HC Deb 11 July 1975 vol 895 cc961-3

Lords Amendment: No. 32, in page 8, leave out line 7.

Mr. Hardy

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.

We have had quite a few long innings today. The House will not wish to spend very much longer on this Bill. However, I should like to say how grateful I am for the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mr. Blenkinsop) and the hon. Member for Esher (Mr. Mather). The hon. Member for Esher has played a very active part in the consideration of the Bill and has made some very valuable contributions, which I hope the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Mr. King) will appreciate.

I should like to say how grateful I am to the Minister, who has helped and guided the Bill, with his colleagues in the Department of the Environment, to what I hope will be its successful conclusion in a few minutes' time. I echo the remarks of appreciation to the officials in the Department who have been extremely co-operative throughout the consideration of the Bill.

As we are in a sense summing up, I want to express one or two brief comments on behalf of the voluntary wild life bodies which are sponsoring the Bill —the Botanical Society of the British Isles, the Council for Nature and the Society for the Promotion of Nature Reserves. They would like to express their appreciation to all who have helped with the progress of the Bill in both Houses and those whose help and guidance over the last two years had contributed to the Bill's passage. The voluntary bodies have been particularly appreciative of the co-operation of Government Departments and officials of Parliament.

The amendment deals, unfortunately, with the deletion of the dormouse from Schedule 1. The dormouse is still in decline, but its position is much better at present than we had assumed a couple of years ago. This is probably due to the fact that the last two winters have been particularly mild. Dormouse mortality in hard winters is very severe indeed. At present it is not so rare as to merit inclusion in Schedule 1, although we can assume that the Nature Conservancy Council will be looking at this question very carefully, and if the status of the dormouse deteriorated obviously it would be included.

I have a recent ground for anxiety, however. A book which has been published recently in this country and which is a translation from the French advises people how to destroy and stuff wild animals, which would include the dormouse. As it is a translation from the French, it presents the situation in terms of French law. Our laws are perhaps better in this respect than those to which the book relates, and one hopes that our authorities will look carefully to see whether this particular volume is in any way an incitement to people to break the provisions of the Bill.

I hope that the Bill when enacted will be regarded, as it deserves to be, as an example to the rest of the world. Once again Britain is in a very leading position in the field of example in conservation. It is—if I may make one relatively prejudiced comment—the conservation of wild life and our natural heritage, and not the conservation of privilege and property, which is another association of that word.

The Mammal Society has started a survey of the dormouse. This will help to establish its status, and the Nature Conservancy Council will give guidance should further considerations arise in relation to the species.

Question put and agreed to.

Remaining Lords amendments agreed to.