| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Hoyle: I am sure that you would agree, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that it is desirable for hon. Members to consider SSSIs and the future of wildlife in this country. The SSSIs are one of the most important factors in the protection of the countryside and wildlife, but, in the past 18 years, we have seen developers encroaching on them. That will always continue, because the greed for a little bit more will always exist. The feeling is that development on an extra small piece of land will not make any difference, but protection is needed against such encroachment.
A new challenge for the new millennium should be to provide solid, reliable protection for SSSIs and wildlife for the future. If such protection needs a new name, let it have a new name. We should seriously consider how we write such protection in stone, so that it cannot be nibbled away at the edges. It should also be easier for SSSIs to be listed, because we have already heard of how small pieces of land, whether in cities, towns or rural areas, may not fit into the category of SSSIs. The definition should not be so strict or regulated, and any piece of land should be included as long as it is worthy of protection. We should make it easier for people to obtain designations for land, and the protection that listing as SSSI gives should be afforded to all our constituencies, no matter how large or small the piece of land concerned. The main point is that a site should be worthy.
In addition, we must recognise that wildlife in the countryside needs protection. The best way to provide that is through a national rangers agency. The question of
resources is always important, but those rangers could look after SSSIs and country parks. By linking up with the national parks, they could offer true protection.
I am lucky in having part of the West Pennine moors in my constituency. That beautiful area is owned by North West Water, which itself is now part of United Utilities. There is nothing wrong with the arrangement: the company spends money on rangers and on ensuring that there is protection for wildlife.
More than a million people a year want to visit the part of the moor that is in my constituency. I do not want to tell those people that they cannot go there, as I think everyone ought to be able to share that beautiful countryside. However, what will happen if a French or American company snaps up United Utilities? We will then have to rely for that area's protection on an overseas company that does not understand the requirements of the countryside.
That is why I believe that the area would benefit from being declared an SSSI. We failed to achieve that in the past, but we could lose the protection afforded by the present owners overnight. I hope therefore that my hon. Friend the Minister will consider new ways to protect for future generations the countryside and the rural wildlife habitat that we love.
It is easy to look backwards, but we should look to the future and to the provision of further protection for the countryside. Extra funding will be needed. Farmers throughout the country are having a really tough time. However, given that no alternative funding for wildlife protection is available outside the assisted areas, farmers in those areas could be hired as part-time rangers. That alternative income would mean that they would not have to rely entirely on farming, as they would be employed to protect our countryside, wildlife habitats and SSSIs. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will consider how such a scheme might be implemented, by his and other Departments.
I am sure that in every constituency there is at least one application for a licence for commercial exploitation--for the extraction of minerals or of peat, for example--to which the first response is always to say no. I recognise that roads and houses have to be built, but no new licences should be granted unless a genuine need exists, and unless existing licences are taken into account.
A licence application has been submitted for a huge sand extraction facility at the village of Euxton in my constituency. However, the sand from a similar facility not far away is being stored because no one wants to buy it. The real value lies, not with the minerals extracted from such sites, but with the resulting hole in the ground, which can be filled with household or industrial waste.
Licence applications for mineral extractions should be refused if similar facilities exist within a 25-mile radius. Companies should be told that they cannot attempt to get a hole in the ground through that means. Existing licences should have to be shared, and the resources involved should have to be exhausted before new licences are granted. That would be a clear indication of the Government's determination to protect the countryside, and it would reassure the villagers of Euxton that those who want to make a quick, cheap pound out of a hole in the ground will not succeed.
Mr. David Lepper (Brighton, Pavilion):
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint) on securing this morning's debate. I apologise that I was not here for its start, but I could not change a commitment of long standing. However, I am pleased to have the opportunity to contribute a few comments.
The events of a couple of years ago at Offham down, at Lewes near my constituency, first made me aware of the vulnerability of sites of special scientific interest. The farmer there decided to plough up an SSSI on his land, to take advantage of the common agricultural policy's financial subsidy scheme. Who could blame him? However, local people decided that his action was not right, and turned out in force to replace the soil as soon as the farmer's plough turned it. Eventually, action was taken to restore that site.
That brought home to me just how vulnerable SSSIs are. I know that the Government intend to introduce legislation to protect them--my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, and other Ministers, have told me so. It is merely a matter of when such legislation will be brought in.
About a year ago, I introduced my Wildlife Bill into the House. Like most other private Members' Bills, it did not get very far, but it received a heartening level of support among hon. Members. For example, 349 hon. Members have now signed early-day motion 11, supporting my Bill and the wildlife charter proposed by a number of relevant organisations.
Moreover, the provisions that I have suggested and about which we have heard this morning also have support across the country. Earlier this year, the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Mr. Brake) and I delivered to Downing street a quarter of a million signatures collected from people who wanted to urge the Government and Parliament to introduce stronger wildlife protection legislation.
We have heard this morning about some of the omissions from the Government's framework for action document. I welcome that document, which contains many of the elements that I included in my Bill. However, the Government have not made a commitment on the matter of marine protection, which my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Mrs. Brinton) mentioned. There should be a greater emphasis on local wildlife sites, and more attention needs to be paid to the vulnerable land around the SSSIs.
Many habitats will disappear if action is not taken now. At present, 28 per cent. of SSSIs are in a state of neglect, and many of the species familiar in our countryside will not survive for future generations to enjoy. Given the present system of agricultural subsidies, we need to offer financial incentives for the good management of the sites. We need carrots as well as sticks.
Mr. Damian Green (Ashford):
I congratulate the hon. Member for Don Valley (Caroline Flint) on securing the debate, and I welcome the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin), to his new role. He will have realised that many of us are veterans of these Wednesday morning discussions of sites of special scientific interest, of which there have been many during the past few months. He may have to clear his diary on Wednesday mornings for many months to come as they are a regular feature. I welcome the Minister not least because the sight of him at the Dispatch Box after what he will agree has been one of the more tortuous journeys up the greasy pole gives hope to us all. I am delighted to see him make it.
Like many hon. Members, I hope that we are moving towards legislation. Last time we debated SSSIs, in July, the Minister for the Environment had been on the "Today" programme campaigning for legislative time. I, like others, understand that he has been successful in that, and I certainly hope that he has. The delay in taking steps to protect SSSIs and other areas of great wildlife value has been damaging.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |