I thank the Government for moving as far as they have in addressing the concerns that many of us raised on Second Reading. I thank my noble friend Lord Tyler for his kind mention of my Amendment No. 146. When I tabled it I wondered whether it was much too simple to address the problem. I was attracted to the form of words because the more we try to define activities and distinguish between an agricultural function and an environmental function, the more difficulties that creates. Should we discuss the management of vegetation? But what would happen if there was a plague of rabbits and the relevant people were not entitled to manage anything other than the vegetation unless that task comprised an agricultural function? That kind of delineation could lead to a lot of arguments. That is why I eventually chose the simple form of words in Amendment No. 146.
The Minister may criticise the amendment but I commend its form of words for inclusion on the face of the Bill. The Government are very fond of introducing regulations and the amendment would permit them to do so. To try to define further in the Bill exactly what is meant by ““sustainable management”” would create arguments and difficulties. I prefer a simple provision, if that is possible.
Commons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 2 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c121GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:27:17 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279652
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279652
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279652