by Ben Davis
 |
| Source: Mikhail Berkhut, Shutterstock |
Since the UK formally left the European Union in January 2020, the country has been less bound by stringent EU environmental law. Seen as some of the strictest yet progressive regulations in the world, EU law regarding the environment and climate should be the aspiration of states around the world, including the UK. Yet, the UK is slowly diverging, adopting dangerous policies that threaten our wildlife and ecosystems.
Recently, it came to light that the UK government had approved, albeit only on a case-by-case basis, the use of thiamethoxam, a neonicotinoid insecticide that is banned across Europe due to the damage it inflicts on bees. The decision comes after predictions that virus yellows, a disease spread by aphids, will be rife this year, destroying critical sugar beet harvests. Thiamethoxam, although effective in killing disease-spreaders, such as aphids, also poses a threat to pollinators. The insecticide damages the nervous systems of bees and prevents them from being able to navigate back to hives. Bee populations subsequently take a hit, causing secondary damage to other crops. The decision to allow the use of thiamethoxam has been branded as ‘scandalous’ both by campaigners and wildlife charities/ groups.
Such a decision, although a minor divergence from EU law, may have severe consequences on UK wildlife, representing a giant step backwards in our habitat restoration and protection efforts.
Emerging issues can also be seen with regard to the pollution of waterways and rivers with both industrial/agricultural waste and sewage. Brexit-induced supply chain issues have meant that some businesses cannot access their usual array of water treatment chemicals. As such, the government has contentiously allowed the discharge of ‘partially treated’ effluent into waterways. The state of UK rivers, even before this additional supply of pollution, is arguably atrocious. The Environment Agency recorded more than 400,000 cases of raw sewage discharge in 2020 alone. This comes in addition to research that only 14% of rivers are of ‘good’ ecological status. The dumping of hazardous effluent into rivers damages vital freshwater ecosystems, disrupting the composition of chemicals and contaminating habitats and food chains. Algal blooms and subsequent eutrophication reduce oxygen levels within the water, suffocating fish and below-surface plants. This can be seen in the River Wye, where, as reported by the Wildlife Trust, ‘life is silently slipping away’. Manure from poultry farms seeps into the river, where phosphates stimulate algal growth and lead to declines in biodiversity.
Thus, it can be seen that minor changes in UK environmental law, such as the allowance for only ‘partially treated’ effluent to be released into rivers is having a widespread detrimental impact on wildlife.
It may be useful to consider why the UK might decide to diverge from EU law. From an economic viewpoint, establishing its own rules would give the UK, perhaps unfairly, a trade advantage. The EU recognises that some of its regulations are in place simply to facilitate fiar competition by monitoring the way in which products are manufactured and marketed. By making its own rules, the UK would oversee how its products are made, thus expanding profit margins and cutting costs. With trade networks distorted by Brexit, this would play well for the UK, enabling it to easily and profitably establish new trade routes.
To conclude, whilst we are unlikely to see a paradigm shift in the UK’s environmental regulations, we may see some gradual divergences in the near future, damaging crucial ecosystems and habitats at a time where we should be doing everything we can to protect them.
Sources
https://www.brexitenvironment.co.uk/2021/03/23/environmental-regulation-post-brexit/
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/citizen-science-water-safecast
https://www.whitecase.com/publications/alert/environmental-law-after-brexit
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments with names are more likely to be published.