Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

If we are to have a CRC, it must be totally independent. That is the key. The noble Lord, Lord Haskins, was right to point out that the commission’s advocacy role was compromised by its more high profile responsibility as a service provider. In some ways, that answers the question raised by my noble friend Lord Renton. The noble Baroness, Lady Miller, has raised some fundamental and important issues through her amendment. Having given this matter considerable thought, however, I am very much in favour of the formation of the CRC. I understand the points she makes. Of course it is the responsibility of local democratically elected bodies, whether they be in Parliament or in local government, to ensure that rural areas are properly serviced. But the crucial role of the CRC will be in making statistics available to those elected bodies; plus the fact that the desired role of the chairman is to ensure that the information is made available to the Government at top level, as the noble Lord, Lord Cameron, has expressed, is essential. I do not believe that I misrepresent the right reverend Prelate when I say that he cast doubt on the ability of the RDAs to carry out their rural dimensions as effectively as we would like. I think that that is happening in practice. It is another good reason why we need this independent voice. The reason I feel so strongly about this is that the countryside is going through such a fundamental change. There will be enormous social implications for the revolution taking place; it is therefore essential that we have an independent body to draw attention to these changes and to advise the Government on what needs to be done. Amendment No. 255, spoken to by the noble Lord, Lord Cameron, proposes that the CRC should have equal regard to the three pillars of sustainability: economic, social and environmental. I shall be very interested to hear what the Minister has to say about this but I suspect that ambition may be somewhat optimistic and that in practice the CRC will find itself concentrating pretty exclusively on the economic and social responsibilities, of which there are plenty, as I have already implied. I wonder whether it can be all things to all three pillars, for want of a better expression. As I say, I shall be interested to hear the Minister’s view. After all, the new body, Natural England, will have the primary role of promoting the environmental dimension of the countryside. The fact that the Government appear so reluctant to give Natural England a duty to have regard to the social and economic side of life makes those dimensions of the CRC’s position that much more important. However, I am entirely behind the sentiment of all these amendments. I suspect that they are unnecessary and that they are principally probing amendments to try to get the Minister to give assurances that all we want out of the CRC will be provided. However, I would be interested to hear whether he feels that it could and should have an environmental dimension or whether it should concentrate primarily on the economic and social aspects of the countryside.