Only Royal Assent Stands Between Scotland’s Nature and a Protected Future
Scotland is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, ranking 212th out of 240 countries surveyed for biodiversity intactness. So, it’s no wonder the Scottish Parliament has been lobbied to set out a legal pathway for nature recovery.
The solution, the Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill, which passed Stage 3 on its way to becoming an Act, covers a range of issues including: biodiversity, Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), national parks and deer management. Marking a clear step forward from previous legislation, as nature-based targets will be considered legally binding, instead of voluntary goals. On the 29th January 2026, the Bill passed with a parliamentary vote of 90 Members of Scottish Parliament (MSPs) for, and 26 against – all the Bill requires to become an Act now is royal assent.
The Bill not only closes the long-standing gaps in nature protection that threatened Scotland’s future but also reflects many similar goals and aspirations of the Climate and Nature (CAN) Bill (for the UK). Given the precarious future of UK-wide legislation on climate change and biodiversity loss, this Bill represents a step in the right direction – for Scotland at least. Making it a stark wake-up call for other UK nations to catch up and put in place legally binding targets, not only for species recovery, but ecosystem restoration.
The Natural Environment Bill was first published by the Scottish government on the 19th of February 2025. The Scottish Government introduced the Bill to improve biodiversity and regenerate the natural environment.
The Bill involved four main parts:
- Part 1 – Related to Biodiversity and Legally Binding Targets. This part of the Bill was related to nature restoration and the legal responsibility of the Scottish government to meet targets.
- Part 2 – Gave Authority for Scottish Ministers to Make and Change Laws Regarding Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Habitat Regulations. Enabled ministers to make and change EIAs and Habitat Regulations, keeping them relevant and applicable to major projects, ensuring developments are sufficiently assessed. Part 2 was intended to give ministers back this power, after the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union (EU). Previously, an EU law covered this.
- Part 3 – Focussed on National Parks. Updated their aims and management. Additionally, created new powers for park authorities.
- Part 4 – Applicable to Wild Deer Management. Allowed further controls on deer populations when there are ecological concerns, and removed the need for a licence when trading venison.
Since the Bill’s original publication, it has undergone three stages of debate and scrutiny, including a broader public sector consultation. Throughout the process, MSPs from across the chamber tabled amendments to strengthen the nature recovery plan in line with NGO, conservation and expert advice. The most notable amendment came at Stage Two, when, after lobbying from environmental organisations and MSPs, Part 2 of the Bill was removed, and has not been returned to the Bill at Stage 3.
Why was Part 2 Removed?
Many environmental organisations, including RSPB Scotland, Scottish Environment LINK (ScotLink) and Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM), led the calls to remove Part 2. The RSPB’s campaign stated, ‘Part 2 of the Bill would give Scottish Ministers new powers which could weaken Scotland’s most fundamental environmental protections: Environmental Impact Assessment and the Habitats Regulations. That’s not what a nature Bill should do’. In the same article, RSPB Scotland wrote how the Bill should be used to bring about ‘practical actions’ like the ‘mandatory introduction of swift bricks in all new developments’. Subsequently, regulations regarding swift bricks were added to the Bill at Stage 3 discussions.
In addition to environmental organisations, many MSPs from across the political spectrum voted and voiced to remove this Part from the Bill. Some MSPs who voiced their concerns over this Part were: Mark Ruskell (Scottish Greens), Sarah Boyack and Rhonda Grant (Scottish Labour), Tim Eagle (Scottish Conservatives). Many believed that future governments could use this Part of the Bill to change legislation, in a way that would bypass environmental concerns, and make developments faster, instead of more environmentally friendly.
After concerns raised at Stage 1 and Stage 2 discussions, the Scottish Government -Scottish National Party (SNP), represented by Gillian Martin, ‘agreed that the power in Part 2, as written, is too broad and could be open to misuse by future governments’. She encouraged MSPs to support amendments to this section, which would safeguard nature and prevent regression. Ultimately, the committee voted for amendments proposed by Mark Ruskell – to scrap Part 2 entirely – and it was removed from the Bill.
Other Notable Changes to the Bill
- Swift bricks became mandatory for new builds. During Stage 3 discussions, an amendment was lodged by Mark Ruskell and supported by RSPB Scotland.
- Biodiversity targets, outlined in Part 1 of the Bill, were strengthened at Stage 2. Evelyn Tweed (SNP) broadened the target requirements to any species. Allowing for the protection of species that are not currently threatened. Additionally, amendments to Part 1 of the Bill require Environmental Standards Scotland (ESS), submit reports directly to the Scottish Parliament. This prevents editing from ministers and will give a better perspective on nature recovery, without bias.
- Also at Stage 2 debates, a requirement for the government to promote venison as a sustainable food source nationally was introduced. This came from calls from MSPs and environmental organisations. Furthermore, land owners/managers were given clearer notification and objection rights if NatureScot intends to cull deer on their land.
- Lastly, at Stage 3 discussions, extra parts were added to the Bill to address specific gaps that had been previously identified. These were related to the sale of peat for horticulture, marine planning/protection and urban Gull management. The Marine Conservation Society (MSC) worked directly with MSPs throughout Stages 2 and 3 to ensure targets for marine biodiversity were as legally binding as their terrestrial counterparts.
The Bill’s Significance
The Bill represents a positive step forward for nature (and climate change). A positive outcome that was lobbied for by RSPB Scotland, CIEEM, The MSC, ScotLink and more. Additionally, amendments were made and approved by a cross-section of MSPs, signifying a much-needed shift working towards a common goal that will affect us all – nature recovery.
The success and consensus of the Natural Environment Bill in Scotland have become a beacon of hope for UK-wide nature recovery. This should be a wake-up call for Westminster to update its legislation, halting species loss and reversing ecosystem destruction. Creating a nature positive plan would benefit us all, providing jobs, protecting communities and helping us achieve our most ambitious climate aspirations. We can only hope that the CAN Bill will be discussed by the UK Parliament as planned, on the 29th of May 2026 – currently, such a discussion looks unlikely.
