Speeches by Hinchliff.

“Without wanting to guess the outcome of the consultation, it sounds like you would expect that potentially to have a qualitatively different level of outcome for natural flood defences, significantly changing the number of them.”

“T8. In recent weeks Ministers have been arguing that vital support for the disabled is fiscally unsustainable because it is forecast to rise to £60.7 billion a year by 2029-30. What assessment has the Chancellor made of the fiscal sustainability of the 107 non-structural tax breaks that are currently costing HMRC £207 …”

“Okay. I think that is a really crucial point that a lot of the concerns have focused around. You are saying that although it might not be done by the developer, under the new terms of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill sites would be surveyed and we would know what is there, and what would be harmed by the developmen…”

“To drill down into the point about financial incentives for mitigation as opposed to legal, Alexa Culver, the legal counsel at ecological consultancy RSK Biocensus, has argued that the Bill requires that the levy “must preserve development viability above all else, so it won’t be any kind of financial deterrent to harm…”

“You do not have concerns as Natural England that relying on protections under the NPPF for ancient woodland would be insufficient?”

“Throughout the debate around the Bill, Government Ministers have maintained that irreplaceable habitats, such as ancient woodland, do not require protections under the Bill on the grounds that protections in the NPPF will still exist. You have referred several times in your evidence today to protections that will be th…”

“To pick up on that point, on protections, the NPPF states that “development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats…should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists”, but a lack of official guidance on what is wholly exceptional or what …”

“I will explore that in a little more detail. It seems to me that there is a distinction between the mitigation hierarchy, which says to avoid harm in the first instance, and, as I think we would all agree, looking at a wider scale for how best to achieve improvements. But I do not think those are necessarily the same p…”

“I would like you to answer the question that way, actually.”

“I’m sorry in advance, Ms Spain, but I have a series of questions directed at you. If either of the other panel members want to come in, please do. I want to pick up the point we have just been discussing about the mitigation hierarchy and go into it in a little more detail. You have just said that you maintain your pos…”

“Professor Depledge, I would like to ask you some further questions. We have talked about the precautionary principle, but could you also expand on how strong our evidential base on this issue is, and whether you feel that we need further epidemiological studies to inform regulation?”

“I think you did. To follow up, although I might be prompting you to repeat a statement you have already made, what would you like to see this Committee recommending to Government to tackle the potential of those synergistic effects now?”

“Thank you. Ms Cottrell, did you want to come in?”

“To some extent, such studies are having to run to catch up, because the chemicals are already out there and we are trying to work out what the problem is, when perhaps we should have known what the potential problems were before the chemicals were in the public sphere. Dr Cloy, what is known about the long-term health …”

“I want to follow up on the discussion around chemical mixtures. What do we actually know about how PFAS interact with other chemicals? How does that impact the risks they pose? Dr Cloy, you are nodding, so perhaps I will go to you first.”

“I will come to the other members of the panel in just a minute, but I would like to respond to that, Dr Cloy. You have mentioned multiple times how difficult it is to get the science to prove some of these points. Do you think that the Committee’s report should be saying something about the precautionary principle in r…”

“Did you want to come in on that, Professor Depledge?”

“Johnson Matthey are a major employer in my constituency in my hometown of Royston. I am in ongoing communication with them as a result.”

“We know, as was just described, that regrettable substitution has happened. It may be happening now. What can be done to prevent further regrettable substitution going forward?”

“I think you did. To follow up, although I might be prompting you to repeat a statement you have already made, what would you like to see this Committee recommending to Government to tackle the potential of those synergistic effects now?”