Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120
- 125)
TUESDAY 16 MAY 2000
MR ROGER
PRITCHARD, MRS
HILARY NEAL
AND MR
JOHN OSMOND
Mr Blunt
120. The truth is, is it not, that there is
a basic problem here about joined-up government? We all know that
the Agricultural Secretary is in terrible strife at the moment
for a wide variety of reasons and that what has happened, on my
reading of events, is that Ministers in MAFF have therefore striven
to protect the industry as far as possible, whilst the environmental
benefits of a lot of these policies have been allowed to go by
the board. If there were actually a case of joined-up government,
of both MAFF and the Department of the Environment, Transport
and the Regions joining together to make sure that the industry
received the help it needs, but also the environment received
the incentives necessary to people who largely own and manage
the wider country environment, if we had had a case of joined-up
government, we would not now be having these problems, would we?
(Mr Osmond) Obviously you can put that to Ministers,
but I do not think they would accept that. The previous questions
you have been asking related to the balance between the carrot
and the stick. It is true that Ministers have tried to take the
view that they should regulate only where it is absolutely necessary
and they should also look at voluntary measures and market measures
and other possible measures before resorting to regulation. In
terms of the priority they are giving to it, the fact that they
announced that they are putting £1 billion over seven years
into the agri-environment schemes, and the fact that that will
increase Countryside Stewardship, for example, from a budget of
about £35 million this year to £126 million in 2006-07
illustrates that there is quite a degree of commitment to delivering
biodiversity through agri-environment schemes. What is a different
question is the role which regulation plays in that, beyond the
existing laws to prevent pollution and so on.
121. May I ask you about the tax on pesticides
use? Do you think there is a role for that?
(Mr Osmond) I am sorry, I am not briefed on the position
on that at all.
122. Maybe you want to comment on whether you
believe there is a role for a tax on pesticides use?
(Mr Pritchard) I am afraid I am even less briefed
than my colleague is.
Chairman
123. Perhaps you could send us a note on that?
What about foreign imported species? Do they need regulating?
(Mr Pritchard) Yes, I listened with interest to your
previous witnesses. I must admit I agree substantially with a
lot of the evidence they gave you. It is one of the most serious
problems which needs to be addressed. Whether regulation really
will substantially help, I think I very strongly agree that the
most essential priority is a better early warning system and better
criteria for deciding when action needs to be taken. We cannot
act against all alien species; it would be ridiculous. As you
pointed out yourselves, some of them have got to the point where
action is really so difficult. We do need to think very hard though
about a better system to try to decide what things we need to
take action on, how early to do it and who should do it.
Mr Donohoe
124. The forestry industry has identified major,
major problems in terms of seeds being brought into this country
from behind what was the Iron Curtain. They are about one quarter
of the price of seeds from this country. That has been identified
as a major problem 30 years down the line and yet no department
seems to have addressed it.
(Mr Pritchard) It is not true to say that there is
no regulation with regard to alien invasive species. The question
is whether the regulation is adequate and aimed in the right direction.
125. Would you argue that it is not?
(Mr Pritchard) It is an issue which definitely is
a priority to be looked at and we have announced that it is something
we are going to make a priority over the next year. The Joint
Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) has already produced a first
report beginning to look at some of the issues which are raised.
It itself has said that there needs to be more work before we
can go forward on a statutory basis. It is something which is
going to have to be looked at as a priority. There is no doubt
that it is a major issue.
Chairman: On that note, may I thank you very
much for your evidence.
| 
