HC Deb 13 June 1984 vol 61 cc908-9
11. Mr. Yeo

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment when Her Majesty's Government expect to conclude their considerations of proposals to end the three-month loophole in section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

Mr. Waldegrave

We are considering the various proposals that have been made, including the private Member's Bill introduced by the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Mr. Barron), in consultation with the other Government Departments concerned. We expect to be in a position to reach a view shortly.

Mr. Yeo

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is unsatisfactory for the owner of a site of special scientific interest to have three months in which to object to a proposed notification by the Nature Conservancy Council, because that period could be used by unscrupulous owners to cause irreparable and permanent damage?

Mr. Waldegrave

I well understand the argument, and Ministers are considering it.

Mr. Freud

Does the Minister agree that the whole effectiveness of the Wildlife and Countryside Act is called into question when, despite ministerial assurances, many acres of Halvergate marshes are being ploughed up? Will he take power under article 4 of the general development order to stop these works?

Mr. Waldegrave

I welcome the opportunity to comment on Halvergate. When I referred to Halvergate earlier I was, perhaps rightly, criticised for using shorthand for those areas not far from Halvergate to which the Broads authority was offering management agreements. Those areas under such agreements are secure. However, 92 other acres, I am sad to say, are in danger. Article 4 action is for the Broads authority to take in the first instance. If it wanted to come to us to discuss it we should give the matter urgent consideration, but it has delegated planning powers to make such an order.

Mr. Kenneth Carlisle

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Wildlife and Countryside Act is a big step forward in protecting the countryside and that it was passed by a Conservative Government? However, does he accept that we have now had time to understand certain defects in the Bill and that if we are to give proper protection to the countryside the deficiencies must be remedied before long?

Mr. Waldegrave

We are considering the representations, such as those from my hon. Friend, which have been made to us on these points.

Mr. Spearing

With respect to the 92 acres near or on Halvergate to which the Minister referred, is it his opinion that the ploughing threat to which they may be subject at the moment is due to the improved techniques of drainage, or to the price mechanism to which agriculture is now subject?

Mr. Waldegrave

There is no question but that the return from cereals growing is the principal issue, and is more important than drainage.

Mr. Budgen

Does my hon. Friend agree that this problem arises from the operation of the common agricultural policy in fixing the price levels for cereals and oil seed rape too high. Would it not be better to make representations to the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food rather than give further subsidies to landowners?

Mr. Waldegrave

It would be worth while for farmers considering ploughing in this sort of area to note that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is tackling these questions of over-production, and that the great expansion of cereal profitability may not go on for ever.

Dr. David Clark

Does the Minister not appreciate that the House is getting tired of the Government wringing their hands over countryside lost, and taking no action? May I remind the Minister of the categorical assurance that he gave the House in response to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell)? My hon. Friend asked: Is Halvergate now safe? The Minister replied: I can assure the hon. Member that Halvergate is safe for a year."—[Official Report, 4 April 1984; Vol. 57, c. 954] That is typical of the Government's attitude. May I ask the Minister again when he will take some action? When will he pick up the Bill lying on the Floor of the House in the name of my hon. Friend, the Member for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy), and will he have meaningful discussions with Opposition Members, who are prepared to help the Government to produce a sensible amendment to the Act to try to protect the countryside?

Mr. Waldegrave

On the latter point, I have had helpful discussions with the hon. Member for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy) and will be delighted to have discussions with the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark). I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman heard what I said to the hon. Member for Cambridgeshire, North-East (Mr. Freud) when I remarked that in an oral answer I should have been more accurate. The land to which I was referring—and I make this clear today—was the land for which the Broads authority was offering agreements over which there were difficulties, which the House was debating at that time. Those agreements have all been made, and that remains the fact. There have been other losses elsewhere.