This is the best summary I could come up with:

Businesses and environmental groups have told the Guardian they have been left in the dark as to the extent of the regressions because there is no government body tracking the divergence between the EU and the UK.

Despite Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and the other architects of Brexit promising that environmental protections would be strengthened after the vote to leave the EU, the Guardian’s analysis shows the opposite is the case.

“This backsliding is problematic because not only will it weaken existing levels of environmental protection, our trade and cooperation agreement with the EU has a specific legal commitment, repeated by multiple ministers, that the UK would retain high standards and not regress after Brexit.”

While this means there is technically more protection from chemical pollution and nature destruction, the differences in regulation between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK have implications for trade and politics.

Ed Barker, the head of communications at the Agricultural Industries Confederation, said its members were struggling with lack of transparency about regressions from EU environmental law.

He added that he was “very, very” sympathetic to the idea of dynamic alignment, which would mean the UK’s environmental regulations would automatically mirror those of the EU, but that the country would have the power to diverge on any of them.

The original article contains 976 words, the summary contains 216 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!