Author: Michael Nicholson

The State Opening of Parliament and the monarch’s address gets all policy nerds excited. This year was no different. It is an opportunity to pore over the government of the day’s legislative agenda for the year (or so) ahead and though much is briefed (or leaked) in advance, it still rouses considerable interest – a European Partnership Bill, a Water Reform Bill and much else besides. Has Defra, the government department responsible for environmental matters, secured the attention of decision makers in 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office to ensure enough legislative time in Parliament? Is the environment (and climate) policy prominent in this year’s Kings Speech? Spoiler alert: no, it isn’t. To compensate, the Government should use the upcoming UK-EU summit and propose a wide-ranging ‘environment package’ that seeks close(r) alignment around higher environmental standards. 

Over the last five years, the Institute for European Environmental Policy UK (IEEP UK) has been tracking and assessing the state of divergence in environmental law between the UK and EU. In other words, we have been watching the ongoing trajectory in the development of new UK and EU environmental laws since Brexit.

In short, and perhaps as no surprise to many, our research has shown that the UK has not kept pace with the EU which has been strengthening existing environmental rules (the ones we shared with the EU at the point of Brexit) and have created tougher new environmental laws too.

This is why it is disappointing to see so little ‘environment’ in the latest King’s Speech in May 2026. Of concern too, the topic of environment has been left out of follow up House of Lords debates in Parliament also. 

The Sovereign’s Address to Parliament stresses the Government’s core aims: energy, defence and economic security of the United Kingdom. Yet the Government’s own analysis shows that “environmental degradation can disrupt food, water, health and supply chains, and trigger wider geopolitical instability”. That there was an initial reluctance by the Government to publish this report more than suggests that there is a disconnect between what is being said and what will be done.

In the King’s Speech, there are glimpses of environment or climate policy. Ultimately though they are just glimpses that are left hanging, often disjointed, and neither living up to the promise of a Green Brexit or closing the gap to higher environmental standards currently being set by the EU.

The Government may point to the European Partnership Bill as a means by which higher environmental regulatory standards in the areas of agri-food products and emissions trading can be achieved. But make no mistake, this Bill – which formalises the Labour Government’s 2025 ‘Reset’ agenda with the EU – are primarily about boosting trade and the economy. This is not about raising environment standards. At best, the environment is a by-product of these trade/economic deals.

The new Energy Independence Bill is framed as reducing reliance on fossil fuels produced in unstable parts of the world. This is a sensible objective. Hopefully it will. But where is the consideration that clean and renewable supply is a worthy goal in and of itself? Where is the clear and unambiguous statement that fighting climate change – a leading cause of the instability that is threatening ecosystem collapse as highlighted in the Government’s report – is a primary goal too?

The Government’s Water Reform Bill is intended to end decades of mismanagement and pollution in England’s rivers and coastal waters. This is welcome. Again, hopefully it will. It is the most concrete of the ‘environmental’ measures in the 2026-27 programme of government, but no one is expecting the fruits of this labour being felt any time soon.

To perk up the environmental lobby and raise environmental standards, the UK could and should propose a robust package of environmental measures at the next UK-EU summit. It could and should be bold in seeking greater alignment with the EU in environment and climate policy – an area that frankly, both sides largely agree on. As a starter, the package up for discussion should include circular economy rules (such as on eco-design, right to repair, food and textile waste and critical raw materials), air quality standards, marine protection, regulation of harmful chemicals and rules around deforestation. What about improving our shared understanding of the problems facing the European continent too – by rejoining the European Environment Agency and Eionet?

Working together in areas that both sides largely agree rebuilds trust, strengthens relations and buys goodwill for other more difficult negotiations that are surely to come.

Photo by Marcin Nowak on Unsplash