The launch of the government's "red tape" consultation isn't really a consultation at all (Anger as green laws are labelled red tape, 18 April). It's a sort of agent provocateur exercise where the government wants to do something controversial (churn up the environment), but needs to incite sections of the population (in this case farmers and businesses) to get their backing to override resistance from the public.
How can laws designed to protect the ecosphere, on which life depends, be regarded by Cameron and Cable as "red tape"? The most important acts – like the Climate Change Act, the Clean Air Act, the National Parks Act and the Wildlife and Countryside Act – could have been omitted as non-negotiable. That they were not shows how far-reaching this attack on the environment is intended to be.
Tory ministers have always regarded the environment as an opportunity for profitable exploitation, not as a heritage to be safeguarded for the benefit of all. Where was Defra in all this? The secretary of state, Caroline Spelman, has already shown herself unfit for purpose by campaigning to sell off Britain's forests. Balked by Cameron's U-turn, she's now ready to sacrifice much of the rest of the environment.
Labour, Oldham West and Royton, environment minister 1997-2003
• It is exactly five years since Cameron made his husky ride to the Norwegian glaciers to display his environmental concern. He told us to vote blue to go green. After a year in office, what has he achieved? He has called every environment regulation and law "red tape", and put them under review. He has tried to privatise England's forests. He has appointed a man who worked for a Russian oil company as climate change minister. He has cut the funding to green groups and research into renewable energy. It turns out if you vote blue, you get blue.
Paul Richards
Eastbourne, East Sussex
• The coalition is fully committed to the Climate Change Act, and any suggestion otherwise is highly misleading.
I am proud that the Climate Change Act was passed with cross-party support after both Liberal Democrat and Conservative pressure on the last government. Indeed, it was as a result of pressure from Liberal Democrat MPs that the emission reduction target for 2050 was raised to 80% following advice from the independent Committee on Climate Change. The Act is a key plank of the coalition's climate change policy, and has helped to take the politics out of the decisions needed to reduce our emissions in the most cost-effective way.
Businesses are central to the low-carbon investment that can help kickstart our economy, so it is right that government looks at how this can be done in a way that promotes green investment.
Energy and climate change secretary
• The business department's latest deregulatory threat to environmental laws poses a major threat to the UK's environmental industry. When will the BIS realise that government intervention is vital to remedy the market failure inherent in unpriced "environmental goods", which then creates demand for solutions from Britain's environmental industry?
This new BIS initiative, along with the coalition's policy of "one in – one out", also aimed at achieving a reduction of regulation, will damage the international competitiveness of the UK in a £3tn global environmental market
EIC also believes that all ministerial decisions should be informed by a thorough examination of all the costs and benefits – notably the economic benefits of environmental policies, such as improved air quality/reduced NHS bills; and the job creation and export potential for the UK's environmental industry.
Adrian Wilkes
Environmental Industries Commission
• Oh dear – more red tape on the way. It seems that the government may stop companies from storing gas cylinders and similarly highly flammable substances under motorway bridges. Regulation like this is a burden on enterprise and a real disincentive to risk-taking business.
Tony Cole
London