logo
Scotland can lead the world with 'ecocide' bill currently in Holyrood

Scotland can lead the world with 'ecocide' bill currently in Holyrood

The National4 hours ago

Good evening! This week's edition of the In Common newsletter comes from Michaela Girvan and Tara Pierce of the Ocean Rights Coalition.
IMAGINE the scene: a CEO sits handcuffed, silent, in the dock of a Scottish courtroom. He is not there because of a shareholder scandal or financial fraud but because the company he leads has caused widespread, long-term destruction of the marine environment through illegal bottom trawling in Scottish waters.
Expert witnesses describe the devastation. Once-thriving seabeds flattened. Biodiversity lost. Species pushed to collapse. Carbon stores released from the seafloor, worsening climate change, communities along the coast left with the wreckage and coastal artisan fishermen struggling. The courtroom listens, and the law now recognises this harm for what it truly is – not an unfortunate side effect of business but a crime against nature.
That scene may feel like fiction. However, it is exactly the kind of accountability the Ecocide (Prevention) (Scotland) Bill currently progressing through the Scottish Parliament could make real. If passed, Scotland would become the first country in the world to criminalise ecocide in domestic law – a powerful and necessary step at a time of ecological crisis.
The bill, brought forward by Scottish Labour MSP Monica Lennon (above), defines ecocide as the causing of severe environmental harm, whether intentional or through reckless disregard. The harm must be either widespread or long-term – measured not in headlines, but in habitats, ecosystems and years. If passed, the law would make individuals, companies and public bodies liable for the most serious kinds of environmental destruction.
Punishments include up to 20 years in prison, fines and court-ordered restoration of the damaged ecosystems. Importantly, it introduces personal liability for directors and decision-makers. In a world where corporate impunity too often shields those at the top, this matters. What sets this legislation apart is not only its ambition but its timing.
Just last week, world leaders gathered in Nice for the third United Nations Ocean Conference. Once again, they committed to reversing marine biodiversity loss and protecting 30% of the world's oceans by 2030. The pledges are noble. But if we are honest, global action has repeatedly failed to match the scale or speed of the crisis.
Here in Scotland, we have a rare opportunity to do something the international system has so far failed to do: make marine destruction legally actionable as a criminal crime.
From deep-sea mining and industrial overfishing to oil spills, chemical dumping and plastic pollution, Scotland's marine environment is facing an onslaught of threats. Some of these are caused by foreign actors; others are permitted under existing UK or devolved policy. Either way, the law has not kept up with science, morality or the pace of destruction.
That is why this bill matters so deeply to those of us working in ocean protection. It acknowledges that the sea is not an industrial buffer zone or economic abstraction. It is a living system on which we all depend. Its kelp forests and corals store carbon. Its species form fragile food webs. Its health is climate health, biodiversity health and human health.
The bill does not mention the ocean by name, but its scope is broad enough to include it and serious marine harm. In doing so, it brings new hope to those who have campaigned for decades for stronger protections for the sea. It gives voice to communities who have watched polluters act with impunity. It sets a legal precedent that others can follow.
Scotland is no stranger to progressive leadership. From banning smoking in public spaces to providing free period products, it has shown the courage to legislate ahead of the curve. With this bill, it can again lead – not just the UK, but the world – on environmental justice.
There will be attempts to dilute this legislation as it moves through Parliament. Some will argue the definitions are too broad. Others will raise fears about economic impact. The truth is this: the cost of doing nothing is far greater. The science is clear, the damage is real and the legal gap is glaring.
We must not allow this bill to be watered down into symbolism. It must retain the strength to do what it promises: hold powerful actors to account for the destruction of the natural world. This is not about stifling enterprise. It is about drawing a line. About saying, as a country, that we will no longer tolerate the wilful wrecking of our wild ecosystems that sustain life.
The Ocean Rights Coalition is calling on MSPs to support this bill with integrity and urgency. We are asking members of the public to do the same.
If you care about the future of our seas – about their resilience, their beauty and their survival – now is the time to act. Email your MSP. Tell them you support the Ecocide (Prevention) (Scotland) Bill. Tell them not to weaken it and to keep the lion's teeth, and remind them that Scotland has a chance, right now, to lead the world and make history. To make sure the Scotland their grandchildren will inherent is protected.
The ocean is rising. It's time Scots law rose with it.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

QUENTIN LETTS: Lucy the Leader rabbits away snippily. Can No 10 not find someone better?
QUENTIN LETTS: Lucy the Leader rabbits away snippily. Can No 10 not find someone better?

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

QUENTIN LETTS: Lucy the Leader rabbits away snippily. Can No 10 not find someone better?

Where was Sir Keir Starmer? It used to be customary for PMs, on their return from summits, to hasten to the Commons to make a statement. Downing Street 's gap-year traveller, back from his Canadian G7 jaunt on Wednesday afternoon, was yesterday still absent from Parliament. He was, you see, meeting England's Lioness footballers. Was Sir Keir uninterested in what MPs thought about Iran-Israel and other crises? Did he not want us to see that he was as clueless as the rest of us as to what the White House might do? Or could he simply not be fagged with Parliament? What is the point of the Commons? Does it matter if ministers lie? Was Richard Tice completely sober at 11.15am? These were questions I scratched into my notebook as the mercury rose and the world went spinning towards its destiny. Adrian Ramsey (Grn, Waveney Valley) at least tried. At weekly business questions he raised the reported view of Lord Hermer, Attorney General, that British military involvement in Iran would be illegal. It was 'critical', said Mr Ramsey, that MPs have their say. Lucy Powell, Leader of the Commons, replied: 'Where there is sustained military action in which our troops could be involved, that would of course be a matter for the House to consider.' The Green man, although sometimes a credulous Herbert, appeared to find this answer elastic. Who could blame him? Can Ms Powell be trusted on anything? She sucks on her Mancunian teeth and rabbits away in a snippy fashion that is demeaning for a Leader of the House. I'm not sure I have seen one worse. Commons Leaders in my journalistic time have included John Biffen, Jack Straw, John Wakeham, Margaret Beckett, Robin Cook, George Young, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Penny Mordaunt. All could hold a line with wit and, usually, an acknowledgment of the legitimacy of opposition. Ms Powell is more bludgeon than rapier. On the Government's rape-gangs volte-face she said, with sepulchral piety: 'We never ruled out returning to the issue of a national inquiry.' Yes they did! Often. Sir Keir himself, on January 6, dismissed any inquiry, saying: 'This doesn't need more consultation. It doesn't need more research.' Ms Powell's answer was that of a Little Britain character caught thieving chocolates – 'I never done it, honest' – as contraband Bounty bars clatter to the floor. It was risible. Absurd. Can No 10 not find someone better to fill this velvety berth? Not that business questions at present is up to much. New intake MPs read from scripts as they raised the most parochial issues. The chair, inexplicably, felt obliged to call all these plodders. Richard Tice (Boston & Skegness) had a chance to assert Reform as the party for real people's concerns. Up he rose on his hind legs to ask Ms Powell to congratulate Nigel Farage and Angela Rayner on being named Britain's 'sexiest politicians' on some scuzzy website and to ask: 'Does she recommend that they have dinner together?' Good grief. Later we were treated to Treasury minister Darren Jones. He's the one who made that peculiar claim about small-boat immigrants being mainly women and children. He unveiled a 'ten-year strategy on infrastructure'. Given how the Middle East is going, we might be lucky to last ten days. Mr Jones spoke of efficiency, affordability and 'place-based business cases – I know this will be a huge relief'. He added, with pride: 'We will publish a new online infrastructure pipeline.' His £725billion vision involved, naturally, a new quango, the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority. Its birth will be announced on the Court and Social pages and will entail godparent duties for retired mandarins and ministers. How nobly they do these things. Last thing to note was the juxtaposition of two backbench discussions on yesterday's order paper. A debate on incontinence was followed by one on water safety education.

MPs switch sides to vote no to ‘drastically weakened' assisted dying Bill
MPs switch sides to vote no to ‘drastically weakened' assisted dying Bill

North Wales Chronicle

timean hour ago

  • North Wales Chronicle

MPs switch sides to vote no to ‘drastically weakened' assisted dying Bill

Labour's Paul Foster, Jonathan Hinder, Markus Campbell-Savours and Kanishka Narayan wrote to fellow MPs to voice concerns about the safety of the proposed legislation. The letter comes on the eve of a crucial vote on Friday which would see the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill either clear the House of Commons and move to the Lords, or fall completely. The MPs wrote: 'The Bill presented to MPs in November has been fundamentally changed. 'This is not the safest Bill in the world. It is weaker than the one first laid in front of MPs and has been drastically weakened. 'MPs were promised the ultimate protection from a High Court Judge but that protection is missing from the final Bill.' They said colleagues with 'any doubts about the safety of this Bill' should 'join us tomorrow and vote against it'. As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. While the MPs cited the replacement of a High Court safeguard with the expert panels, Bill sponsor Kim Leadbeater has insisted the change is a strengthening of the legislation, incorporating wider expert knowledge to assess assisted dying applications. But concerns around the panels have also been raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych), which announced in recent weeks that it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in its current form. The college's lead on assisted dying for England and Wales, Dr Annabel Price, expressed worry there will not be 'enough space or time to carry out proper, holistic assessments', and that the only involvement on a panel being to check decisions made by others 'is deeply troubling'. The relatively narrow majority of 55 from the historic yes vote in November means every vote will count on Friday. While acknowledging there could be some change in the numbers, Bill sponsor Kim Leadbeater has insisted she remains confident it will pass the third reading stage and move on to be considered by peers in the Lords. Speaking on Thursday, she said: 'There might be some small movement in the middle, some people might maybe change their mind one way, others will change their mind the other way but fundamentally I don't anticipate that that majority would be heavily eroded so I do feel confident we can get through tomorrow successfully.' Ms Leadbeater has insisted her Bill is 'the most robust piece of legislation in the world' and has argued dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives in a conversation which has seen support from high-profile figures including Dame Esther Rantzen. Making her case for a change in the law, she said: 'I know that many colleagues have engaged very closely with the legislation and will make their decision based on those facts and that evidence, and that cannot be disputed. 'But we need to do something, and we need to do it quickly.' A YouGov poll of 2,003 adults in Great Britain, surveyed last month and published on Thursday, suggested public support for the Bill remains high at 73% – unchanged from November. The proportion of people who feel assisted dying should be legal in principle has risen slightly, to 75% from 73% in November. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill, as he did last year, saying earlier this week that his 'position is long-standing and well-known' on assisted dying. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, while describing Ms Leadbeater's work on the proposed legislation as 'extremely helpful', confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it. Ms Leadbeater has warned it could be a decade before assisted dying legislation returns to Parliament if MPs vote to reject her Bill on Friday.

MPs switch sides to vote no to ‘drastically weakened' assisted dying Bill
MPs switch sides to vote no to ‘drastically weakened' assisted dying Bill

South Wales Guardian

timean hour ago

  • South Wales Guardian

MPs switch sides to vote no to ‘drastically weakened' assisted dying Bill

Labour's Paul Foster, Jonathan Hinder, Markus Campbell-Savours and Kanishka Narayan wrote to fellow MPs to voice concerns about the safety of the proposed legislation. The letter comes on the eve of a crucial vote on Friday which would see the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill either clear the House of Commons and move to the Lords, or fall completely. The MPs wrote: 'The Bill presented to MPs in November has been fundamentally changed. 'This is not the safest Bill in the world. It is weaker than the one first laid in front of MPs and has been drastically weakened. 'MPs were promised the ultimate protection from a High Court Judge but that protection is missing from the final Bill.' They said colleagues with 'any doubts about the safety of this Bill' should 'join us tomorrow and vote against it'. As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. While the MPs cited the replacement of a High Court safeguard with the expert panels, Bill sponsor Kim Leadbeater has insisted the change is a strengthening of the legislation, incorporating wider expert knowledge to assess assisted dying applications. But concerns around the panels have also been raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych), which announced in recent weeks that it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in its current form. The college's lead on assisted dying for England and Wales, Dr Annabel Price, expressed worry there will not be 'enough space or time to carry out proper, holistic assessments', and that the only involvement on a panel being to check decisions made by others 'is deeply troubling'. The relatively narrow majority of 55 from the historic yes vote in November means every vote will count on Friday. While acknowledging there could be some change in the numbers, Bill sponsor Kim Leadbeater has insisted she remains confident it will pass the third reading stage and move on to be considered by peers in the Lords. Speaking on Thursday, she said: 'There might be some small movement in the middle, some people might maybe change their mind one way, others will change their mind the other way but fundamentally I don't anticipate that that majority would be heavily eroded so I do feel confident we can get through tomorrow successfully.' Ms Leadbeater has insisted her Bill is 'the most robust piece of legislation in the world' and has argued dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives in a conversation which has seen support from high-profile figures including Dame Esther Rantzen. Making her case for a change in the law, she said: 'I know that many colleagues have engaged very closely with the legislation and will make their decision based on those facts and that evidence, and that cannot be disputed. 'But we need to do something, and we need to do it quickly.' A YouGov poll of 2,003 adults in Great Britain, surveyed last month and published on Thursday, suggested public support for the Bill remains high at 73% – unchanged from November. The proportion of people who feel assisted dying should be legal in principle has risen slightly, to 75% from 73% in November. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill, as he did last year, saying earlier this week that his 'position is long-standing and well-known' on assisted dying. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, while describing Ms Leadbeater's work on the proposed legislation as 'extremely helpful', confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it. Ms Leadbeater has warned it could be a decade before assisted dying legislation returns to Parliament if MPs vote to reject her Bill on Friday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store