
UN Ocean conference gives 'glimmer of hope' for marine life
The UN Ocean conference has been heralded a success, with more countries ratifying a key treaty to protect marine life and more progress on curbing plastics and illegal fishing in our seas.Nearly 200 countries came together in Nice, France to discuss how to tackle the most pressing issues facing the oceans. The conference ends today.The world's seas are facing threats on multiple fronts from plastic pollution to climate change. Sir David Attenborough said ahead of the conference that he was "appalled" by the damage from certain fishing methods and hoped leaders attending would "realise how much the oceans matter to all of us".
The key aim was to get the High Seas Treaty ratified by 60 countries to bring it into force. The agreement was signed two years ago to put 30% of the ocean into protected areas. Fifty countries had ratified by Friday, but dozens more promised to ratify by the end of the year. This and other progress on plastics and illegal fishing appears to have restored faith in the ability of governments to work together."UNOC has given us a glimmer of hope that the challenges facing our ocean are being seen and will be tackled," said Tony Long, chief executive officer of Global Fishing Watch."As we edge closer to the High Seas Treaty coming into force, governments need to double down - using both transparency and new technologies - to safeguard the ocean," he added.Prior to the UN Oceans Conference confidence in the multilateral process for solving the world's most pressing issues was low.In 2024, key negotiations on biodiversity, plastics and climate collapsed or concluded with limited progress.The aim of the meeting was not to sign a new legally-binding agreement but make progress on previous treaties.Three years ago, countries agreed to protect 30% of land and sea by 2030 to support biodiversity.For international waters this is hard to achieve as there is no clear controlling nation. So, in 2023 countries signed the High Seas Treaty agreeing to put 30% of these waters into marine protected areas.What is the UN High Seas Treaty and why is it needed?Prior to the conference only 27 out of the 60 states needed to bring it into force had ratified. Over just a few days that figure jumped to 50 and countries, including the UK, agreed it would ratify by the end of the year.This is record time for a UN agreement, explained Elizabeth Wilson, senior director for environmental policy at environmental NGO The Pews Trust."We have worked on many different treaties over the years and ratification often takes five years, seven years. "So the fact the High Seas Treaty is on the cusp of it entering into force really shows the global momentum behind working to protect more of the high seas," she said.Major nations including the US and China have not ratified the treaty although they are signatories, indicating their intention to do so in the future.And Russia, which has never supported it because of concerns over its impact on fisheries, said on Friday it would continue with that stance.But US diplomats experienced in UN negotiations praised the progress."From progress on the High Seas Treaty to French Polynesia's marine protected area, UNOC provided the latest proof that when we work together, real accomplishment is possible," said John Kerry, former US Secretary of State and Climate Envoy.
More countries also came forward with promises to put their own national waters into marine protected areas (MPAs) and restrict the most harmful fishing practices.During the week the UK announced it would seek to ban bottom trawling in nearly a third of English MPAs. This has been long been a demand of environmental charities, and more recently Sir David Attenborough, who argue that without such bans the protection just exists on paper.The largest ever marine protected area was also launched by French Polynesia in its own waters, and 900,000 sq km of that will ban extractive fishing and mining - four times the size of the UK.With this commitment and others made during the conference, 10% of the oceans are now in protection. "This is sending a message to the world that multilateralism is important," Astrid Puentes told R4's Today programme on the final day. "We need this leadership. The ocean is a single biome in the planet, it is all connected so we absolutely need to strengthen international law," she continued.However, progress on limiting destructive fishing practices globally has been difficult without the participation of China - which operates the largest fleet in the world.But at the conference its government announced it had now ratified the Port State Measures Agreement - a legal commitment to eliminate illegal and unregulated fishing.
Despite French President Macron opening the conference with a stark warning on the threats from deep sea mining, countries remained split on the issue.Last week 2,000 scientists recommended to governments that all deep sea exploration be paused whilst further research is carried out; just 0.001% of the seabed has been mapped.Despite this only 37 countries heeded the advice and have called for a moratorium on deep sea mining. "More and more states need to call for a moratorium on seabed mining so that we have this regulatory framework in place before any mining activities can happen," said Pradeep Singh, an environmental lawyer and marine expert with the Oceano Azul Foundation.President Trump abandoned the idea of a global approach in April when he declared that the US administration would start issuing permits for the activity. But Mr Singh thinks even without calling for a ban most countries do not support the US approach. At the final meeting of the conference countries passed the Nice Ocean Action Plan summarising their commitments.
The issue of plastic pollution is one that is particularly profound for the oceans, but in December talks on reducing the levels of production broke down.There are nearly 200 trillion pieces in the ocean and this is expected to triple by 2040 if no action is taken.Both the physical plastic and the chemicals within them is life-threatening to marine animals, said Bethany Carney Almroth, Professor of Ecotoxicology at the University of Gothenburg."There are more than 16,000 chemicals that are present in plastics, and we know that more than 4,000 of those have hazardous properties, so they might be carcinogenic, or mutagenic, or reproductively toxic," she said. At the conference ministers from 97 countries, including the UK, signed a joint political statement saying they wanted an ambitious treaty to be signed on the issue.But this only included one of the top ten oil-producing nations - Canada. Plastic is made from oil, so any commitment to reduce production could harm their income, the countries claim.Reducing oil production is also crucial if countries want to see a drop in planet-warming emissions and limit the worst impacts of climate change.The oceans are at the forefront of this - 90% of the additional heat put into the atmosphere by humans has been absorbed by the oceans, leading to increasingly destructive marine heatwaves.This conference did not see any new commitments on reducing emissions, but poorer nations did push their richer counterparts to release previously promised money for climate action more quickly."I share the frustration of many small island developing nations in terms of the non responsiveness of international financial facilities," said Feleti Teo, prime minister of Tuvalu."We don't have influence to change their policies but we need to sustain the pressure, meetings of this sort give us the opportunity to continue to tell the story."
Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to keep up with the latest climate and environment stories with the BBC's Justin Rowlatt. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
A burqa ban won't protect or unite Britain – it will divide us
It wasn't surprising to hear newly elected Reform MP Sarah Pochin call for a ban on the burqa – such calls resurface from time to time. What was surprising, however, was her decision to use her very first parliamentary question to raise this issue, rather than ask about pressing concerns such as the cost of living, NHS pressures or the rise in crime levels. Instead, she chose to single out and stigmatise Muslim women, making unfounded claims about public safety. On reflection, though, Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) provided a high-profile national platform, making it an ideal stage to stir further negativity towards Muslims. Unsurprisingly, Suella Braverman, known for her history of making disparaging remarks about Muslims, quickly added her voice. Targeting Muslims has become a convenient marketing tool for some right-wing politicians – a tactic used to gain support, attract media attention and generate publicity, regardless of the real-life consequences. Only a tiny minority of Muslim women in Britain have adopted the face veil (niqab) or the burqa – a long garment covering the entire body from head to foot, including the face. With a Muslim population of around four million, there has been no formal attempt to measure how many women wear the veil – but estimates suggest the number is likely to be only in the hundreds or low thousands. Similarly, in other European countries, estimates range from just 300 to 2,000. So why does such a small number attract so much public and political attention? The most common arguments used to justify prohibiting the veil in public are actually irrational. Tired and prejudiced tropes are used, such as suggesting women are being forced to wear the veil and need to be 'liberated', that it is a threat to public safety, that it is an obstacle to integration, or that it is simply visually offensive. Let's examine each of these claims more closely. Debates around women who wear the face veil are often driven by assumptions rather than grounded in evidence. In reality, the vast majority of Muslim women who choose to wear it do so voluntarily and for a variety of reasons – religious, cultural or personal. For many, it's an expression of faith, identity, modesty or spiritual commitment. Some even find it empowering, as it shifts the focus from appearance to character. Yes, there are cases where women may be pressured or forced to wear the veil – but these are instances of domestic abuse and coercive control, which require targeted support and awareness, not sweeping bans. I run the Muslim Women's Network Helpline, and in our 10 years of service, we've encountered only a handful of such cases. Concerns about identity concealment are often tied to public safety, yet there is no credible evidence linking the burqa to security threats in the UK. Security protocols already exist in sensitive settings (e.g. banks, airports and courts), where face coverings may need to be removed temporarily for identification purposes – and such situations are managed respectfully and without incident. This public safety narrative seems more about stoking fear than addressing real risks. Also, why is there so much anxiety about the anonymity of veiled Muslim women, especially in a world where much of our communication now happens online – through emails, social media and digital platforms – where anonymity is commonplace? Many people conceal their identities online to spread misinformation or abuse, yet this form of anonymity rarely provokes the same level of scrutiny by the same politicians. Claims that a burqa ban will promote community cohesion and integration are likely to have the opposite effect – deepening divisions instead. When any group feels threatened or pressured to conform through such hostile measures, they are more likely to become even more attached to how they express their identity. For the small minority of women who wear the veil, it may bring personal, social or economic challenges, but it remains their choice. Meanwhile, the vast majority of Muslim women who do not wear the veil continue to face significant social and economic barriers that are often overlooked. If concerns about integration and community cohesion were genuine, politicians would prioritise addressing the systemic discrimination and inequalities these women regularly experience. Some argue the burqa should be banned because it is considered offensive. Not everything that is offensive is prohibited. For example, in the UK, the right to offend is protected as part of freedom of speech, allowing the expression of unpopular or controversial views provided no harm is caused and laws are not broken. Similarly, while some may find the burqa visually offensive, the right of Muslim women to express their identity in this way must also be respected, because their clothing does not harm anyone. It is clearly a frightening time for Muslim women, especially those who are visibly identifiable by their clothing. Coded language by politicians that normalises hostility towards Muslims, fuels fear and hatred, and deepens societal intolerance, is making them feel unsafe. I therefore urge parliamentarians across all political parties to reject divisive rhetoric and commit instead to policies that address gendered anti-Muslim discrimination. Muslim women must be empowered to make independent choices about their own bodies – whatever those choices may be – and they must be able to live with dignity and equality.


Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Labour minister who claimed majority of Channel migrants were women and children now says he was only talking about ONE boat - as nearly 1,000 more cross to UK
A Labour Minister has had to issue a clarification after claiming on Question Time that 90 percent of people arriving in the UK on small boats are women and children, as another 919 made the dangerous journey across the Channel on Friday. Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, made the claim during Thursday's programme before hastily 'clarifying' he was referring to one specific boat after the figure was widely debunked online. The row came as Reform's Zia Yusuf, who revealed an inner chaos to the party when he abruptly quit as chairman last week before returning two days later in a new role, also made false claims when he said 'more than 90 percent' are men. Mr Jones provoked fury when he said that 'the majority of the people in these boats are children, babies and women'. Following cries of disbelief from members of the public, Mr Yusuf - who prevoiously said getting Reform elected was 'not a good use of my time' - interjected to say that 'more than 90 per cent of them are adult men', which is also incorrect. Home Office figures show 73 percent percent of small boat arrivals in 2024 - or 26,999 out of all 36,816 arrivals - were adult males. More than 14,800 people have arrived in Britain after making the crossing so far in 2025 - making it the highest start to the year on record, which experts have blamed on an usually high number of calm weather days. On Friday, another 919 people arrived in 14 small boats after making the dangerous crossing from France. The figure makes yesterday's arrivals the second highest number so far this year. On Question Time last night following Mr Yusuf's intervention, host Fiona Bruce turned to Mr Jones and asked: 'You're saying that's not true?' He replied: 'I'm saying it's not true. I'm saying this is controversial for a reason and you're told you're not supposed to challenge the audience on Question Time, but I'm going to. 'When there are babies and children put into that position by human trafficking gangs, who are coming across the Channel with skin burns from the oil from those boats mixing with the salt sea water, I would ask any of you to look at those babies and children and say 'go back'. Mr Yusuf hit back: 'In my previous answer, I made the case that this Government prioritises foreign citizens over citizens of the United Kingdom. After that testimony, I can rest my case. 'The vast, vast majority of people making the journey from France by small boat are fighting age, military age, males, not women and children. 'We're talking about asylum hotels, and Rachel Reeves saying we're going to shut down asylum hotels. 'I spent many weeks in the constituency of Runcorn and Helsby. Runcorn is a very deprived area. And do you know the issue that exercised people so much? The reason is primarily because of HMOs – houses of multiple occupancies. 'In an unholy alliance of Serco and Yvette Cooper, illegal migrants are being deposited into communities and there's no say for the local people.' Taking to X (formerly Twitter) this evening, Mr Jones clarified his position but maintained the percentage of migrants that are adult males is 'not north of 90 percent'. A group of people thought to be migrants are brought in to Dover, Kent, onboard the RNLI Ramsgate Lifeboat on Friday An overloaded dinghy is pictured as it attempts to make the perilous journey cross the Channel from France He wrote: 'Of course the overall majority of people arriving illegally on small boats are men - but not 'north of 90 percent' as Reform claimed. 'On @bbcquestiontime I shared a story from my visit to the Border Security Command about a dinghy that arrived mostly carrying women, children and babies who had suffered horrific burns. 'I'm happy to clarify this given how this is now being misrepresented. 'Labour committed new funding this week to secure our borders while Reform have voted against giving our police the powers needed to smash the gangs fuelling this vile trade.' At her spending review on Wednesday, Rachel Reeves pledged that migrants would be moved out of hotel accommodation by the time of the next general election, due in 2029. Ms Reeves also promised £1 billion of savings by speeding up the asylum system, along with £280 million investment in future years for the new Border Security Command. Latest figures show £3.1 billion was spent on housing asylum seekers in hotels in 2023-24, out of a total asylum support bill of £4.7 billion. More than 30,000 asylum seekers are housed in about 200 hotels across Britain, many of whom arrived illegally in dinghies, and ministers are looking at moving them into derelict tower blocks and student digs. But despite Ms Reeves' pledge to end the use of hotels, the Tories pointed out that the small print of her Spending Review documents revealed that £2.5 billion will still be spent each year on asylum support by the end of the decade. It comes as dramatic pictures emerged of French police using tear gas and pepper spray to disperse hundreds of migrants trying to board boats headed for Britain. Some officers were seen entering the water and dragging them back to shore. A major point of contention between Britain and France has been the French authorities' refusal to turn back migrants who are already in the water. Despite officers' efforts, a significant number of migrants were able to successfully cross this morning - with pictures showing them at Dover. A major point of contention between Britain and France has been the French authorities' refusal to turn back migrants who are already in the water A record five months of the year has brought the provisional arrivals today so far to 14,812 arrivals. This has also surpassed the highest total recorded for the first six months of the year, which was previously 13,489 on June 30 last year. In 2024, the number of arrivals did not reach more than 14,000 until July 9 (14,058). The Government has vowed to crack down on people-smuggling and Channel crossings since coming to power in July last year. This includes funding elite officers to increase patrols along the northern French coastline and launching a specialist intelligence unit in Dunkirk to track down people smugglers. It has also established a Border Security Command to lead strategy and its Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, currently going through Parliament, seeks to introduce new criminal offences and hand counter terror-style powers to law enforcement agencies to target smuggling gangs. However, critics have repeatedly warned the 'smash the gangs' strategy will not work unless there is a deterrent strong enough to prevent migrants from wanting to make the crossing in the first place. Yesterday, a spokesman for the PM repeatedly refused to engaged with questions about whether Mr Jones was right. 'The Government is absolutely focused on tackling these vile smuggling gangs… ' they said. Asked again about Home Office figures suggesting he is wrong, the spokesman said: 'The focus of the government is tackling these vile gangs that deal in misery.' Pressed if the PM had confidence in Mr Jones, the spokesman said: 'Yes.' Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: 'Darren Jones is completely out of touch with reality. 'Since 2018, 73 percent of small boat arrivals have been single adult men. Yet Labour MPs like Jones still push the fairytale that these boats are full of women and babies. It's a dangerous distortion of the truth. 'No wonder this is shaping up to be the worst year on record for small boat crossings. If this is what passes for reality inside the Labour Government, Britain is in serious trouble.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We all want to end dangerous small boat crossings, which threaten lives and undermine our border security. 'The people-smuggling gangs do not care if the vulnerable people they exploit live or die as long as they pay, and we will stop at nothing to dismantle their business models and bring them to justice. 'That is why this Government has put together a serious plan to take down these networks at every stage, and why we are investing up to an additional £280 million per year by 2028-29 in the Border Security Command. 'Through international intelligence-sharing under our Border Security Command, enhanced enforcement operations in northern France and tougher legislation in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, we are strengthening international partnerships and boosting our ability to identify, disrupt and dismantle criminal gangs whilst strengthening the security of our borders.'


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Labour ministers have no grasp of even the most basic facts on migration
That this Labour Government has no useful ideas for resolving the migrant crisis can be taken as a given. What has been harder to explain has been its lack of enthusiasm for finding viable solutions beyond simply repeating a vague pledge to 'smash the criminal gangs'. A curious statement from Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, has offered a potential explanation: it may simply be that nobody in the party has bothered looking at who is actually crossing the Channel. Appearing on Question Time, Mr Jones claimed that ' the majority of the people in these boats are children, babies and women '. This is wrong. In the latest 12 months of data, 74 per cent of those arriving in small boats have been adult men over the age of 18. Given that the British state's ability to assess the age of arrivals is not entirely uncontested, and the advantages to asylum claimants who fall just below that critical threshold, this may well be an understatement. If senior figures in the Government believe the inflow to consist of vulnerable women and babes in arms, a great deal of policy decisions begin to make more sense; the lack of concern at distributing unvetted arrivals throughout the country, the apparent confusion that locals may feel threatened or unsafe as a result, and the apparent refusal to countenance any policy that might realistically see arrivals removed. When challenged on his claim by Reform's Zia Yusuf, Mr Jones doubled down. His Government may wish to do some research before doing so with its current, failed approach.