The new environment secretary wants to help animals but at the expense of the planet

Theresa Villiers and a banner reading "capitalism has no solutions for climate change"
Support us and go ad-free

Boris Johnson has appointed former Northern Ireland secretary Theresa Villiers to his cabinet. Johnson handed Villiers the environment secretary post, which Michael Gove vacated. She appears to have some redeeming environmental views, specifically on animals. But scratching below the surface reveals a logic that’s perfectly in line with the rest of the cabinet.

Opposition to live exports

Villiers’ record displays clear anti-environmental positions. She has a history of voting for ecologically destructive projects including fracking, HS2, and military action. But the new environment secretary also has a history of pro-animal positions.

Most notably, Villiers has been loud and clear in her opposition to live exports. This practice sees farmed animals such as cows and sheep carried in cramped lorries across huge distances, often spending hours in sweltering conditions. Villiers is also against repealing the Hunting Act, supports an end to factory farming, and has spoken out against farrowing crates.

At first glance, Villiers continues the allegedly ‘progressive’ stance that Gove took during his term in the post. But, as with Gove, digging down suggests her actions are motivated by reasons other than care for non-human animals.

Economic benefits

One clue appears in Villiers reason for supporting the ban on hunting. She said the underlying reason for her opposition is that:

I haven’t seen any convincing evidence that the ban on hunting has caused the job losses and economic damage some feared that it would.

This refers to claims by pro-hunting groups before the ban that the move would cause thousands of job losses. She has also been outspoken in her support for culling badgers whilst blaming the EU for ‘prohibiting’ a vaccination for cattle. The farming industry widely supports the cull because of the “economic impact” of bovine TB and the belief that badgers are key to the disease’s spread.

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

Prioritising economics puts Villiers’ animal welfare views in line with her attitude towards the environment and wider society. She responded in 2015 to concerns about her support for fracking by talking about ‘safety standards’, and briefly mentions “benefits to society as a whole”. However, fracking is environmentally destructive and support for the industry is based on perceived economic benefits. This is also true of other projects that Villiers has supported such as HS2 and the eventually-abandoned forest sell-off.

Villiers’ stance is a belief in state-guided private profit. And this becomes explicitly clear in her positions on human and social issues, such as voting to reduce corporation tax, for academisation, and for cuts to benefits.

“Least climate-friendly cabinet ever”

This position puts Villiers in step with the rest of Johnson’s cabinet.

Mat Hope, editor of climate news website DeSmog UK asked if Johnson’s new appointments make up the “least climate-friendly cabinet ever”. He then went on to lay out the front bench’s relationship with the environment. For example, he pointed out that leader of the commons Jacob Rees-Mogg is a climate crisis ‘denier’, and chancellor Sajid Javid permitted fracking projects. Business secretary Andrea Leadsom questioned climate breakdown and foreign secretary Dominic Raab has voted against efforts to curb carbon emissions.

Crucially, many in the new cabinet have links to the ‘Tufton Street Network‘. This collection of thinktanks and campaign groups seeks, in part, to limit environmental regulations that supposedly harm profits.


Former prime minister Theresa May’s appointment of Gove as environment secretary was an effort at greenwashing. Gove, like Villiers, was driven by a belief in putting profitable business at the heart of policy. And this same belief undermines Villiers even where she has some apparently positive points of view.

Capitalism is detrimental to a healthy planet. And Johnson’s new cabinet looks set to accelerate us down the path of destruction. We must get rid of them as soon as possible.

Featured image via Wikimedia – Nikki Powell / Flickr – Takver

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. So the belief in state guided private profit of Villier’s is a group think then? No public profit or an appreciation of of ideas unvetted by this network will be allowed then. This means no public discourse on a future they didn’t envision.
      This politic feels like what is happening, and so one can consider the richness of an open society inclusive for all to encourage a creativity to be welcomed isn’t acceptable.
      And any issue unvetted they speak to will not be sincere, or considered to be an honest reflection which is what I observe.
      Its difficult to see how they will last against any scientific truth then which isn’t socially acceptable.
      Why its like the 19th century when the concept of evolution was denied by the church, and in the 16th
      with the Catholic Church’s stance against Galileo when he perceived the earth was not the center of our solar system.. They haven’t admitted being misled or looked into their mirror upon the world yet.
      No questioning here.
      It’s hard to think Ms. Villers group is socially any different.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.