If there is some actual evidence that a toxic wilderness will be the outcome I'm on your side of the debate , but I doubt anything remotely resembling that is the intent or the even vaguely possibly out come.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear: what I’m saying is that an absence of regulation over development, in general, will result in a toxic wilderness, which is why we need to scrutinise any and every move in that direction.
There are plenty of historic examples of unregulated development creating wildernesses which have taken decades to put right (dust bowls in the US is a good example; the destruction of habitat in the Thames by industrial pollution is another; nearer to to home in this case heavy-metal polluted run-off from mining for metal ores), and there are current examples (burning-off of forests in multiple places across the world), so it’s not a wild, imaginary scenario, it’s what happens in the absence of regulation.
In the UK we have some pretty good environmental protections in place, so look very, very carefully indeed at anything which threatens to “roll back” those protections is what I’m saying.
Look very carefully indeed at whether protections against the discharge of raw sewage into rivers are being respected, or are under threat, or are being improved, for instance.
