Source · Select Committees · Environmental Audit Committee
Recommendation 2
2
Paragraph: 24
In 2018 the Government announced it would devise an indicator on the overseas environmental impacts...
Conclusion
In 2018 the Government announced it would devise an indicator on the overseas environmental impacts of UK consumption of key commodities. It appears that little to no progress has been made in developing this indicator. This is disappointing and shows a lack of prioritisation in addressing one of the biggest drivers of land conversion, biodiversity loss and carbon emissions at a global scale.
Paragraph Reference:
24
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
changes. As set out previously in our response4 to the Public Accounts Committee’s recommendation on this matter, the government already carefully considers the environmental implications of relevant measures. 2 https://hub.jncc.gov.uk/assets/709e0304–0460–4f83–9dcd-3fb490f5e676 3 https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/ukbi-a4-global-biodiversity-impact 4 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/997065/ CCS207_CCS0621746140–001_Treasury_Minutes_WebAccessible.pdf We also publish environmental assessments for relevant environmental tax changes, such as the Plastic Packaging Tax. HM Treasury and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will continue to carefully consider options on assessment and publication of environmental impacts, taking into account the relevancy of environmental impacts to the tax measure. In addition, HMRC is exploring options to further strengthen the analytical approach to monitoring, evaluating and quantifying the environmental impacts of tax measures, including their wider impacts. Our approach to this issue will be kept under review, including at future Budgets. However, it would not be practical, cost effective or beneficial to consider detailed environmental impacts for every tax change, such as any changes to the personal allowances for income tax or employer National Insurance Contributions. We therefore do not agree with the Committee’s specific recommendation on this matter.