Environment Bill — New Clause 5 — State of Nature Target — 26 Jan 2021 at 17:53

The majority of MPs voted not to have a target to halt and begin to reverse the decline in the state of nature in England as soon as reasonably practicable and no later than 2030.

MPs were considering the Environment Bill.[1][2]

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: State of nature target and stated:

  • (1) It is the duty of the Secretary of State to set a target to halt and begin to reverse the decline in the state of nature  in England as soon as reasonably practicable and no later than 2030.
  • (2) The target in subsection (1) shall be known as the state of nature target.
  • (3) The Secretary of State must ensure that the state of nature target is met.
  • (4) A draft statutory instrument containing regulations that make provision for how progress toward the state of nature target will be measured must be laid before Parliament at least one month before the fifteenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.
  • (5) Before laying before Parliament a draft of a statutory instrument under this section, the Secretary of State must obtain, publish and take into account the advice of relevant experts, including—
  • (a) The Environment Agency;
  • (b) Natural England;
  • (c) The Office for Environment Protection; and
  • (d) The Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
  • (6) In this section—
  • (a) the abundance and distribution of species;
  • (b) the risk of extinction; and
  • (c) the extent and condition of priority habitats.

The rejected new clause was accompanied by the following statement from its proposer:

  • This new clause would place a duty on the Secretary of State to set and meet a target to begin to reverse the loss of biodiversity in England no later than 2030. This timetable would align with the new Convention on Biological Diversity goals that are due to be agreed in 2021.

There was presumably an intent to refer to the Office for Environmental Protection in subsection 5(c).

Subsection (6) doesn't appear to make any sense, presumably it was intended to set out subjects the target might relate to.


Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con352 (+2 tell) 6098.6%
DUP8 00100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 2050.0%
Lab0 196 (+2 tell)099.0%
LDem0 110100.0%
Total:360 217098.5%

Rebel Voters - sorted by constituency

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

Tracey CrouchChatham and AylesfordConaye
Dame Cheryl GillanChesham and AmershamCon (front bench)aye
Jason McCartneyColne ValleyConaye
Roger GaleNorth ThanetCon (front bench)aye
Caroline NokesRomsey and Southampton NorthCon (front bench)aye
David WarburtonSomerton and FromeConaye

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive