Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

I echo the Minister’s thanks on behalf of the Opposition. I thank him for the constructive spirit in which he has approached the Bill. I also thank our Liberal Democrat colleagues, and above all I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice), who has borne the heat of the day for the official Opposition. What we have seen today represents the House at its best. As I said on Second Reading, we embarked on the Bill with severe reservations about the creation of Natural England without an adequate understanding of the relationship between it and the Environment Agency. While those doubts remain in our minds—we shall see whether they prove justified; I hope that they will not—we also approached the Bill with great concerns about some detailed points. Many were cleared up in Committee, which is indeed the work of Committees, but some remained. The principal ones related to byways open to all traffic—BOATs—which we debated this evening. The Minister has done a fine job in doing what Ministers are meant to do when Parliament, across parties, raises a set of serious, practical issues following inspection of a Bill. He has offered to amend the Bill. We shall obviously hold him to that. We shall see whether the Lords amendments are adequate to the task, and I assure him that if we think they are not, we shall produce our own. I have every confidence that their Lordships would then pass what they would need to pass to ensure that what the Minister seeks to achieve, and what we seek to achieve, is achieved. But it may well be that the Minister’s own amendments will achieve those aims—I hope that they do—and if so, I repeat my comment: Hallelujah! Before I close, I want briefly to mention two very important amendments that we did not have time to debate this evening, despite the fact that—in keeping with the arcana of parliamentary procedure—they are labelled amendments Nos. 1 and 2. The first amendment deals with the need for Natural England to work with local organisations and businesses. I hope that the House of Lords will have time to investigate that issue in considerably greater depth, and to ensure that such co-operation takes place. But the more important amendment is amendment No. 2, which would ensure that"““where there is irreconcilable conflict between aspects of””" Natural England’s"““functions priority is given to the conservation of the natural environment.””" That is a point about which we feel very strongly. We continue to believe that there is a significant risk that a body known as Natural England will not focus exclusively—or even with absolute priority—on the preservation of natural England. That would be not only an irony but to the great detriment of the preservation of our countryside. The Minister will recognise that the point we are making in the amendment has a long genesis, and that many of the most serious, careful and powerful of this country’s environmental lobby groups share our view that such a provision is needed in the Bill. I am sure that—