Scotland's Ecocide Bill is pure moral posturing
Here we go again. The Scottish parliament risks embarking on yet another exercise in legislative virtue signalling: the Labour MSP Monica Lennon's emotively titled Ecocide Bill. The Scottish government is reportedly looking favourably on this legislation, which would make destroying the environment a criminal offence punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
Needless to say, destroying the environment – intentionally or recklessly – is already illegal under numerous statutes: the Environmental Protection Act, the Wildlife and Countryside Act, and the Climate Change Act, to name but three. But, like the ill-fated Named Person Act, the Gender Recognition Reform Bill or the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act, this Ecocide Bill is designed to 'send a message'. That message being: damaging the environment is a really, very bad thing indeed and should be opposed by all right-thinking people.
Much like those earlier legislative missteps, the unintelligible Ecocide Bill, if it goes the distance, will repealed, ignored, or, most likely, ruled ultra vires – beyond the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
32 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Analysis: Is Reform UK's Nigel Farage a threat to the Union?
Just a few months ago the prospect of Mr Farage winning the keys to Number 10 would have seemed unbelievable. Reform has just five MPs but unprecedented gains in local elections in England in May, plus successive polling, has now led to the former Ukip leader becoming the bookmakers' favourite to be Britain's next Prime Minister. READ MORE: Farage 'can't be trusted to oppose SNP' says leading unionist campaign group Analysis: Can Reform UK actually win the Hamilton by-election? Aberdeen councillor Duncan Massey defects to Reform John Swinney news, interviews and updates on the First Minister With the rise of Reform observers are now thinking through the consequences and what will be the impact on the constitutional question. Of course, there are the caveats that this is just one poll and that the next general election isn't scheduled to be held until sometime before August 2029. Political parties' fortunes and misfortunes can radically change in four years. Sir Keir Starmer may be able to move on from some of the controversial decisions such as the cut to winter fuel payments for pensioners which damaged his and his government's popularity in the weeks that followed Labour's election success in July last year. Perhaps Labour may even change leaders and refresh its offering ahead of polling day? Maybe the Tories will recover, though at the moment that is looking very unlikely. But even should none of these changes take place and Reform do storm to victory in 2029, recent history should calm unionist fears that the UK is about to break up. Over the last decade or so similar polling forecasts were made about the rise in support for independence based on various scenarios regarded as fundamentally unpalatable to the values and outlook of Scots. First it was Brexit - leaving the EU would make Scotland independent it was claimed by the SNP. Then it was the Boris Johnson "clown" ; then it was Scotland apparently handling Covid better than the Conservative government, then it was Liz Truss and her dodgy budget and then it was Keir Starmer's and his various "betrayals" of pensioners and the disabled. Yet nine years after the Brexit vote and the turmoil in UK politics which was left in its wake Scotland is still very much part of the Union. So based upon what has happened before I am sceptical whether a Prime Minister Farage would turn Scotland into a nation of Yessers. Besides the 54% support for independence is somewhat off from the level of support First Minister John Swinney suggested would be needed to bring about indyref2. Last month Mr Swinney talked about securing "demonstrable support" for independence and compared it to the 1997 referendum for a Scottish Parliament, which was backed by around 74% of Scots. But it seems that whatever happens at Westminster a certain proportion of Scots may rail about the state of affairs and show their disapproval in opinion polls, before simply getting used to the political landscape there and reluctantly tolerating it. It's a phenomenon which illustrates the limitations of the negative case for independence. So it's probably safe to reassure pro-UK voters that they need not fear that the UK is on course to break up in the next decade, whether Keir Starmer remains in Downing Street after polling day in 2029, gives way to a Labour rival or whether Nigel Farage indeed wins power.
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
Labour's historic opportunity
Image: Da Antipinum/Shutterstock There shouldn't be 4.5 million children in the UK living in poverty. That's 4.5 million children who face shorter life expectancies, poorer educational outcomes, worse physical and mental health. It's children who are more likely to be sent home from school because they can't afford the right uniform. They are unable to learn a musical instrument or progress in swimming because lessons are too expensive. Many go cold or hungry and tired despite their parents doing everything they can. It shouldn't be the case that educators warn they can't prioritise teaching because so much time needs to go into dealing with the consequences of poverty, or that children decide which subjects to study based on what they think they can afford. After 14 years of austerity, Covid and the high cost of living, it's the bleak reality we face as a country in 2025. But it shouldn't be like this. The Labour government promised a different way through. Not only a manifesto commitment to reduce child poverty, but one cemented in its Plan for Change. A child poverty taskforce set up to deliver an ambitious child poverty strategy. A government that knows what can be done, because its Labour predecessors did it before. Over a million children lifted out of poverty between 1998 and 2010. Lives made better, futures rebuilt. There can be no denying that reducing child poverty matters to this government's wider mission too. Improved living standards and sustainable growth depend on investment in children and their families, sooner rather than later. And it matters to the public. Polling consistently shows people don't think kids should grow up in poverty and that government should do something about it. People want change. The concern, of course, is that momentum has stalled. It's been almost a year since the general election was called, and while interventions like breakfast clubs are important and welcome, they alone are not enough to make the critical difference. Improving employment rights will help low-paid parents in many ways, but won't alter the fundamental equation that salaries don't adjust for the additional mouths a family has to feed. With the proposed cuts to disability benefits affecting potentially hundreds of thousands of children, the government has only made its task of reducing child poverty harder. Already the clock is ticking, and without significant intervention, 4.8 million children will live in poverty by 2029. The government risks a legacy of even higher child poverty at the end of this parliament than at the start, an unenviable record and the first time under a modern Labour government. But unlike many of the other questions the government faces, the answers on this are known, tested and come with the potential to support a genuinely transformational change for children and the whole country. Family income is still the strongest predictor of how well a child will get on at school, four times more so than where a child grows up. Using the social security system to support family incomes during the time-limited period when the inevitable additional costs of having children puts pressure on budgets must sit front and centre of the child poverty strategy. All the evidence shows that investing in support for children through social security leads to healthier, better developed kids, with the benefits continuing through into adulthood. Improved quality of life in the here and now, improved life chances for the future. It leads to better jobs and reduced pressure on public services, not to mention the extra money this would bring into the local economy where every penny of poorer families' income is spent. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Child benefit, Universal Credit, free school meals are all building blocks towards stability and security for families with low incomes. A government ambitious to cut child poverty has these ways – and many more – of getting financial support to the low- and middle-income families that need it. But without first scrapping the two-child limit and benefit cap, the government will find its hands are tied. Every day it exists, the two-child limit pulls another 109 kids into poverty. It will act as a millstone round the neck of anyone who wants to make life better for the children it affects, acting as a drag on any and every effort the government makes to bring the child poverty figures down. For a government concerned about domestic finances in the face of global instability, abolishing the two-child limit and benefit cap is by far the most cost-effective way to reduce child poverty and lift children out of deep poverty. A government confident in its decade of national renewal can use this child poverty strategy to help the electorate see and feel that things can, and will, get better. A government that believes in the potential of every child won't tell those children to wait for economic growth or leave untouched the lives of kids who need support the most – whatever their age, wherever they come from. This can be a strategy delivered with conviction, backed up with a moral and financial commitment to both immediate and ongoing progress, investing to make sure no child is left behind. The real test of this strategy, and a real test of this government, will be the difference it makes to the lives and life chances of millions of kids. Now is the moment for this government to make decisions that match its long-term vision, not just the daily balance book. Now is the moment to deliver the change that our children need – and have been promised. This article first appeared in our Spotlight on Child Poverty supplement, of 23 May 2025, guest edited by Gordon Brown. Related
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer hints major winter fuel payment could come as soon as next week
Keir Starmer says he wants to make more pensioners eligible for the winter fuel payment this year - and did not rule out an announcement next week Keir Starmer has hinted that new rules on winter fuel payments could come as soon as next week. The PM admitted clarity is needed as soon as possible after saying he wants to look again at eligibility thresholds. Chancellor Rachel Reeves will unveil a spending review on June 11, which may include an update on the controversial policy. Mr Starmer has bowed to pressure after 10 million pensioners lost out when the payments of up to £300 became means-tested. Last month he said the Government is looking at expanding the number of people who qualify. The Prime Minister said: "I do need to be absolutely clear where the money is coming from but I take your point which is that if we want to look again at what pensioners are eligible then the sooner we have clarity on that the better." Asked if next week's spending review would include an update on winter fuel, he said: "There's lots of moving parts in the spending review as you appreciate." But he maintained that means testing the payments was the right thing to do. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "I want to look again at where the threshold is. That's for sure. I'll be clear with you. "In relation to that, I do think it was our duty to stabilise the economy and to fill in that £22 billion black hole. And I'm not going to resile from that." He added that ministers "need to be absolutely clear where the money is coming from". Mr Starmer previously told the Commons he wants to make sure 'more pensioners are eligible". The Prime Minister said at the time that further details would be announced at the Budget in the autumn. No10 has indicated that a full U-turn on the cut is unlikely. But officials are reportedly examining the option of restoring the allowance to all but the wealthiest pensioners. Labour has argued the unpopular decision - announced just weeks after the party's election victory last year - was necessary to fix the Tory mess they inherited. But in recent weeks Labour MPs have blamed the policy for the party's bruising results at the local elections earlier this month and defeat to Reform UK at a key by-election.
