HS Environment Historical reform of the Nature Conservation Act progressed for consideration by Parliament, live broadcast underway – “Nobody but Finland can protect Finnish nature”

Finland The reform of the Nature Conservation Act progressed for consideration by Parliament on Wednesday.

You can follow the current live broadcast conversation from the video in this article.

The reform of the Nature Conservation Act is quite historic, as this is only the second time that the Finnish Nature Conservation Act, enacted in 1923, has been thoroughly reformed. The previous reform dates from 1997.

Reform work has caused a twist within the government, but a compromise was found, and the environment minister Emma Kari (vihr) introduced the bill last Thursday in the middle of Finland’s hottest NATO day.

Read more: Mineral exploration in national parks would be banned and ecological compensation would be protected by law – government proposes new nature conservation law

Kari commented on the reform to HS on Wednesday just before the start of the debate. According to him, from the Greens’ point of view, this is one of the most important reforms of the entire term of office.

“When I started this pest, I said the big thing for the rest of the season is to raise the loss of nature alongside the climate crisis to one of the biggest issues of our time,” he said.

“It is also progressing in Finnish nature. Every ninth species is endangered. Half of the habitats are endangered. ”

In Kari’s opinion, the deterioration of biodiversity in Finnish politics is not always as serious as the climate crisis. However, he is grateful to the government partners for the progress of the law. He hardly wants to comment on the contradictions with the city center, for example, although he mentions that the reform was not easy.

“Understanding has increased, and across party lines, it is understood that current legislation and current measures to stop nature loss have not been enough.”

Wholly what is new in the law is the concept of ecological compensation. It refers, for example, to the replacement of natural values ​​under a company or municipal construction project so that the person causing the damage pays for the protection or restoration of a similar nature elsewhere.

The law does not force compensation, but provides a framework and control over the natural value market. The landowner can obtain the approval of the authorities for the natural values ​​of his land, which also makes it clearer to trade them with the compensator.

At the same time, with the approval of the authority, the company is able to say that the disadvantages have indeed been compensated and is not just about green washing.

“This sector has been a wild west,” Environment Minister Kari told HS before the parliamentary hearing. According to him, the desire to clarify the rules has come a lot from the companies themselves.

Initially, there was also a mandatory requirement in some cases for compensation in some cases. However, the law now under consideration is entirely voluntary.

According to Kari, for example, Metso’s voluntary forest protection program in southern Finland has been an indication that volunteering can also produce results. Today, landowners provide Metso with more forest than there are enough funds to pay for protection compensation.

Incorporating Metso into the law is also one of the reforms in the new law.

Member of the Greens Pirkka-Pekka Petelius commented in the broadcast discussion that he believes compensation should be made mandatory in the future. However, he praised the inclusion of the concept in the law and believed it would help to disconnect the growth of well-being from the weakening of nature.

“The goal should not be to buy a clear conscience, but to create an incentive to minimize the natural impact of economic activity.”

In addition what is new in the law is the strengthening of the protection of endangered habitats, the legalization of adaptation to climate change and the fight against the disadvantages of mining by banning mineral exploration in national parks and nature parks.

The removal of alien species, such as the raccoon dog and the mink, is also facilitated in protected areas.

According to Kari, local responsibility and effectiveness are an advantage in the policy against nature loss.

“It is quite often asked in the climate debate why we are doing here, why not focus on China or the United States and their emissions. Here, this whole set-up is reversed, because it is quite clear that the beautiful Finnish nature cannot be protected by anyone other than us. ”

Opposition party Coalition Party Group Leader, who has long followed climate and environmental issues Kai Mykkänen is concerned about the loss of legal certainty, although it also sees the necessary changes in the law.

Mykkänen also commented on the law to HS just before the start of the parliamentary proceedings.

“It is positive and important that safeguarding biodiversity as a more holistic concept than traditional nature conservation gets a legal basis,” he said.

“It is also positive that a legal basis is now being created for the economic replacement of nature conservation,” he said, referring to ecological compensation and the Metso forest protection program.

The main concern in the Coalition Party is that the law introduces endangered habitats alongside endangered species. According to the law, endangered habitats must be taken into account whenever possible.

In principle, it is not a matter of directly binding legislation, but of adding information to the law. However, the Coalition Party is concerned that the increase could constitute a new article that could lead to, for example, construction projects or investment by companies getting stuck in the courts.

“We now need to find out more about this,” Mykkänen said. “The permit hassle must not be complicated anymore.”

Mykkänen hopes that the law will also be sent to the Finance and Transport Committees for opinions.

In connection with the discussion of the law, he also hopes for a broader discussion on what is Finland’s long-term target level in the fight against nature loss, so that the planning of economic activities is also predictable.

“Before long, we must learn to determine what is the tolerable amount of natural loss.”