Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Gordon Prentice (Pendle): I am very happy to contribute to this very important debate on wildlife conservation. I shall keep my remarks brief, as I know that many colleagues wish to speak.
A moment ago, my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Leicestershire (Mr. Taylor) spoke about the importance of ancient woodlands, and said that we should
help people to understand the importance of maintaining them. As he was speaking, I allowed myself a wry smile, because it was only a few years ago, in 1995, when the warden of Windsor great park ordered the felling of 63 ancient oak trees that dated back to Queen Anne's days. The warden of Windsor great park is, of course, the Duke of Edinburgh. If he does not know the importance of ancient woodland, what hope is there for us?
The hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Mr. Brake) spoke about the nail fungus living in the dung of New Forest ponies. Tragically, that is not the only species that has gone in recent years. I received a briefing from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, stating that the Essex emerald moth has gone--it is extinct. The mouse-eared bat, which sounds like an endearing creature, is gone for ever--extinct. As for plant life, alpine butterwort is gone, as is the purple spurge. I do not know what the purple spurge looks like--I have probably never seen it in my life--but I feel that it is a tragedy for all of us that it is gone.
We need to act, and to act quickly. This morning, on the "Today" programme, I heard the Minister for the Environment tell us that action would be taken. He was good; he is always good. If I had a vote for Ministers--tragically, I do not--he would have my vote. I hope that he keeps his job.
Mr. David Taylor:
Kiss of death.
Mr. Prentice:
We all want my right hon. Friend to keep his job. We do not want him to be moved, to placate some lobby saying, "The Government are too green. We've gotta get rid of him." I want him to stay where he is.
The countryside Minister told John Humphrys that we need legislation to protect sites of special scientific interest, and that it was not a question of if, but when--which had a familiar ring to it. This year, in March, when I withdrew my Right to Roam Bill, he told me that the Government were in favour of opening up the countryside--4 million acres of mountain, moorland, heath and common land--and that that would be done as soon as parliamentary time permits. This November, we want to see that parliamentary time permitted.
This Session, we have dealt with the City of London (Ward Elections) Bill. No one asked me whether weshould consider that Bill. Mysteriously--magically--we discovered ourselves debating it in the Chamber. That Bill has never been debated in the parliamentary Labour party, and no one in the wider Labour party knows about it. Personally, I feel quite hostile to it; but we debated it. In the same breath, however, we are told that we cannot introduce wildlife and habitat legislation because of a problem with parliamentary time. There is lots of parliamentary time.
Mr. Brake:
I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman would be prepared, as I would, to extend our stay in this place a little into our rather generous summer recess to address the issue?
Mr. Prentice:
The hon. Gentleman's comments would carry more force if he had a few Liberal Democrat colleagues sitting behind him. I should say, just for the record, that one Liberal Democrat Member--from a party
This morning--to get back to the point--the countryside Minister said that he was seeking the earliest legislative slot for the relevant Bill. Listening to him, I started running around trying to find a pen, as I thought that he was going to say something of great moment, which he did. He said that there was a very good chance of obtaining that legislative slot, and then he played his trump card: "Tony Blair is strongly in support of this."
So what is the problem? The Prime Minister apparently supports strongly the need for early legislation. The problem is that too many people just do not believe it. Philip Rothwell, head of policy operation at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Birds [Hon. Members: "Protection."] I am obviously too fired up today. Let me call it the RSPB. Mr. Rothwell was quoted in The Express as saying:
If the RSPB holds that view, we can imagine the millions more who feel the same. The perception exists that the Government are dragging their feet, and much that has happened has reinforced that idea. I was given a commitment in March that there would be legislation on the right to roam, but the papers tell us that the idea has been shelved in case it alienates landowning interests. Fox hunting is immensely important, particularly to our younger constituents, but the Government give the impression of being unwilling to take on the blood sports lobby.
Despite what my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment said on the radio this morning, there is a feeling that wildlife is another area that may fall off the end of the plank. If we are governed by focus groups that tell us that health and education are the top priorities--as they must be--it is inevitable that wildlife protection will be regarded as less important in the great scheme of things. But that is a mistake.
Our attitude to wildlife boils down to trust. Do the people trust the Government to deliver? If we do not deliver on wildlife, it will be impossible to make promises about legislation at the next election. We have an enormous majority, and we control the legislative agenda. We could sit here for 12 months to pass a wildlife Bill if we wanted to.
Mrs. Helen Brinton (Peterborough):
I am delighted to add my voice to those calling for greater protection for wildlife, and particularly to that of my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) who spoke with great passion. It is fitting that we should mark the 50th anniversary of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, which was, as so many have said, ground-breaking legislation introduced by a great Labour Government, by returning to the issue of wildlife protection and asking what improvements we can make.
We must accept that improvements are now needed to that legislation. My right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment knows that, and I commend him on his hard work in this area. However, to make improvements that we all want for the protection of sites of special scientific interest, we need new legislation, and I hope that the next Queens Speech will include a Bill.
The need for improvements is illustrated by Government figures showing that more than 300 SSSIs are damaged every year. The effect of even just one more year's delay is absolutely clear. A year's delay would mean another 300 of our finest and most treasured wildlife sites being destroyed or ruined. We cannot allow that to happen.
My constituents have raised this matter with me. The protection of wildlife sites and SSSIs has real resonance with members of the public who want our countryside to be preserved and the wild animals and wild flowers that make the countryside such a special place to be protected. I have received many letters from constituents, and many hon. Members will have received, in the form of an enormous daisy chain, a novel and very large petition from their constituents.
It is easy to see why the issue has such resonance with the public. Many beautiful places known to our constituents are being damaged. In Northamptonshire alone, two SSSIs have been all but destroyed. A tiny fraction of Harleston heath remains; despite its SSSI status, the rules to protect it from development and forestry were too weak. Likewise, only a fragment of the Oakley purlieus SSSI remains, its having been destroyed by quarrying.
On top of the loss of those beautiful places, the public recognise the loss of important and well-loved species. I was staggered to see in today's report from the wildlife and countryside link that 25 species have become extinct in the UK since the passage of Clem Attlee's 1949 Act. We think of extinction as something that happens in countries struck by poverty, or as a relic of the last century. We think of it happening when people destroy habitats in a desperate attempt to grow food or scrape out a living. We do not think of it happening in a prosperous country such as the United Kingdom, where there are laws to protect the countryside.
Other species have suffered dramatic declines. The grey partridge has declined by 78 per cent. since 1972, and the tree sparrow by 87 per cent. Even among birds as common as starlings--once positively a pest because
of their enormous flocks--numbers have dropped dramatically. People notice these changes, and the introduction of a Bill to halt the decline would be extremely popular and effective politics.
"Tony Blair is not interested in the environment and he has surrounded himself with advisers who are not interested either."
The RSPB is not some fringe organisation that can be dismissed with a wave of the hand. There are 3 million members of the RSPB and other organisations dedicated to the protection of wildlife.
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |