label some species as not endagered, more than to label them as endangered? It's quite common that rare species and habitats are seen as "getting in the way" e.g. of construction or industry.

I'm currently reading Wild City, a delightful book by Florence Wilkinson (my business partner) about "Encounters With Urban Wildlife". I was interested to find this titbit about politics and conservation:

"In July 2020, Prime Minister Boris Johnson gave a speech on job creation, in which he urged the nation to 'build, build, build'. And in doing so, he waged war on one of our rarest amphibians: 'Newt-counting delays are a massive drag on the prosperity of this country,' he blustered, referring to the great crested newt, which is a protected species under British law.

"For development to take place on a site occupied by great crested newts, adequate mitigation must be provided and the newts translocated to a suitable habitat elsewhere. Anyone found guilty of disturbing their resting places, breeding sites, or taking their eggs is liable for an unlimited fine and up to six months in prison.

"Johnson's comments soon faced wide condemnation, with the head of the Wildlife Trusts, Craig Bennett, describing the speech as 'pure fiction'. 'It may sound funny referring to newts,' he continued, 'but actually it was rather sinister. In the environmental movement we know referring to newts is a dog whistle to people on the right of his party who want environmental protections watered down.'"

So, here's an echo from the recent past. Neither Boris Johnson nor Liz Truss are visionaries, and I'm quite confident they are blown by the same winds: I wouldn't be surprised if they were influcenced by the same ideologues or generous funders in the Conservative Party, so this echo seems to support explanations four or five. Of course, multiple motives can be in play at once.

British nature organisations are clearly keeping an eye on all this too. The RSPB last week "weighed in to the Tory leadership contest". Notably, the first thing they highlighted was that EU-derived habitat regulations "have been vital in the protection of nature for the past thirty years," and they warn strongly against scrapping them or watering them down. The RSPB is also concerned about other related policy proposals such as absorbing Natural England into DEFRA, i.e. absorbing arms-length nature organisations into the government department, which clearly would reduce the independent voice for nature.

Postscript: I've been trying to keep to a neutral tone, but I can't really leave this topic without registering my horror at British politics. The UK's voting system, and now the Conservative party's system too, seem fatefully incapable of selecting for competence. In such important times as these, we have some very significant "live issues" to deal with, and the hollowing out of the UK political system is a cause for despair.