UK Parliament / Open data

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

moved Amendment No. 128:"Page 61, line 34, leave out ““for the purposes of ascertaining whether”” and insert ““if he has reasonable grounds for suspecting that he may find there evidence that””" The noble Earl said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 128 and speaking to Amendment No. 129, perhaps I shall be allowed to go back a little. Clause 44 gives various enforcement powers to the new pesticide inspectors who are charged with enforcing the new pesticides offence under Clause 43. In Committee, the Government accepted that their initial idea of giving these new pesticide inspectors the power to enter premises to ascertain whether an offence had been committed was disproportionate. Accordingly, the Minister introduced an amendment requiring pesticide inspectors to have reasonable grounds to suspect that he may find evidence of the offence before entering. Clause 51 and Schedule 5 significantly extend the powers of wildlife inspectors, in the same way as Clause 44 gave powers to the new pesticide inspectors, so I see no logical reason why wildlife inspectors should not be subjected to the same constraints as the Government have put on pesticide inspectors. I moved an amendment in Committee to that effect and, although the wording was slightly different, the intention was precisely the same. The Minister objected to that amendment on the grounds that the criminal investigation function, as opposed to the licence monitoring function, which are both the responsibility of wildlife inspectors, are so closely linked that they cannot be separated. I find that hard to believe, so I am looking for an assurance that wildlife inspectors will not go on what are known as ““fishing trips”” when dealing with wildlife crimes, as opposed to carrying out their duties under the licensing enforcement—which I appreciate is a totally different matter. Furthermore, I would be grateful if the Minister could indicate clearly how the wildlife inspector’s role will work in relation to the police when dealing with wildlife crimes. I beg to move.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

680 c45-6 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top