When I first saw the new clauses and amendments, I was tempted to speak against them. In the last Parliament, I considered tabling a ten-minute Bill on pesticides and, in particular, the killing of birds of prey. As many Members will know, I have a keen interest in ornithology, and I have looked into this matter.
I do not think that any Member has any time for those who use pesticides illegally to poison birds of prey, other birds, domestic animals or pets. As the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hillsborough (Ms Smith) Lady said, the reintroduction in my constituency of the red kite has been very successful. As Members travel down the M40, many of them doubtless often see red kites near Stokenchurch, for example. They have spread far and wide and have even been seen in the London borough of Hillingdon in winter. That is wonderful, and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and all those concerned should be congratulated. Interestingly, awareness of this development has perhaps led some estates—we do not have the very large estates that are to be found elsewhere in the country—to clean up their act. Buzzards, which used to be seen only in the west country, are now to be found much closer to London. I have seen them, for example, in the Wycombe area and among the wonderful beech woods of the Chilterns.
I was therefore dubious about this provision, as I tend to be on the side of the birds in these matters, but I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) and the hon. Member for South-East Cornwall (Mr. Breed) that we must consider the question of proportionality. I do not necessarily have doubts about some inspectors going over the top, but the danger is that we will lose credibility in the eyes of some if they think that the powers given to deal with this offence are greater than those given to deal with many others. Unfortunately, granting these powers is not necessarily going to solve the problem; rather, what is needed is education. We need to tell gamekeepers that these birds are not predating on what they are trying to preserve on their estates, be it for shooting or other purposes.
I somewhat reluctantly point out that there are a couple of minor flaws in the drafting of the new clause. That is inevitable because, as I have noticed over our years in opposition, we do not always have the skills available to make such provisions absolutely watertight. [Interruption.] I do indeed speak for myself, as I do not claim any expertise on these matters. But I have a great deal of sympathy with the new clause tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for South-East Cambridgeshire, and the Government should also be congratulated on taking this issue seriously. That said, we need to be sure that we do not go overboard by granting too many powers at once. As the hon. Member for South-East Cornwall said, if the authorities in question say that they need more powers, we should perhaps return to this question.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Randall of Uxbridge
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 11 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
437 c192-3 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:40:43 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264894
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264894
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264894