Obvious choice! – Owl

No 10 has appointed a wealthy Scottish landowner accused by ramblers of restricting public access to his estate as a new environment minister by making him a peer.

Rowena Mason www.theguardian.com

The government made the surprise announcement on Friday afternoon that the king was giving the title of baron to Robbie Douglas-Miller, allowing him to enter the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs as a minister.

It gave no biographical details about Douglas-Miller, but he is believed to be a Scottish businessman whose family owned the Edinburgh department store Jenners.

Douglas-Miller has long worked on conservation projects and was awarded an OBE for services to wildlife conservation in Scotland. He is managing director of Moorfoot Capital, according to his LinkedIn profile.

Douglas-Miller also chaired a charity called the Atlantic Salmon Trust, where Scottish secretary Alister Jack sat on the board and King Charles was the patron.

He has attracted criticism from Ramblers Scotland for apparently making it difficult for walkers to access a site at East Lothian’s Lammermuir Hills, which is part of his Hopes estate.

The area became increasingly popular with walkers during the pandemic, but the estate brought in a new car park and put up a gate, with access reportedly allowed only three or four days a week and requiring permits bought in advance.

In a statement last March, reported by the National, Ramblers Scotland said: “Our members reported that there were only 14 permits a month to be sold, despite the car park having space for 20 cars, and these had immediately sold out.

“We do not believe it is sustainable to continue to create a car park which is only available on certain days and on purchase of a permit.

“This is an indirect obstruction to public access given there is no public transport to this site and it is a long walk from Gifford or surrounding settlements.”

Jon Moses, from the Right to Roam campaign, criticised the appointment. “The government have put yet another unelected major landowner … in charge of our environment and rural affairs. Defra increasingly resembles a genteel medieval court.

“Meanwhile its long awaited access reforms appear to amount to little more than taxpayer handouts to landowners in exchange for permission to access a few woodlands.”

The apparent approach of the new minister towards access to nature is in contrast to comments from Steve Barclay, the new environment secretary, to journalists at the Country Land and Business Association conference in London on Thursday.

He said he wanted to open up “responsible access” to the countryside to allow people to enjoy the fresh air.

Barclay said he wanted to “support farmers and landowners with access schemes”, adding “we are looking at the detail but I think people want to be able to access nature, but to do it in a responsible way”.

Defra sources said at the time that Barclay was passionate about social prescribing and getting people outdoors to help their mental and physical health.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs was approached for comment.

A substance found in hundreds of drinking water samples across England has been categorised as carcinogenic by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The move will increase pressure on the UK government to take action on “forever chemicals”.

Rachel Salvidge www.theguardian.com 

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is one of 10,000 or so chemicals within the family of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that are used in a wide range of products, from cosmetics to clothing and food packaging, as well as in industrial processes and in firefighting foams. PFOA and another member of the family, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), have largely been banned, but remain in the environment because of their persistence. Studies have linked the PFAS family of chemicals to cancers, immunodeficiencies, reproductive harms and developmental effects in children. They are not easily metabolised by the body so build up in humans and animals over time.

PFOA has been linked to cancer for some time but a growing body of evidence means it has now been upgraded to “category one”, which means it is “carcinogenic to humans”, according to the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).

A recent report from the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) shows that approximately 12,000 samples taken from drinking water sources contain at least one PFAS of some kind.

The highest concentration of PFOA detected in a drinking water source was 149 nanograms a litre (ng/l), 1.5 times the DWI’s maximum limit for tap water. PFOS, categorised by the IARC as a “possible carcinogen”, was found at levels as high as 1,869ng/l, although these levels will have been diluted before reaching a tap.

Analysis of Environment Agency and water company data by Watershed Investigations showed that PFOA was detected in almost 1,000 drinking water sources sampled between 2006 and 2022. And tap water sampling around England found PFOA in more than half of the 45 samples taken, albeit below 10ng/l, deemed “low risk” by the DWI.

Earlier this year, the Guardian and Watershed Investigations found that effluent from the site of a chemicals company flowing into a protected river in Lancashire contained “extremely high levels” of PFOA.

The government has been accused of dragging its feet over taking action on PFAS compared with the EU, which is considering stricter regulation across all 10,000 or so of the substances.

England is behind the EU on drinking water limits: the DWI allows up to 100ng/l for PFOA and PFOS, while the EU applies a limit of 100ng/l for the sum of 20 PFAS. Denmark has set a limit of just 2ng/l for four individual PFAS, and the US Environmental Protection Agency has proposed dropping limits on some to 4ng/l.

Dr Patrick Byrne from Liverpool John Moores University, said: “Recently the Royal Society of Chemistry called on the government to reduce the maximum allowable level of individual PFAS such as PFOA in drinking water from 100ng/l to 10ng/l. This is to bring the UK more in line with other countries such as the US, who are proposing a maximum allowable concentration for PFOA of 4ng/l.

“UK regulations and environmental standards must keep pace with the scientific and medical evidence to protect our drinking water and us.”

Hannah Evans from the chemicals NGO Fidra said the categorisations were “extremely alarming” and highlighted the urgent need for regulatory action on PFAS. “We must take this opportunity to learn from cases such as PFOS and PFOA, and transition towards a PFAS-free economy as quickly and as effectively as possible.”

Philippe Grandjean, professor and chair of environmental medicine at the University of Southern Denmark, said PFAS chemicals were “transferred from a pregnant mother through her placenta to her foetus, and they are excreted in her milk. Thus, a breastfed infant receives a relatively large dose … so we see abnormalities like elevated cholesterol and poor glucose metabolism in children with elevated PFAS exposures. In addition, the immune system is harmed. This has implications for infectious disease but may also be of importance for cancer development, where immune cells are supposed to remove abnormal cells.”

A Defra spokesperson said: “Drinking water quality in England is of an exceptionally high standard and among the best in the world. Water companies are required to carry out regular risk assessments and sampling for any substance – including PFAS – that they believe may cause the water supply to pose a risk to human health.

“Work is continuing across government to help us assess levels of PFAS occurring in the environment, their sources and potential risks to inform future policy and regulatory approaches.”

Rishi Sunak has made a series of claims about the UK’s climate record in defence of his net zero rollback. Speaking at a press conference during a short visit to the Cop28 climate conference in Dubai, the prime minister insisted he had not faced any criticism from other world leaders for watering down his climate pledges.

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com

Claim: the UK has decarbonised faster than any major economy

This is true to an extent: according to some models, since the 1990s the UK has decarbonised faster than other large economies. This is because it was once very dependent on coal and was fast to phase it out. However, look at more recent times and the picture changes. Recent data shows Germany has cut greenhouse gas emissions faster than the UK since the 2015 Paris agreement to limit global warming. The UK was good at moving past the age of coal but it is going to be difficult to keep up with countries that have less stringent planning rules on solar and wind, more nuclear power stations, and less leaky, better-insulated homes.

Claim: the UK is one of the largest climate donors

According to Seek development, the UK is the world’s 13th largest climate donor. As it is the sixth largest economy by GDP according to the World Bank, the UK could do better.

Claim: the UK will meet its climate targets even with rollback on net zero

Sunak claimed the UK would still be on track to meet its carbon targets despite the changes he announced. The government’s own climate change committee has worked out that the changes will make this more difficult.

Claim: rollback on heat pump and insulation pledges will save families thousands of pounds

This is debatable. While Sunak has brought forward some exemptions for the gas and oil boiler phase-out, there were always going to be exemptions for people who would find it difficult to heat their home any other way. No one was ever going to be forced to have a heat pump – they could heat their home by another method that did not involve a fossil-fuel boiler. And the insulation rules he scrapped were only for landlords, who were going to be made to ensure their tenants lived in a home they could heat affordably. So while this will save landlords thousands of pounds, it may end up costing renters more.

Claim: climate politics is broken and rhetoric is harming progress

This was a theme Sunak kept bringing up at Cop28. However, it is he who has been criticised by scientists for politicising the Climate Change Committee, and for accusing climate campaigners and other experts of being “zealots”.