| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Chaytor: Does not it follow that, in any future legislation, the powers, responsibilities and budgets of the
county wildlife trusts need to be enhanced so that they can encourage biodiversity in the urban settings that the hon. Gentleman is describing?
Mr. Brake: That is the case, and resources are important.
As the hon. Member for Don Valley has said, we need to protect species in our seas and coastal areas. For whales, dolphins and porpoises around the UK the situation is far from satisfactory, and those animals are threatened by ever-faster boats and jet skis. They are not adequately protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and I understand that the position will be no better under the proposed legislation. The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society has raised the matter with the Government, and I hope that the Minister will be able to reassure hon. Members.
Mr. David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire):
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint) on securing this important debate on sites of special scientific interest. None of us should apologise for the frequency with which we bring these matters to the House.
For many SSSIs, it is already five minutes to midnight and, for others, sadly, the bells have tolled--they have gone. In years to come, we must not hear my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley asking, "Where have all the peat bogs gone? Gone to plant pots every one". That is the risk we face.
SSSIs are, without doubt, the very best examples of our natural heritage. The importance of their plants, animals or geological and physiographical features has led to those areas receiving the SSSI designation from English Nature. The 4,000 or so such sites cover 1 million hectares in England--4,000 precious and valued square miles.
Historically, a good deal of my constituency has been economically dependent on mineral extraction--including coal, clay, sand, roadstone and gravel. That era is steadily drawing to a close, and we are now restoring the tranches of derelict land in a variety of ways, prominent among which is the rapidly developing national forest--a remarkably successful project.
Former mining areas, such as my constituency and that of my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley, have been environmentally scarred for generations. Our landscape and wildlife have not been seen traditionally as our strengths. We particularly value the relatively few SSSIs that we have, and we are especially sensitive about any damage to or loss of such sites.
As the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Mr. Brake) suggested, it has been estimated by English Nature that, nationally, 28 per cent. of SSSI aspects--
those features of interest for which a site is nationally important--are in an unfavourable condition. There is either no sign of recovery, or they are declining even further. That should give us all great concern. Tighter legislation is essential to ensure that all SSSIs are managed so as to maintain to a high standard their particular features of interest.
We recognise that changing the legislative framework is not sufficient on its own to obtain the necessary improvements. We need a new policy direction, refined regulations and, above all, adequate resources. To obtain better management of SSSIs requires us to work in partnership with their owners and managers.
It is crucial to have the right mix of regulation and incentive to ensure that the major present benefits obtained by partnership working with land managers and owners are maintained. While many SSSIs are positively managed with the active help, goodwill and co-operation of their owners and occupiers, I regret to say that a substantial number are not.
It is time for the Government to legislate to deal with those cases. The present legal framework is unable to deal with SSSI damage arising from certain circumstances--for instance, third parties can badly damage SSSIs, or the sites can simply be neglected, with a consequent loss or decline of many species and habitats.
A major threat to SSSIs often arises when the owner or occupier activates an ancient planning permission which the modern planning framework would never have sanctioned. Owners and occupiers can, after giving notice, carry out damaging activities, preventable only if English Nature produces a management agreement with financial compensation for lost profits.
My hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley pointed to the dramatic weaknesses in that approach, and it is a costly diversion of resources from active nature conservation. In addition, particular difficulties occur on approximately 500 wetland SSSIs which depend on satisfactory management of the water tables on adjoining land. Many such sites are suffering from water pollution or abstraction problems. It is clearly essential to ensure that the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food implements water level management plans on land adjoining SSSIs which will maintain the particularly valued feature of the sites.
There is no current requirement for the owners or occupiers of SSSIs to carry out that management which is necessary to maintain the key points of interest of the sites in question--a problem often of benign neglect. A positive management order--analogous to the order served upon the owners of listed buildings--has been suggested by some as a solution to the problem. Such an order would require owners to carry out the work themselves, or enable English Nature to do so and to recover the cost from the owner.
English Nature has publicly stated its belief that such orders would not be workable for SSSIs, since it would be hard to carry out practical management activities--many of which would be ongoing commitments--without the active co-operation of the owner or occupier concerned.
Will the Minister comment on the potential for a different type of positive management order, whereby English Nature could specify, through a site management statement, the work necessary to maintain the scientific
interest of the SSSI? If the owner's agreement cannot be obtained, even with appropriate assistance from organisations such as the Farming and Rural Conservation Agency, English Nature's council should be empowered to serve a positive management order requiring that the work be completed.
An appeal against the terms of such an order could be made to the Secretary of State by the owner. If the order was confirmed, the owner or occupier would have the choice of completing the works within an agreed time scale, with financial support from English Nature, or agreeing to voluntary sale of the land to English Nature or an approved conservation body. If the owner refused both those alternatives, compulsory purchase proceedings would be initiated, with an appeal process through the planning inquiry system and confirmation by the Secretary of State.
The attractions of that approach are that the same process of appeal could be used to resolve refusals to allow operations likely to damage the scientific interest of the SSSI and that such a system could eventually replace the present order under section 29 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
There is a pressing need to reform the common agricultural policy so that payments are focused to deliver positive benefits for SSSIs and to discourage the intensive agricultural practices that have the most damaging effect on wildlife. Production subsidies should be redirected to protecting and managing special sites and the countryside, converting to organic farming or creating jobs in rural areas; direct subsidies to farmers should be conditional on sustainable farming, with protections for hedgerows, rivers and streams; and payments to beef farmers should be made under discretionary powers from the European Union to support traditional, low intensity herds, so as to maintain conservation grasslands.
I make a plea from the heart for much tougher planning guidance so that far higher hurdles must be surmounted before any developments on SSSIs are sanctioned. We should also consider revocation of old mineral extraction permissions that could damage SSSIs.
Those of us with constituencies that have suffered a great deal of despoliation are especially alert to threats to our SSSIs. When I reviewed the condition assessments and management prospects for 16 sites in my area, I found that of the 53 features of interest a bare 30 per cent. were in a favourable condition, compared with 56 per cent. nationally; 26 per cent. were in an unfavourable condition, but showing signs of recovery; and the remaining 44 per cent. were in an unsatisfactory condition, compared with 28 per cent. nationally. It was that high proportion of local sites suffering from benign neglect that prompted me to contribute to this debate.
A typical example concerns the SSSIs in Grace Dieu and High Sharpley: very attractive, important and valued areas just outside the urban fringe of Coalville. Parts of the areas have some public access and parts are closed by their owners to "protect the SSSIs"; yet an assessment of the sites shows that two thirds of their features are in an unfavourable condition that is not improving. Clearly, restriction of public access has not led to adequate protection for those important and sensitive sites. More has to be done.
Like every Labour candidate, especially those contesting rural or part-rural seats, I campaigned vigorously on environmental issues in the long run-up to
the 1997 general election. Labour's policies, enabling the countryside to become ecologically richer, more varied and more accessible were, and are, especially popular. Those policies include our commitment to strengthening protection for SSSIs and other valuable habitats.
Like every Labour Member, I welcomed the announcement earlier this year by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment that he would deliver on that commitment by amending the 1981 Act, and I was encouraged by the Government's public consultation paper, "SSSIs--Better Protection and Management". There is strong cross-party support for better wildlife protection. Many hon. Members are signatories to early-day motion 11.
It is clear that the statutory conservation agencies need new powers and resources to tackle the worsening problems facing almost a third of SSSIs. There is an urgent need to act, and it would be popular, so what better time than two weeks from today, what better setting than the other place and what better means than the Queen's Speech? I urge my hon. Friend the Minister to ensure that the necessary powers and resources are made available very soon to prevent yet more deterioration of our national natural assets.
Oscar Wilde said that
"each man kills the thing he loves,
Is not our nation at risk of allowing some of the things that we most love--SSSIs--to be killed by a method not mentioned by Wilde: benign neglect by their owners or occupiers? Is not it about time that we were brave enough to step in and prevent that?
By each let this be heard,
Some do it with a bitter look,
Some with a flattering word,
The coward does it with a kiss,
The brave man with a sword!"
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |