Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Labor pledges to pass long-awaited nature laws this week as Greens demand more concessions

News Feed
Sunday, November 23, 2025

Years of debate about environmental law reform have come down to a tense standoff in the final sitting week of federal parliament for the year, with Labor claiming it can do a deal that will pass the Senate by Thursday.The government is still pushing to pass its major changes, despite not yet having reached an agreement with either the Greens or the Coalition.The Greens appear to be inching closer to a deal on updating the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, with the Coalition still refusing to back the changes. But the Minerals Council has joined other peak business groups in urging the Liberals and Nationals to back the changes, with environment minister, Murray Watt, pledging to make a deal with whoever will come to the table first.Sign up: AU Breaking News email“We will pass these reforms this week with whichever of the Coalition and the Greens is willing to work with us to deliver that balanced package,” Watt said on Sunday.Greens and Labor sources said they expected the two parties could come to an agreement later in the week, ahead of parliament rising on Thursday afternoon, but the Greens environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, wanted more limits on fossil fuel developments before signing up.“We also want to make sure we’re not seeing coal and gas fossil fuel projects accelerated,” she told the ABC’s Insiders.“I think it’s crazy in 2025, you’re talking about a new set of environment laws and it doesn’t even consider the climate pollution that a coal or gas mine makes?”Despite the 1,500 pages of environmental law reform still being examined by a Senate committee, due to report in March 2026, the government says it wants to ram the bill through parliament by year’s end because it would improve approvals and build times for major parts of its agenda including housing construction, critical minerals sites and green energy projects.But the Greens and Coalition say they are not convinced of the bill’s urgency. Despite not ruling out a deal later in the week, Greens sources said they didn’t see the need for rushing, noting the ongoing Senate inquiry, and their concerns that the bill could help fast-track approval of coal and gas projects.Labor, in turn, is pressuring the Greens. Watt held a press conference on Sunday in the Brisbane electorate of Ryan, the last Greens-held seat in the country after the party lost three seats at the May election.“We saw at the last federal election that the Greens party paid a very big political price for being seen by the Australian people to be blocking progress on important things like housing and environmental law reform,” Watt said.“There’s a real opportunity for the Greens this week to demonstrate that they have heard the message from the Australian people, that they’re not going to keep blocking progress, that they’re not going to make the perfect the enemy of the good.”The Liberal party’s finance spokesperson, James Paterson, said on Sunday: “where it stands today, we certainly couldn’t support the proposed legislation.”He claimed the laws were “deficient” and that the opposition would stick to its earlier demands, daring the government to “do a deal with the Greens and they will wear the consequences of that.”skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionWatt has offered concessions to both Greens and Coalition demands.To the Coalition, Watt has conceded amendments to tighten rules around the National Environmental Protection Agency’s powers, while for the Greens, Labor has offered limits on the “national interest” test being used to approve fossil fuel projects.On Sunday, Watt extended another olive branch to the Greens, offering to force native forestry projects to comply with national environmental standards within three years. But Hanson-Young wanted more for their support, saying a three-year phase-in was not fast enough.“It’s 2025 and it’s time we ended native forest logging,” she said.Corporate groups like the Business Council of Australia have urged the Coalition to back the EPBC changes. The Minerals Council CEO, Tania Constable, added her voice on Sunday, calling for a “sensible compromise by both sides”.“This will allow our industry to deliver investment, jobs and regional benefits faster,” she said.

The government has offered to make changes to the bill to both the Greens and the Liberals hoping to reach a deal on legislation that can pass the SenateGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastYears of debate about environmental law reform have come down to a tense standoff in the final sitting week of federal parliament for the year, with Labor claiming it can do a deal that will pass the Senate by Thursday.The government is still pushing to pass its major changes, despite not yet having reached an agreement with either the Greens or the Coalition. Continue reading...

Years of debate about environmental law reform have come down to a tense standoff in the final sitting week of federal parliament for the year, with Labor claiming it can do a deal that will pass the Senate by Thursday.

The government is still pushing to pass its major changes, despite not yet having reached an agreement with either the Greens or the Coalition.

The Greens appear to be inching closer to a deal on updating the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, with the Coalition still refusing to back the changes. But the Minerals Council has joined other peak business groups in urging the Liberals and Nationals to back the changes, with environment minister, Murray Watt, pledging to make a deal with whoever will come to the table first.

Sign up: AU Breaking News email

“We will pass these reforms this week with whichever of the Coalition and the Greens is willing to work with us to deliver that balanced package,” Watt said on Sunday.

Greens and Labor sources said they expected the two parties could come to an agreement later in the week, ahead of parliament rising on Thursday afternoon, but the Greens environment spokesperson, Sarah Hanson-Young, wanted more limits on fossil fuel developments before signing up.

“We also want to make sure we’re not seeing coal and gas fossil fuel projects accelerated,” she told the ABC’s Insiders.

“I think it’s crazy in 2025, you’re talking about a new set of environment laws and it doesn’t even consider the climate pollution that a coal or gas mine makes?”

Despite the 1,500 pages of environmental law reform still being examined by a Senate committee, due to report in March 2026, the government says it wants to ram the bill through parliament by year’s end because it would improve approvals and build times for major parts of its agenda including housing construction, critical minerals sites and green energy projects.

But the Greens and Coalition say they are not convinced of the bill’s urgency. Despite not ruling out a deal later in the week, Greens sources said they didn’t see the need for rushing, noting the ongoing Senate inquiry, and their concerns that the bill could help fast-track approval of coal and gas projects.

Labor, in turn, is pressuring the Greens. Watt held a press conference on Sunday in the Brisbane electorate of Ryan, the last Greens-held seat in the country after the party lost three seats at the May election.

“We saw at the last federal election that the Greens party paid a very big political price for being seen by the Australian people to be blocking progress on important things like housing and environmental law reform,” Watt said.

“There’s a real opportunity for the Greens this week to demonstrate that they have heard the message from the Australian people, that they’re not going to keep blocking progress, that they’re not going to make the perfect the enemy of the good.”

The Liberal party’s finance spokesperson, James Paterson, said on Sunday: “where it stands today, we certainly couldn’t support the proposed legislation.”

He claimed the laws were “deficient” and that the opposition would stick to its earlier demands, daring the government to “do a deal with the Greens and they will wear the consequences of that.”

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Watt has offered concessions to both Greens and Coalition demands.

To the Coalition, Watt has conceded amendments to tighten rules around the National Environmental Protection Agency’s powers, while for the Greens, Labor has offered limits on the “national interest” test being used to approve fossil fuel projects.

On Sunday, Watt extended another olive branch to the Greens, offering to force native forestry projects to comply with national environmental standards within three years. But Hanson-Young wanted more for their support, saying a three-year phase-in was not fast enough.

“It’s 2025 and it’s time we ended native forest logging,” she said.

Corporate groups like the Business Council of Australia have urged the Coalition to back the EPBC changes. The Minerals Council CEO, Tania Constable, added her voice on Sunday, calling for a “sensible compromise by both sides”.

“This will allow our industry to deliver investment, jobs and regional benefits faster,” she said.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

‘Whiplash’ and ‘scar tissue’: conservation authorities grapple with Ontario’s most dramatic overhaul yet

Nearly 80 years after their creation, the Doug Ford government is reducing the unique environmental agencies from 36 to 7, in a move staff say may ‘slow approvals, create confusion’ over development and flood protections

Nearly 80 years after their creation, the Doug Ford government is reducing the unique environmental agencies from 36 to 7, in a move staff say may ‘slow approvals, create confusion’ over development and flood protections

Government
Conservation

Sicily deserves better than the looming prospect of a giant bridge that will never get built | Jamie Mackay

Troubled waters over the world’s longest suspension bridge are no surprise. The Italian government should be funding public servicesA dozen or so times each day, as Italy’s southbound Intercity rail service arrives in the Calabrian town of Villa San Giovanni, the journey comes to a dramatic halt. The train is decoupled from its tracks, carefully loaded on to the deck of a ferry, and secured in place. The entire cargo then eases out into the Strait of Messina en route to Sicily. Invariably, this 25-minute crossing becomes an impromptu community moment. Passengers abandon their carriages, flocking to the ship’s top-deck snack bar to share freshly fried arancini, trade anecdotes, and admire the vista over Mount Etna’s distant peak, before returning to continue their journey by rail.For tourists and itinerant visitors like myself, the ferry crossing is a charming novelty. For local people, however, it has long been a defining part of their identity. In his 1941 novel, Conversations in Sicily, the writer Elio Vittorini describes a group of fruit pickers congregating on the boat’s deck, feasting on large chunks of local cheese and enjoying the view. As the narrator joins them, he is transported to “being a boy; feeling the wind devouring the sea”, while gazing out at “the ruins along the two coasts”, separated, poetically, across the water.Jamie Mackay is a writer and translator based in Florence Continue reading...

A dozen or so times each day, as Italy’s southbound Intercity rail service arrives in the Calabrian town of Villa San Giovanni, the journey comes to a dramatic halt. The train is decoupled from its tracks, carefully loaded on to the deck of a ferry, and secured in place. The entire cargo then eases out into the Strait of Messina en route to Sicily. Invariably, this 25-minute crossing becomes an impromptu community moment. Passengers abandon their carriages, flocking to the ship’s top-deck snack bar to share freshly fried arancini, trade anecdotes, and admire the vista over Mount Etna’s distant peak, before returning to continue their journey by rail.For tourists and itinerant visitors like myself, the ferry crossing is a charming novelty. For local people, however, it has long been a defining part of their identity. In his 1941 novel, Conversations in Sicily, the writer Elio Vittorini describes a group of fruit pickers congregating on the boat’s deck, feasting on large chunks of local cheese and enjoying the view. As the narrator joins them, he is transported to “being a boy; feeling the wind devouring the sea”, while gazing out at “the ruins along the two coasts”, separated, poetically, across the water.Soon, though, this sentimental voyage may become a relic of the past. For the past few months, Italian officials have been in advanced talks to sign off on a new bridge connecting Sicily to the mainland. In August, the Italian government confirmed it will invest €13.5bn and commission the Webuild Group to begin construction. If it is ever built, it will be the longest single-span bridge in the world.The Sicilians I know are sceptical. After all, this is not the first time the Messina Bridge has been mooted, only to be shelved. While plans for the crossing date back to Roman times, the modern saga truly began in the late 1960s, when successive Italian governments championed the project as crucial for tackling regional inequalities. For the original architects, the bridge offered an obvious solution to the glaring infrastructure gap between the industrial north and the agricultural south. By closing that space, they reasoned, Sicily could finally attract the kind of international investment that other parts of Italy had long enjoyed.But the bridge has never materialised. Over the decades, hurdles such as seismic viability, environmental concerns, and the pervasive risk of mafia fraud have repeatedly halted the plans, making it seem impossible. Even a few months ago, when the government announced its “final” approval, my Sicilian friends told me they’d believe it when they saw it. They were right. Last month, Italy’s court of auditors blocked the project due to concerns about the legality of the financing, and at the time of writing, the project is frozen once again.In the meantime, an old public debate is re-emerging, which reveals a lot about Italian politics today. On one side are the pro-bridge advocates, who see the project as key to the future, pointing out that it would provide as many as 120,000 new local jobs per year and improve prospects for growth. On the other side are the protesters, from across the political spectrum, who dismiss pro-bridge advocates as nefarious opportunists concerned only with profit. For them, the bridge is synonymous with the shortsighted exploitation of the island.If you’ve ever been to Messina, you’ll know these vague ideological stances quickly rub up against reality. While the city’s life and culture are as exciting as anywhere on the island, Messina is unfortunately afflicted by some of the worst social problems in Italy. The local municipality is infamous for its financial mismanagement, characterised by mysterious losses of public funds and active criminal and civil court cases ongoing against various politicians, including two former mayors. Organised crime is prevalent, and cases of infrastructure-related fraud are already common among businesses, including those with interests in the Strait. Poverty is a huge problem. The health service is on its knees, and the school system is on the verge of collapse, suffering from some of the worst drop-out rates in the country.This reality makes the rhetoric of political proponents hard to swallow. Recently, Italy’s transport minister, Matteo Salvini, called the bridge “the most important public work in the world”, but he didn’t always feel this way. A decade ago, in fact, he was arguing the exact opposite. In a 2016 TV interview, which is now being widely reshared online in Italy, he judged the bridge unfeasible from an engineering standpoint and argued that regular closures due to the notoriously strong winds would render it useless. Given the state of public services in Sicily, he argued, spending billions on such a project would be a waste of money, and it would be better to dedicate such limited funds to bolstering local services.Ironically, the very arguments Salvini made in 2016 have only gained greater relevance as the effects of the climate crisis intensify. Over my years of taking the ferry, I’ve witnessed first-hand how the annual wildfires are getting worse. I’ve made small talk with local farmers on the ferry’s top-deck bar, watching flames lick the sky, illuminating the charred hillsides. I’ve heard accounts of the fatal spring and summer of 2024, when the province of Messina experienced its worst drought in decades. Crops failed, livestock died. Reservoirs ran empty and aqueducts began to fail. In some areas, tap water failed to arrive for days on end.Webuild presents the Messina Bridge as a historic opportunity. Residents, though, don’t seem to see it that way, and a recent survey indicates 70% are against the project. And you can see why: if you were living in a drought zone, would the prospect of having an estimated 15-20% of your local water supply diverted towards the project really seem like an opportunity? If you lived near the seafront, would you want years of noise, wildlife destruction and pollution, all for the eventual aim of a giant public work that is not guaranteed to benefit you? If you were one of the 4,000 people on either side of the Strait who would be forced to abandon their homes to demolition, would you be ready to pack your bags?skip past newsletter promotionSign up to This is EuropeThe most pressing stories and debates for Europeans – from identity to economics to the environmentPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionSalvini has promised to respond to the court’s concerns and claims the government can still get construction started by February 2026. I, for one, hope he backs down. At a moment when the climate crisis is creating new emergencies and worsening an already dire economic situation, the bridge is simply not a priority. Sicilians are desperately in need of political investment in public services, of leaders who can inspire collective action to ensure government funds are properly spent. Until then, Sicilians remain defiant and continue to enjoy one of the world’s most spectacular ferry crossings: preferring conviviality and arancini to a costly steel panacea.

Government
Water
Climate

Data centers meet resistance over environmental concerns as AI boom spreads in Latin America

An expert describes how communities in some of the world’s driest areas are demanding transparency as secretive governments court billions in foreign investmentThis Q&A originally appeared as part of The Guardian’s TechScape newsletter. Sign up for this weekly newsletter here.The data centers that power the artificial intelligence boom are beyond enormous. Their financials, their physical scale, and the amount of information contained within are so massive that the idea of stopping their construction can seem like opposing an avalanche in progress. Continue reading...

This Q&A originally appeared as part of The Guardian’s TechScape newsletter. Sign up for this weekly newsletter here.The data centers that power the artificial intelligence boom are beyond enormous. Their financials, their physical scale, and the amount of information contained within are so massive that the idea of stopping their construction can seem like opposing an avalanche in progress.Despite the scale and momentum of the explosion of data centers, resistance is mounting in the United States, in the United Kingdom, and in Latin America, where data centers have been built in some of the world’s driest areas. Local opposition in all three regions has often focused on the environmental impacts and resource consumption of the gargantuan structures.Paz Peña is a researcher and fellow with the Mozilla Foundation who studies the social and environmental impact of technology, particularly data centers and particularly in Latin America. She spoke to the Guardian at the Mozilla festival in Barcelona about how communities in Latin America are going to court to pry information away from governments and corporations that would much rather keep it secret.The Guardian: Could you describe your research?Paz Peña: Basically, my research is about the positions of governments on data centers and what the promises are behind them. What are the relationships that governments today in Latin America have with big tech? There’s a lot of lobbying activities around infrastructure and data centers from big tech to governments in Latin America.Chile and Brazil are the two top countries working on data centers today in Latin America, and Chile is one of the countries in Latin America that has a lot of resistance against data centers.What the governments are doing – I’m talking about leftwing governments … what they are looking for is foreign investment for data centers in their countries. The amounts are great. It’s a public policy to attract [data centers] with what they call national investment plans. They’re doing tax exemptions, for example, in Brazil, which is a huge controversy back there.In the case of Chile, what they’re doing is actually trying to deregulate the environmental assessments that data centers are going through.Carving out an exception for them?Peña: Exactly. There’s no specific category of environmental impact assessment for data centers in Latin America. In the case of Chile right now, they are assessed on the diesel that they use, because they use diesel generators for energy. It’s huge amounts of diesel.The government actually made an administrative change in the environmental system evaluation, where the threshold that data centers need to achieve on diesel to pass an environmental assessment changed. Magically, that means that data centers are not going through environmental impact assessments in Chile any more, which was the reason why communities understood what were the impacts of data centers. They don’t have that information right now.What we’re seeing is that governments are creating opportunities for investments but not creating rules and regulations for the environmental impacts of data centers, rules about diesel use, energy, and water.Without that information on data centers, do you see that the opposition to them is confused or hobbled because they don’t know what it is they’re opposing? Or does it incite more opposition because of the feeling of not being told what’s really going on?In the case of Chile, I would say that the local activism is quite angry with the leftwing government. The promises of this government was to be an environmental, sustainable exercise of power, right? President [Gabriel] Boric actually said this, that he would form an ecological government. Nobody really believes that. But they put that in the discourse. So you have to pay your words, right?People are really mad. I would say for two reasons. One is that they don’t have the transparency to understand what is going on in their neighborhoods. The second thing is they are super mad about it because the national data center plan, which is, again, a foreign investment plan, is presented for companies – but not necessarily for communities. When they actually publicly presented this plan, which was about two months ago, all the industry was present, but super few people from communities. Communities felt like they were being left out of the conversation.If there’s a data center planned for my neighborhood and I oppose it, what should I do?In a community, you will find people that understand what a data center is and some people will not have an idea of what it is. So when they have heard, they probably heard by two sources: a government’s evaluation system or the media. So once they have heard about this, the main problem they have is, again, transparency. Because corporate secrecy is still super present around the resources that these data centers need – energy, water, et cetera.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe problem that we have seen this in Latin America – there’s an incredible example in Uruguay about this – is that governments actually agree with this corporate secrecy. When a community asks for more information, the government is saying: it’s corporate secrecy. We cannot give you that information. So in general, what we are seeing is that communities are considering going to court to actually ask for that information. Because in Latin America, there is an inter-American agreement called the Escazu agreement, which is an environmental agreement about transparency, saying that a government cannot hide this incredibly important information for people.In the case of Uruguay, they went to court, because there was a Google data center being built in Uruguay in Montevideo, the capital. A couple of years ago, they’re going through an incredible drought where the people in Montevideo had to shower with buckets of water.Meanwhile, the government announced that this Google data center, where the amounts of water needed would be immense. So people were asking if this water, this very scarce resource, should be going to Google or to people. This is a fair question.They didn’t know exactly how much water Google would need. So they asked the government. The government said no. The environmental minister said: no, you cannot have that information because it’s corporate secrecy by Google. So they went to court, and they won, actually. The court quoted the Eskasu agreement.When a community takes a public stance saying we want more information about this and that, and social and environmental impacts, the impression is that they are opposing progress, technological progress, economic progress. Corporations, and I will say, sadly, governments – they see communities as a kind of roadblock.The first thing people need is information, and the first hurdle that they confront is the lack of information. So I would say that the first step they need to take is to find any source of information, and sometimes go to court. The majority of these actions are not successful, but they are sometimes the only way that corporations but also, sadly, governments give the information to the people.If you lose the fight, what should you do then if you’re a member of this community?For some communities in Chile that I interviewed, big tech companies weren’t actually the enemy, which is very interesting. Data center plans were seen as sort of an opportunity to raise the bar of environmental measures, because the people in those communities are surrounded by so many bad corporate actors who pollute a lot and don’t even care. It’s not necessarily a movement against big tech. Not yet, I would say. Maybe later.For now, these communities see a tech company planning a data center as not as a bad actor, actually as a strategic opportunity to raise the bar of environmental care and measures in their own neighborhoods. Big tech companies have this necessity of being the good player in the world, or at least being seen that way, so there is an opportunity for people to say, ‘Big tech has raised the bar of environmental care. So let’s try to put some sort of pressure to the other bad actors.’The enormous amounts of money and the physical scale of these things are so huge. They seem to operate on this inhumanly large level. How do people believe in their own opposition to these projects? They’re so massive that it kind of seems like you’re just saying no to an earthquake.In general, people who are working against data centers are people who have a background working on environmental issues. It’s people really used to the big fight. It’s people that really understand how difficult it is to deal with corporations and with governments.

Government
Activism
Sustainable

Developers met ministers dozens of times over planning bill while ecologists were shut out

Exclusive: Leading ecologists say warnings over threat to wildlife have been ignored in drive to build 1.5m new homesThe scale of lobbying of ministers by developers on Labour’s landmark planning changes, which seek to rip up environmental rules to boost growth, can be exposed as campaigners make last-ditch attempts to secure protections for nature.The government published its planning and infrastructure bill in March. Before and after the bill’s publication the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, and housing minister Matthew Pennycook have met dozens of developers in numerous meetings. The body representing professional ecologists, meanwhile, has not met one minister despite requests to do so. Continue reading...

The scale of lobbying of ministers by developers on Labour’s landmark planning changes, which seek to rip up environmental rules to boost growth, can be exposed as campaigners make last-ditch attempts to secure protections for nature.The government published its planning and infrastructure bill in March. Before and after the bill’s publication the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, and housing minister Matthew Pennycook have met dozens of developers in numerous meetings. The body representing professional ecologists, meanwhile, has not met one minister despite requests to do so.The government’s planning bill will reach its final stages before it is given royal assent in the coming days, after months of tussling between ministers, nature groups and ecologists.The government has promised to rip up the rules to allow 1.5m homes to be built by the end of this parliament as part of its push for growth.As last-minute wrangling over the reforms continues, peers have secured a key amendment that would ensure species such as dormice, nightingales and hedgehogs, and rare habitats like wetlands and ancient woodlands, continue to be protected from harm by development.Katherine Willis, the peer who put forward the successful amendment in the House of Lords on behalf of nature organisations and ecologists, said the changes would reduce the risk the bill posed to the natural world, but also help developers. She urged MPs to vote for the amended bill next week.“It provides a pragmatic way out of what are the real things that are blocking development and is a win-win amendment because it will help developers build houses, but also means that the vast majority of nature, the things the public really care about, will be protected,” she said.But the government has shown little sign of wanting to compromise. It has previously whipped its MPs against a string of amendments, and suspended one Labour MP for speaking out for nature.The Guardian can reveal the scale of the lobbying by developers in face-to-face meetings with the chancellor and other ministers that has been going on for months, while professional ecologists have found it hard to gain any audience.“Access to ministers has been difficult,” said Sally Hayns, the chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management. “We asked for a meeting early on, and were initially turned down. We asked again in July and finally had a meeting in the autumn with civil servants. We haven’t had a face-to-face meeting with a minister at all.”In contrast, just a week into her tenure Reeves hosted high-level discussions with housebuilders Berkeley, Barratt and Taylor Wimpey and has continued to have a string of meetings with housing developers, according to the Treasury register of ministerial meetings.Reeves has repeatedly trumpeted the virtues of slashing nature rules to make it easier for homes to be built, and maligned the bats, newts and spiders that might get in the builders’ way.She recently boasted to a tech conference hosted by US bank JP Morgan that she had unblocked a development of 20,000 homes that were being held up by a rare snail after she was approached by a developer. These homes had initially been blocked by Natural England because the Sussex area was at risk of running out of water.Housing minister Matthew Pennycook has also recorded many meetings with developers including Vistry, Berkeley, Barratt, and Taylor Wimpey. He has recorded 16 meetings up to May this year with property developers, on housing supply and planning reform.In contrast, his engagement with wildlife and nature groups is less intense. Pennycook has recorded four meetings over the past year with nature groups, three with Wildlife and Countryside Link and the other with a range of groups including the Campaign to Protect Rural England and the RSPB (the Royal Society for the protection of Birds). Ministers in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) have held roundtables with environmental NGOs, but the bill’s oversight is being led by Pennycook’s department.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionVistry, which is building 1,200 homes outside Newton Abbot in Devon, sent bulldozers to within feet of a 2,000 year-old protected ancient wetland last month. They want planning conditions protecting the site lifted, and have said they are in contact with Labour housing ministers, seeking help to sort out the “current blockages” and expedite the project.Hayns said ecologists from her group worked closely with developers, and were key contributors to helping projects go ahead but were not being properly consulted. “There is a very low level of ecological literacy being displayed by ministers,” she said.“Nothing I have seen or heard gives me comfort that Rachel Reeves understands the importance of nature to economic and social wellbeing, nothing,”Hayns said nature was being treated as expendable. “I believe this will come back to bite them in the local elections,” she said. “Nature and protecting it is an issue that people care about.”Joan Edwards, director of policy and public affairs at the Wildlife Trusts, said it was vital that the amendment to disarm the most damaging aspects of the planning bill was supported by MPs in the Commons next week.“The evidence is unequivocal and a consensus is growing: nature is not a blocker to development and the government should stop pretending otherwise … this is the last chance saloon for MPs to ensure that the planning and infrastructure bill rolls out development and growth that brings genuine benefits for people and wildlife.”A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “We completely reject these claims. Minister Pennycook attended two meetings with environmental groups on the planning and infrastructure bill in recent months, while the secretary of state also held a number of meetings with environmental NGOs during his time at Defra.“This engagement has helped to shape the development and passage of the planning and infrastructure bill, which will remove barriers to building vital new homes and infrastructure and achieve a win-win for the economy and nature. We will consider our next steps as the bill returns to the Commons and leave no stone unturned to get Britain building faster.”

Government
Nature
Water

England facing drastic measures due to extreme drought next year

Government and water companies are devising emergency plans for worst water shortage in decadesWater companies and the government are drawing up emergency plans for a drought next year more extreme than we have seen in decades.Executives at one major water company told the Guardian they were extremely concerned about the prospect of a winter with lower than average rainfall, which the Met Office’s long-term forecast says is likely. They said if this happened, the water shortfall would mean taking drastic water use curtailment measures “going beyond hosepipe bans”. Continue reading...

Water companies and the government are drawing up emergency plans for a drought next year more extreme than we have seen in decades.Executives at one major water company told the Guardian they were extremely concerned about the prospect of a winter with lower than average rainfall, which the Met Office’s long-term forecast says is likely. They said if this happened, the water shortfall would mean taking drastic water use curtailment measures “going beyond hosepipe bans”.Droughts are usually multi-year events. While much of England went into drought this summer, with hosepipe bans across large swathes of the country, things were not as bad as they could have been because it had been a rainy autumn and winter the year before. This meant reservoirs were full and that groundwater – storage of water under the soil – was charged up.But months of record dry weather meant a lot of that water was used, and it has not been replaced, despite roughly average September and October rainfall. Average reservoir storage is at 63.3% compared with the average of 76% for this time of year. Ardingly, in West Sussex, and Clatworthy and Wimbleball in Somerset, are below 30%.Groundwater takes significantly longer than reservoirs to recharge, and the situation in England is still fragile despite recent rainfall; South East Water has applied for a local water restriction order, which would ban some businesses from using water for certain things, such as cleaning buildings and equipment or filling hotel pools.Alastair Chisholm, the director of policy and external affairs at the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management, said: “In UK drought management terms, a second dry winter is when things start to get serious. So Met Office warnings of increased risk of dry spells through an important time of year for recharge of our water resources will ring alarm bells. This, coupled with dry weather next spring and summer will mean more drought orders – more abstraction from rivers when they’re at low levels, more hosepipe bans and likely restrictions on some business water use.”England has a lack of water resilience, with a growing population, higher risks of hot, dry summers and the fact no new major reservoir has been built in more than 30 years. This means that the country is reliant on consistent rainfall to keep taps running, and when we do not get it, rivers have to be sucked dry and hosepipe bans imposed.Chisholm said building new reservoirs was not enough, and that water efficiency measures for businesses and homes could be taken very quickly, for example by stopping leaks, more widespread smart metering and ensuring water-efficient appliances were installed in new homes.He said: “Whilst government has been fixated on announcing new reservoirs it’s been far less proactive or ambitious on its water efficiency policies. Reservoirs will take decades to build whilst water users can be supported to reduce their consumption quickly. This is nonsensical. It’s not an either-or question on these. We’re a densely populated nation facing increasingly extreme and variable weather, with growing water demand to support new homes, datacentres, food production and more. Without new reservoirs and leakage reductions alongside ambitious water efficiency and domestic or development-level rainwater harvesting and reuse, droughts are likely to become a growing problem for the UK.”The drought is expected to continue into next year. If that happens, and we have a spring and summer with below-average rainfall, England runs a risk of running out of water.The Met Office’s chief meteorologist, Dr Will Lang, said: “This year has been characterised by notable rainfall deficits across much of England. By 28 October, provisional data shows England had only 61% of its expected annual rainfall, when we’d normally have about 80% at this time of the year (based on 1991–2020 average).“Looking ahead, there is an increased risk of dry spells through late autumn and early winter and regional differences in rainfall continue to be likely. Without sustained and widespread precipitation, a consistent recovery from drought remains uncertain.”Water minister Emma Hardy said: “We are closely monitoring all regions – especially those still experiencing drought – and working with the National Drought Group and water companies to maintain supplies. We face increasing pressure on our water resources. That is why this government is taking decisive action, including the development of nine new reservoirs to help secure long-term water resilience.”Hydrologists are alarmed by the extent of the drought and the very real possibility it could cause problems next summer. The strategy of waiting for significant rain carries big risks.Prof Hannah Cloke, a professor of hydrology at the University of Reading, said: “We now need exceptional rainfall all winter just to recover. Even with recent improvements in some areas, many drought orders and hosepipe bans are staying in place. That tells you how serious the water resource deficit really is. Some reservoirs are sitting at less than a third of their capacity, which is alarming at this point in the year.“With climate change drying Britain out for longer periods in the future, we need to adapt to the climate we have now. Building new reservoirs will help, but we also need much more management of demand, and a more ambitious plan for water resilience.”Dr Megan Klaar, associate professor in the School of Geography at the University of Leeds, said: “We know that climate change is making rainfall patterns more variable, with longer dry periods and more intense wet periods. This growing volatility makes it harder to plan or foresee with certainty making the reliance on rain to arrive ‘just in time’ an unreliable strategy.”There are actions the country could take now, she said: “Nature-based solutions including restoring wetlands, reforesting catchments and improving soil health all help retain water in the landscape and slow its movement through river systems. Households can also help by reducing water use, especially during dry periods, and slowing and storing water during high rainfall by replacing impermeable surfaces like concrete and installing water butts to collect rainwater from roofs which stores water locally and reduces runoff during heavy rainfall.”

Government
Water
Climate

Suggested Viewing

1948 and Counting

Reports on Costa Rica's ability to manage without a military since 1948, despite invasions based in Nicaragua. Addresses the role of private armies serving multinational corporations, and whether the country's civil guard is a military by another name. Places Costa Rica in the context of Central and Latin American populist struggles against US backed regimes in El Salvador, Chile, Panama, Nicaragua and Honduras. Touches on the colonial history and explores whether Costa Rica depends on US military backing, and whether it is able to maintain independence from the US.

Government
Business

Jetty Cats

Jetty Cats explores contemporary animal rights issues through a focus on a feral cat colony that has survived on a rocky, seaside jetty in Southern California for decades. There is an ongoing debate over feral cat colonies involving advocates who support the trap, neuter, and return -- or "TNR" -- model of management, and those who argue that trapping and euthanizing the cats is more humane. This documentary’s point-of-view supports the TNR model and the related “no-kill” animal shelter policy, and features an exclusive interview with Richard Avanzino, the "Father" of the no-kill movement.

Animals
Government
Activism

Descended: The Fight for Harris Neck

The documentary film “Descended: The Fight for Harris Neck” explores an ongoing land battle in Harris Neck, Georgia. In 1942 the U.S. war department seized 2,687 acres of land from a self-reliant community of seventy-five African American families. Since 1962 the land has been a national wildlife refuge. The film seeks to answer the pivotal question: How has a community been shaped by its common goal to reclaim their land?

Social Justice
Government
Nature

The Fellowship of the Springs

Florida’s artesian springs are a natural wonder of the world. As unique as the geysers of Yellowstone and as mesmerizing as Vernal Falls in Yosemite, these blue jewels surrounding the north Florida landscape are considered a treasure by many who see them. The state contains the largest and highest concentration of fresh water springs on earth. But today, the future of Florida’s springs is uncertain. With flow levels declining and nitrate pollution on the rise, the springs today bear the scars of a profound struggle. Florida's own government continues to approve permits for large companies that want to pump water from the springs and their springsheds, for nominal permit fees that often cost less than a day pass to Disney World. The Fellowship of the Springs takes viewers behind the scenes of the fight to save Florida's springs, from the halls of the state capitol in Tallahassee to deep caves of Ichetucknee spring.

Water
Government
Business

928 The Threat Continues...

Since the 1950s deadly nuclear fallout has threatened millions of Americans from nuclear fallout carried east in the atmosphere across the United States, from the Nevada Test Site. “928 The Threat Continues...” tells the story of massive contamination from concentrated nuclear fallout that rained down during heavy storms, on communities and major cities for 40 years. Hundreds of thousands of cancer cases and deaths were the result. The Atomic Energy Commission and the Department of Energy knew the truth, but covered it up. Multiple generations may still face the long-term affects. Through current interviews with scientific experts and surviving victims across the country, plus footage from historic interviews with victims, whistle-blower scientists and journalists, we tell the devastating story of those affected by the deadly radioactive fallout. In Act 3, obscure government videos from US government websites reveal that the threat of cancer death to Americans from Nevada Test Site contamination continues even today! NTS has been renamed, the Nevada National Security Site or NNSS. Presidential administrations from Harry Truman to the present day have kept the highly contaminated former Nevada Test Site operating. Donald Trump while in office ordered the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy to start testing newly designed battlefield nuclear weapons at the NNSS despite the existence of The Non-Proliferation Treaty – 1970. Not withstanding the treaty, the extremely reckless aboveground testing area at the NNSS called Big Explosives Experimental Facility or B.E.E.F. tests non-nuclear bombs that send tons of highly contaminated nuclear dirt 10,000 feet into the atmosphere where the winds carry it east. It needs to be stopped now! The film asks viewers to inform their congressman and vote.

Chemicals
Crisis
Government

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.