Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Queen's recommendation having been signified--

Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 50A(1)(a),

Question agreed to.

12 Feb 1997 : Column 440


Motion made, and Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(6) (Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),


Question agreed to.


Motion made, and Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 94E(2) (Scottish Grand Committee (Bills in relation to their principle)),

Question agreed to.



Pembrokeshire Ambulance Service

10.15 pm

Mr. Nick Ainger (Pembroke): I am here to present a petition that has been signed by more than 60,200 people in Pembrokeshire.

To lie upon the Table.

12 Feb 1997 : Column 441

Basking Sharks

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mrs. Lait.]

10.16 pm

Ms Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent, North): It is with some trepidation that I raise the issue of the quinquennial review of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, especially the consideration of the listing of the basking shark as an endangered species, although I am grateful for the opportunity to do so. I raise it with trepidation because, as you may have noticed, Mr. Deputy Speaker, my constituency is a long way from the sea, although we have a very good canal system, so the sea is not totally inaccessible. Every attempt so far to put the basking shark on the endangered species list has failed. The time has come for action by the House.

In the long time that I have been involved in campaigning on various environmental issues, I have met many local people in environmental organisations and wildlife and countryside groups who are convinced of the soundness of the case for the basking shark to be listed under schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. They have convinced me, and I hope that, when the Secretary of State makes his decision on 1 April, all the efforts on behalf of the basking shark will have been successful.

I wonder whether it is an accident that the basking shark has been left off the list so far, because it is bizarre that such a species has not been afforded the same protection as the red squirrel and other animals. Speaking to many different environmental groups led me to find out more about the basking shark. I wanted to discover exactly what kind of creature it is and why it is facing the threat of extinction.

Unlike the killer whale, the basking shark is a gentle giant. I understand from those who follow this matter closely that it was a common creature in our coastal waters and was bound up with folklore. It used to arrive in the Isle of Man waters during the hot summer days around May, but nobody knew where it went in September. There is scope for more scientific experiments to gain an understanding of how this creature lives.

There has been a marked reduction in sightings of the basking shark, particularly around the coast of the Isle of Man. The basking shark project in the Isle of Man--which is run by Ken Waterson and various volunteers and is supported by the Isle of Man Government--has raised concerns about this. There is a fear that the basking shark faces a real threat of extinction. We understand that the population status of the basking shark is unknown, and we know that its biological characteristics--including a slow growth rate--make it more susceptible to exploitation.

I shall deal briefly with the role of the Isle of Man Government. Under Manx legislation, the basking shark is already afforded protection, and that protection is based on the work of the basking shark project. The next logical step was for the Isle of Man to apply to the United Kingdom Government for appendix II status under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species at the next round of negotiations, which I understand will take place in Zimbabwe in June this year. The application

12 Feb 1997 : Column 442

from the Isle of Man exposed the nonsense that this creature is free to bask in Isle of Man waters, but not in United Kingdom waters beyond the Isle of Man limits.

Fortunately, we have not had a constitutional crisis on this, and I am glad to recognise that the Government have gone some way to making amends. I understand that the Isle of Man will be formally included in the delegation to Zimbabwe, and that Ken Waterson may be part of it. I look forward to being kept informed of the progress that is being made. It is important that the United Kingdom delegation should be able to contribute to the sharks working party which will meet under CITES. The whole episode has demonstrated our failure to get the basking shark on to the CITES appendix II list, and that has highlighted the real fiasco that we now face.

I want a commitment from the Minister that the Government will match the commitment from the Isle of Man, and that they will consider the basking shark under wildlife and countryside legislation. I want the Government to go further, and to discuss whether the Isle of Man, Jersey and other islands should have a say when we deliberate nature and conservation. I am not asking for the islands to play a full part, but it is essential that the Isle of Man should be included. I hope also that the Minister recognises that--in addition to the lack of scientific evidence--an obstacle to all this is the embarrassment of the Government being asked to negotiate internationally on what they were not prepared to do at home as recently as 10 January.

The real obstacle is the Government's unwillingness to take the precautionary approach. There would have been a different outcome to the application by the Isle of Man on 10 January to list the basking shark if the Government had accepted the precautionary approach and the recommendation of various organisations in previous reviews of the Wildlife and Countryside Act.

We want the Minister to give a commitment to the precautionary approach tonight. After all, the Government--whichever Government--of the day hold all endangered species in trust for tomorrow, for our children and grandchildren. It is the duty of Governments to ensure that biodiversity is maintained in United Kingdom waters. The Minister cannot pick and choose which threatened species to include, and an excellent case has already been made for the basking shark.

We should be doing far more to strengthen the Wildlife and Countryside Act. It is a question not only of which species are threatened by deliberate acts--trade, hunting and so on--but of the way in which we honour our obligations under the Berne convention and the habitats directive. We also need to protect threatened species effectively from the incidental results of lawful operations, whether in hedgerows, the seas, or anywhere else.

Perhaps the Minister will cast some light on why he has failed to accept the precautionary approach and on the reasons for previous recommendations being overturned. I have met a range of people through my concern for the basking shark, including the chairmen of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and of English Nature.

Will the Minister expand on where he expects objections to come from in the consultation exercise that he has recently undertaken? Is it the case that the Scottish Office and market forces have been given greater priority than the protection of endangered species such as the

12 Feb 1997 : Column 443

basking shark? Why has the Scottish Office had such a large say, when so many people have acted in the best interests of the basking shark?

Is the Department of the Environment perhaps out of step with the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food? I am grateful to have the support of my hon. Friend the Member for Glanford and Scunthorpe (Mr. Morley), the Labour spokesman on fisheries and agriculture. Does the Minister have any knowledge--this is pure speculation and fantasy--of whether the Government have traded 100 tonnes of basking shark liver oil for an as yet undetermined quota for United Kingdom fishing of white fish in Norwegian waters?

I hesitate to put that to the Minister, but I am trying to work out why the basking shark has already been rejected twice for listing. Is it an accidental oversight or is there some bizarre reason? I would welcome an assurance that there is no prospect of Norwegian whaling boats sailing around the Isle of Man, or anywhere in the Irish sea--even up to the Wirral--and harpooning basking sharks. It would be helpful to know what exactly is the current understanding with Norway, and whether at some future stage Norway could fish our basking sharks in return for a white fish quota agreement.

I urge the Minister to take account of what I believe is overwhelming support for the protection of the basking shark. Support has been expressed by English Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage, the Marine Conservation Society, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature shark specialist group and the basking shark project in the Isle of Man.

I must pay tribute to the tireless work done by Ken Waterson in the surveillance of basking sharks. Indeed, he has brought together volunteers from all over the world to try to keep tabs on what is happening. The Manx Government, the English Wildlife Trust, the Scottish Wildlife Trust and the university of Liverpool have also expressed support. Will the Minister note that that is more support than for any other species proposed for protection in the review?

When the Minister reaches his decision, will he also take into account the JNCC, which has put forward proposals yet again to the Department of the Environment and does not want them to be overturned once again?

Finally, there is concern that failure to protect the basking shark within the framework of our domestic legislation has implications for the undertakings that we have given on biodiversity internationally. The species has been assessed as globally vulnerable under the IUCN red list of endangered species criteria. Other countries are already accepting that it requires protection. The United Kingdom should be playing a leading role in all this. Whatever cuts are being made to the budgets of English Nature--those cuts should not be being made at all--money should be found properly to fund and co-ordinate scientific research.

More help should be given to projects such as the basking shark project in the Isle of Man. If endangered species status is granted for the basking shark on 1 April when the results are known, I hope that the Government will involve themselves in extensive monitoring and be in a strong position to play a leading part in international discussions.

I urge the Minister to heed the warnings that we have been given and to take account of the significant number of Members of Parliament who signed the early-day

12 Feb 1997 : Column 444

motion calling for action based on the precautionary principle--action already taken by the Isle of Man Government. I hope that, for the basking shark at least, it will be a case of third time lucky when the Government's decision is made in April.

Next Section

IndexHome Page