PERMISSION BY NOTIFICATION (Hansard, 7 May 1993)

§ Mr. Peter Atkinson
I beg to move amendment No. 2, in page 2, line 12, leave out '(or work including the work)' and insert 'or works'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to consider the following amendments: No. 36, in page 2, line 12, leave out '(or work including the work)'. No. 3, in page 2, line 16, leave out (or work including the work)' and insert 'or works'.
No. 37, in page 2, line 16, leave out '(or work including the work)'. No. 38, in page 2, line 34, after first 'work' insert 'specified in the notice under subsection (2)(a) above'.

§ Mr. Atkinson
When I tabled my amendment, I had not seen the amendment that was subsequently tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, East (Mr. Ainsworth). Hon. Members will remember that there was an effort to get some plain English into the Bill. I am glad 463 that my hon. Friend the Member for City of Chester (Mr. Brandreth) is present, because he has an enormous interest in this subject. We felt that the phraseology in clause 2 to carry out the work and (or work including the work) was absolutely baffling. The farming community has to deal with some difficult and complicated forms, which I shall call IACS forms. They have set a good example of how to clarify a simple subject. I am glad that my hon. Friend's amendments simplify the Bill to make it better understood by those who will have to live with it should it become law. Having seen the other amendments, I do not propose to push amendment No. 2. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments made: No. 36, in page 2, line 12, leave out '(or work including the work)'. No. 37, in page 2, line 16, leave out '(or work including the work)'. No. 38, in page 2, line 34, after first 'work' insert 'specified in the notice under subsection (2)(a) above'.

§ Mr. Jopling
I beg to move amendment No. 4, in page 2, line 37, leave out from 'are' to end of line 40 and insert 'that—

(a) the hedgerow makes a significant contribution to the landscape,

(b) the hedgerow is of significant historic interest, and

(c) the hedgerow is of significant value as a habitat for plants or animals.'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this it will be convenient to take amendment No. 39, in page 2, line 37, at end insert 'that in the opinion of the local planning authority it is of significant value by reason of.

§ Mr. Jopling
I notice that the hon. Members for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy) and for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell), who spoke for 15 minutes in the earlier debate, are no longer with us. I do not intend to keep the House for long. I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, East (Mr. Ainsworth) who is promoting the Bill, will accept what I regard as important amendments to clause 2(4), which deals with some of the criteria that should be used when a local authority decides whether any alteration to a hedgerow should be made.
As the Bill is drafted, it is all rather bald, if I may use that phrase. It says that the grounds to be considered are

"(a) the contribution of the hedgerow to the landscape,

(b) the historic interest of the hedgerow, and

(c) the value of the hedgerow as a habitat for plants and animals."

I am sure that my hon. Friend would agree that any hedgerow makes a contribution to the landscape in the same way as any hedgerow that has existed for more than a year or two could be said to have an historic interest if it appears on a map from earlier times, however recent.
Of course, it could be said that any hedgerow has value as a habitat for plants and animals. I cannot think of a hedgerow anywhere that is not sometimes a habitat for plants and animals. We must be a little more specific. Amendment No. 4 adds the word "significant". We should fine down the definition so that the more important hedgerows are preserved and the bureaucratic process for the preservation of hedgerows is not embarked upon unless the hedgerows make some significant contribution, have some significant historic interest or are of significant value as a habitat for plants and animals.
464 It is essential that we strengthen the Bill. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, East has tabled an amendment to meet the point, but he will agree that the words that he proposes in his amendment No. 39, which we are also discussing in this group, are not so clear as the ones that we have proposed. He proposes that we should use the opinion of the local planning authority on whether the hedgerow is significant. I speak as a former member of a planning authority in North Yorkshire. I should be the first to admit, and anyone who has served on a planning authority would be forced to agree, that sometimes the opinions of planning authorities are somewhat eccentric. Often one can make comparisions between one planning authority which agrees to one thing and another which would turn it down.
We want to create greater uniformity in the treatment of hedgerows. Therefore, the less that we talk about the opinion of planning authorities and the more that we write into the Bill that the contribution, interest or value of the habitat should be significant in the broader sense, the better. That brings me back to my earlier comments about the importance of making provisions for the preservation of hedgerows fair to everyone—those who are principally concerned with conservation and those who are principally concerned about using the countryside as a workshop and a means of livelihood.

§ Mr. Peter Ainsworth
My right hon. Friend is a highly distinguished former member of the Cabinet and former Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. He will be as aware as anyone in the House of the value of guidance notes that accompany legislation. Why does he not think that, in this case, guidance notes will provide the suitable background against which local authorities may take their decisions?

§ Mr. Jopling
I always prefer to see an undertaking included in a Bill rather than in guidance notes that emanate from a Department. The House legislates in a far better manner if it makes it clear in a Bill what it wants rather than leaves it to some sort of guidance that comes filtering out from Departments. I often find that such guidance does not clarify the situation. I therefore hope that my hon. Friend will agree to the amendment, which is a significant improvement on his amendment No. 39. I should be most grateful if he could accept it.

§ Mr. Maclean
I had not intended to speak much in this debate because my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, East (Mr. Ainsworth) has made an excellent job of masterminding the Bill through the House and there is no real job for me to do. I should like to make a brief contribution, however, about guidance notes.
As with any new legislation, the guidance issued by the Secretary of State on the interpretation of the Hedgerows Bill will be extremely important. I intend that that guidance will be comprehensive and I intend it to cover many aspects of the forthcoming Act. As I said in Committee, I do not want those guidance notes to comprise a couple of flimsy pages; I want them to make a good, readable tome—a best seller—on all aspects of hedgerow management.

§ Mr. Hardy
In that guidance will the Minister make clear what was confirmed in Committee: that the Bill in no 465 way weakens the protection afforded by enclosure legislation, where specific requirements were laid down for the preservation of hedgerows?

§ Mr. Maclean
I did not intend to include that confirmation in the guidance, but there would be no harm in repeating what we said so often in Committee—the Bill has no connection with that previous legislation.
Three important areas would be covered by the guidance, including the landscape, wildlife and historic criteria and the system for applying those when making judgments on hedgerows notified to local authorities. That guidance would also include the importance of viewing the notified hedgerow in the context of all the hedgerows and, for example, the importance of taking into account the relevance of recently planted hedgerows for the landscape and wildlife value of surrounding hedgerows.
We intend to take the views of experts on the countryside and go out to consultation. We have started that process and we will continue it as we develop the criteria into a system for application. We will undertake a trial of any such system. I therefore believe that there will be plenty of opportunity for informed and interested parties to play a role in developing the guidance.
We also intend that the guidance will address what exactly is likely to be covered by the term, proper management of a hedgerow. I hope that that will take into account different management practices in different parts of the country. I do not just hope that; I intend that it shall.
The guidance notes will also need to give advice on planting and replacements with respect to any duty to reinstate a hedgerow. We considered this matter in Committee and it is important that we cover it in the guidance. In particular, that guidance should emphasise that appropriate species should be chosen when replacing a hedgerow in replanting. It would also need to make it quite clear that one should not expect a farmer to replace a hedgerow with large hedgerow-grown container plants or large shrubs. That may seem self-obvious to all hon. Members, but the matter was raised in Committee and I should like to nail it once and for all. The list is by no means exhaustive, but I hope that it will help to reassure hon. Members that we recognise the important role that guidance can play, and intend it to be comprehensive and to cover all those items that it would be inappropriate to place in the Bill.
I say to the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) that the Government have attempted to give all possible help, within the lines of propriety, to my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, East. I have repeatedly said that we support the Bill. However, the Bill is complex, and we found some more complexities as we analysed it in Committee. I respect the right of hon. Members to table amendments and improve the Bill. My hon. Friend sensibly tabled amendments which I commend to the House—it is now a far better Bill than it was initially. One thing that I cannot do in relation to a private Member's Bill, even as a former Whip and even when I support the Bill, is to try to whip hon. Members on either side of the House to support it, as that would be quite inappropriate.

§ Mr. Clifton-Brown
Accusations have been made about Conservative Members. It should therefore be made clear 466 that nearly every time amendments were tabled, my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, East (Mr. Ainsworth) then drafted another amendment designed to make a compromise between the Bill as originally drafted and other hon. Members' amendments. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for doing that. We were not merely trying to waste time by tabling the amendments.

§ Mr. Chris Smith
If that is so, in the next five minutes will the hon. Member accept all the amendments tabled by his hon. Friend to meet the issues that he and his hon. Friends have raised so that the Bill can go on its way?

§ Mr. Clifton-Brown
I take the hon. Gentleman's point, but amendment No. 4, which I am about to discuss, is the fundamental amendment. I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, East would accept that his Bill was not designed to protect every hedgerow, but only specific categories of hedgerow. Any well-meaning person would accept that. The Bill was designed to protect hedgerows of historic value or of value to the landscape or with significant habitat qualities, and it is in that spirit that I wish to speak to the amendment.
We want to make the Bill as clear as possible for all those who are asked to implement it and for local authorities who are asked to police it. I accept my hon. Friend the Minister's assurance that the issues will be covered in the guidance—we had many similar discussions in Committee—but I believe that amendment No. 4 clarifies what is expected and I urge hon. Members to consider it carefully.

§ Mr. Peter Ainsworth
I have listened with great care to my right hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling), my hon. Friend the Minister and my hon. Friend the Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Clifton-Brown), and I have been more persuaded by the arguments of my hon. Friend the Minister than by those of my other hon. Friends.
It has always been my intention to protect only those hedgerows that are of value—I never intended my Bill to protect all hedgerows. It was in response to the unease expressed by some of my hon. Friends in Committee, who felt that the Bill would not achieve that aim, that I tabled amendment No. 39.
I submit that amendment No. 39 has precisely the same effect as amendment No. 4 and I urge hon. Members to consider the role of the guidance notes to which the Minister has referred. On that basis, I urge the House to reject amendment No. 4 in favour of amendment No. 39.
As for the wider issue, the tabling of amendments, I do not for one moment suspect that the amendments that have been so persistently tabled in Committee and on Report are ill intentioned. It is true, as the Minister said, that the Bill has emerged a better Bill as a result of the close scrutiny exercised by hon. Members with differing points of view, and I am grateful to those who have played a constructive role in bringing the legislation thus far.
Nevertheless, we have to accept that the amendments tabled for today will ensure that the Bill fails at this stage. I thank all who have been involved and, in view of the enormous support for the Bill in the country and the House, I stress that this is not the end of the road for hedgerows. We now have the basis for some excellent legislation to protect Britain's most valuable hedgerows, and I still look forward to the day when the legislation will be in place to do that important job.

§ Mr. Jopling
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for his generous comments. Although I strongly prefer amendment No. 4 to amendment No. 39, I recognise that on this and other occasions my hon. Friend has done his best to meet our points. I am therefore perfectly happy to withdraw amendment No. 4 on the understanding that the House agrees to amendment No. 39.
I recognise that 76 minutes is far too short a time properly to deal with an important Bill of this sort, to which 14 groups of amendments have been tabled, and it was inevitable that the Bill would not complete its Report stage in view of the shortage of time.
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.