Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

Clause 55 provides a general power for Natural England or the Countryside Council for Wales to put up signs or notices relating to the site on land within the SSSI. They will be able to maintain the signs and remove them and it will be an offence for any other person to interfere with those signs or notices without reasonable excuse. At present, the conservation bodies have no general power to convey information by means of signs or notices on SSSI land. Such provision as there is for using notices relates only to the formal service of notifications or documents required or authorised by the legislation. What is the justification for this general power? English Nature’s press release of June last year announced a 100 per cent increase in unlawful activities on SSSIs in the previous year, 71 per cent of this being attributable to third parties and more than 160 recorded incidents in England of damage caused to SSSIs by off-road vehicles. The provision of information in areas subject to particular pressures could therefore help raise awareness of the importance of the land, reduce or avoid harm to the sites and any need for enforcement action, and complement the efforts of owners and occupiers to manage and maintain the interests of the sites. The noble Duke’s amendment seems to require prior consultation before the power could be used. A similar concern was expressed in another place. I seek to reassure noble Lords that in the interests of good working relations we would of course expect Natural England to liaise with owners and occupiers of SSSIs if it is intended to erect signs or notices on their land. If there is a need to deter activities that are damaging the land and its special interests or to steer visitors away from sensitive areas, it would serve both their interests to take steps to alert users to the importance of the sites. These things have of course already been the subject of discussion between them. We expect the power to be used as and when there is a particular need or a useful purpose for putting up signs or notices. Natural England will of course want to be as discreet as possible so as to minimise any visual impact or unnecessary interference without compromising effectiveness. For the most part we would naturally expect signage or notices to be sited at entry points of the SSSI. With all that in mind, a strict legal requirement to consult each time the power was to be exercised—either to put up a sign or to maintain one, especially in the case of some common land SSSIs for example—would be a completely disproportionate administrative exercise. Our view is therefore that any consultation should be left to the normal relationships and liaison with owners and occupiers. We are not clear why the amendment refers to a person,"““with whom the agreement has been made””." Use of the power is not dependent on any agreement with the owner or occupiers of the land, neither as a simple mutual accord nor as a legally binding management agreement. We think that the wording of the amendment is faulty—that is a side issue. Amendment No. 304 would remove the summary only offence that would deter interference with any such signs or notices. To be effective and to justify the time, effort and resources that may be involved, these signs and notices must be protected from damage or interference. The Countryside Council for Wales has experienced many cases of signs erected with the agreement of the landowner having been destroyed or damaged. We think it may be important to note that the offence is committed only if the act is intentional or reckless and without, of course, any reasonable excuse. Otherwise it would be all too simple just to remove or take down any warning notices. It is for these reasons that we invite the noble Duke to withdraw his amendment but I think he may have a query of me.