Mr. Eddie Punch:

I do not have anything to add except that Article 16 on access to justice specifically states that one side of the debate, environmental NGOs, will be entitled to bring cases against the member state if they are not happy with how the member state is implementing the regulation. The member state has to agree a nature restoration plan with the Commission. This is a complex and drawn-out process, as we all know, where consultation with stakeholders will presumably, or should, take place and will inevitably take place with environmental groups. Article 16 states that access to justice is specifically for the environmental NGOs. The Government has to make and implement policy but essentially Article 16 gives a veto, as it were, to the environmental lobbyists to take action against the Government if they are not happy with the plan the Government has put forward and agreed with the Commission or with how it is being implemented.

There has to be a level of responsibility for Government Ministers to say they will not entertain EU regulations that undermine their ability to govern and hand over the process to a one-sided litigious battle where environmental NGOs are given a specific role. What about access to justice for farmers and landowners? What about our constitutional property rights?