HC Deb 01 July 1998 vol 315 cc323-30 12.58 pm
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)

Only those who, like my hon. Friend the Minister and me, have had the good luck to swim in one can appreciate the full glory that is a coral reef. There are many reasons, medicinal and otherwise, why they are important as the cradle of fish. I thank the two young RAF officers who took me diving at an enforced stop at Gan in the Indian ocean while I was returning from an Inter-Parliamentary Union armed forces visit in 1965. I shall for ever be grateful for the opportunity to swim in the Indian ocean, which led to a lifelong interest.

The World Conservation Monitoring Centre in Cambridge, in particular Dr. Mark Spalding and the director Dr. Mark Collins, together with its associates in the United States and the Philippines, has produced an important report on the state of the world's coral reefs, called "Reefs at Risk". I should like to use my luck in securing this debate to bring the issue to the top of the Minister's in-tray. So many important reports get publicity and then gather dust.

"Reefs at Risk" highlights the crucial role of coral reefs in alleviating poverty—by supplying food and foreign tourist income—and as a natural coastal defence. Many of our fellow Commonwealth nations have coral reefs, including some of the poorest nations. Do the Government agree that the conservation of such natural resources is fundamental to their policies for poverty alleviation? I applaud my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development and my hon. Friend the Minister for putting poverty alleviation at the top of their agenda. What can the Government do to support integrated sustainable development and coastal conservation in such countries?

The UK is among the largest coral reef nations, with more than 6,000 sq km of coral reef located in our overseas territorial waters. "Reefs at Risk" says that many of those reefs, particularly in the Caribbean, are in areas of high risk from human damage. Praise is certainly due to territories that have set aside marine parks and the resources to manage those sites, but the majority of coral reefs in those territories remain without any form of legal protection. What further measures do the Government propose to protect and manage those precious resources?

Proposals exist for a massive development of condominiums and a deep water harbour in East Caicos, Turks and Caicos Islands, which will include building work and degradation in an existing national park. Similar destructive developments are planned on some of the small islets off Anguilla, including the development of a rocket launching station at Sombrero Cay. Will the Government give a complete assurance that they will not allow those developments to take place at the expense of coral reefs?

The Government's new British Indian ocean territory conservation policy, covering the UK's largest area of reefs, which includes some of the most pristine reefs in the Indian ocean, is an important step forward that deserves high praise. What progress is being made towards the designation of Ramsar sites and strict nature reserves in that area, as laid out in paragraph 19 of "Reefs at Risk"? Will the Government also give an assurance that they will continue to maintain a fisheries patrol to prevent further illegal fishing incursions into the region from neighbouring countries?

I am on delicate ground here. I believe—this is not a universal belief—that fisheries protection is essential. A naval presence is necessary to protect the reefs from the depredation of Taiwanese, South Korean and other massive fishing trawlers that hoover up the bottom of the sea. I point out to my hon. Friend the Minister with some shyness that there is a huge base at Diego Garcia, which is British territory, not American, albeit that the base there is the biggest outside the continental United States. It would not be impossible to have a naval presence. I am not asking for an answer on that delicate issue today, but at least the Department might reflect on it.

Noting the Government's continued support for biodiversity conservation through the Darwin initiative and this country's position in coral reef conservation and science, it is surprising that the Darwin initiative has selected few, if any, reef projects. Does the new report provide a useful basis on which to prioritise and support future projects?

Will the Government consider supporting similar analyses for other coastal ecosystems that are vital for the people who live there? I am thinking particularly of mangrove ecosystems and poorly known but equally important seagrass beds. Part of the problem is that the huge fish that are found in reefs are extremely valued in places such as Hong Kong. They are captured live and set out in stalls, fetching huge sums. There is also a great temptation to catch fish for aquariums. We human beings must make up our minds what we are going to do about the problem, because sooner rather than later the great glories that are the ecosystems of the coral reefs will be in danger.

It is my wont to be lucky in Adjournment debates. As many of those who will read the report of this debate are understandably more interested in what the Government have to say than in what I have to say, I shall give ample opportunity to my hon. Friend, who has taken a deep personal interest in the issue. I place on record my thanks to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and my hon. Friend the Minister and to their ever-helpful officials, who have also displayed a passionate interest.

1.5 pm

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International Development (Mr. George Foulkes)

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) on his success in securing yet another Adjournment debate. When I was an Opposition Back Bencher, I knew how difficult it was. My hon. Friend has a talent that all Back Benchers should try to emulate. I also congratulate him on his interest in science, particularly this important issue. I understand that he is the parliamentary correspondent of the New Scientist and that he takes an interest in a range of issues in that capacity.

The Government also welcome the recent publication, "Reefs at Risk". We are glad for this opportunity to outline our response to this important environmental and development challenge. My hon. Friend has given me plenty of time to do so. In passing, I should like to point out that it is a great tribute to the House of Commons—readers of Hansard and visitors should note this—that we can move seamlessly from the problems of pedlars in the Isle of Wight to issues relating to coral reefs in oceans around the world.

The Government consider the publication of the report a timely wake-up call to the global community. This is the year of the oceans. As my hon. Friend will know, the G8 Environment Ministers agreed in April to promote greater and more co-ordinated action on marine biodiversity. We are at one with my hon. Friend in his concerns.

The coral reefs of tropical oceans are renowned for their beauty, as my hon. Friend and I have experienced from swimming in the oceans. I saw for myself in Belize and more recently in Nassau the beauty of the coral reefs, so I can underline what my hon. Friend said about that. They are also important as centres of biodiversity and a source of livelihood for many poor people. Television and tourism mean that even in our northern location—my hon. Friend and I live in relatively far northern locations—we are increasingly aware of the intrinsic values of the coral reef. We are often less aware of the threats to reefs, which the report brings out well.

The principal causes of decline are clear: there are five. The first is unmanaged coastal development where there is an inadequate institutional and legislative framework to ensure proper resource management. The second is over-exploitation of particular goods and services by destructive fishing or intensive tourism and the marine curio trade. The third is land-based pollution from domestic, industrial and agricultural sources. As tourism grows, such pollution increases. The fourth is sea-based pollution from mineral exploitation and cruise ships. The fifth and final cause is climate change and tropical storms, which physically damage the coral reefs. The challenge for us all is effectively to address those causes while, at the same time, meeting the legitimate development needs of increasing numbers of people and reducing the number of people living in absolute poverty.

I was grateful to my hon. Friend not just for mentioning the White Paper and the Government's commitment to poverty elimination but for his endorsement of it. The key aim of the Government's international development programme is the elimination of poverty. If he does not mind, I shall correct him slightly. He used the old term "alleviation". We are making it clear that we want not alleviation but elimination and eradication of poverty in poorer countries through the promotion of sustainable development. Our specific objectives are: policies and actions that promote sustainable livelihoods, better education, health and opportunities for poor people, and protection and better management of the natural and physical environment, which is what this debate is about.

The Government strongly support—indeed, they have been a leading proponent of—the international development targets to reduce by one half the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015, and to implement national strategies for sustainable development in all countries by 2005, so that we can ensure that trends in the loss of environmental resources are effectively reduced at both global and national levels by 2015.

Concern in the United Kingdom over declining coral reef resources is not new. The Government and their predecessors have been aware of the issue for some time and have funded studies by some of the British scientific institutions, which have well-deserved international reputations for excellence in coral reef research.

I should emphasise that the degradation of the coral reef systems and other tropical coastal ecosystems, such as mangrove forests, which my hon. Friend mentioned in particular, can have a devastating impact on the livelihoods of very poor people in developing countries. I know that he is especially concerned about that. Such people, who often lack access to land or alternative forms of employment, are highly dependent on the resources and services that the reefs can offer. We must understand that, for poor coastal communities, degradation of reefs leads to loss of food security, destabilisation of the community structure and, often, migration to the urban centres, which creates increasing problems. If we are to protect coral reefs, we need to focus on the interests of local people to whom, quite understandably, global values may mean little given the grinding burden of poverty that they face. I shall offer just a few examples.

Astonishingly, coastal communities in the Maldives and Sri Lanka depend on reef fisheries for about 80 to 90 per cent. of the animal protein in their diet. In comparison, only 10 per cent. of the animal protein in the average UK diet is fish. That shows just how dependent such communities are. Furthermore, in the Maldives—a country of more than 1,000 coral islands—a recent study showed that some 17 per cent. of households have no source of income other than reef fishing, and that average household income varies between $25 and $77 a month. More than 60 per cent. of households in the coastal communities of Fiji, for example, are dependent on coral reef fisheries as a source of nutrition and income. Such dependence on the coral reef fishery is common in island states. Degradation of reefs that support the fishery can create poverty.

Other households in coastal areas are equally dependent on coral mining, which destroys reefs to manufacture lime and other building materials. In some coastal communities of east Africa, 85 per cent. of households are dependent on income from coral mining. More than 5,000 people earn a livelihood from coral mining in Sri Lanka. The ability of some coastal communities to build affordable housing depends on coral mining, yet their livelihood also depends on a healthy reef ecosystem. Such spirals of environmental degradation and poverty can be resolved only by sustainable development.

My hon. Friend raised the question of the theft of fish. Since the 1960s, Governments of south-east Asia have been concerned by the use of sodium cyanide solution to stun and capture coral reef fishes, as my hon. Friend described, which are exported for the aquarium trade. There is also some evidence of collateral damage to corals and other organisms. Regrettably, the use of sodium cyanide has become widespread, even though it is illegal in many countries. I am glad to say that the Government of the Philippines have taken a leading role in the fight against the users of sodium cyanide. In partnership with local environmental organisations, they provide training for fishermen in alternative catching techniques and have established laboratories to test live fish exports for traces of sodium cyanide. As a consequence, cyanide fishing has been reduced in the Philippines. We applaud that example of environmental management in action.

Traditional community management systems have existed in some small island states for centuries and have controlled the sustainable use of resources of coral reefs. Pressures caused by increasing populations and inappropriate or badly planned development are breaking down the long-established systems, and community-based management alone may no longer be sufficient to contain the threats to reefs.

As "Reefs at Risk" makes clear, the causes of decline in coral reef health are in any case often beyond the traditional control of coastal communities. The origin of pollution and sedimentation is often far inland. For example, the recently documented decline of a coral reef system in the Philippines identified the cause as inland logging operations, which increased soil erosion and consequent sedimentation in coastal waters, killing corals and reducing fish populations. The main benefits of logging were obtained by commercial companies. The main costs to the environment, however, were felt by the poor in the coastal community. Analysis in the Philippines demonstrated that long-term revenue from tourism and fishing on a healthy reef system would have been $40 million greater than that generated by logging. Therefore, it would have been far better to go down the tourism and fishing route. We must encourage more of such analyses, as well as planning mechanisms that use the resulting information.

My hon. Friend put his finger on the key to the issue. An integrated approach to planning is essential if Governments are to protect the coral reefs and the livelihoods that depend on them. The Government are committed to such an approach in our development co-operation programme. There is a recognised planning framework to achieve it, which is known as integrated coastal management. That enables communities to participate with the Government in the identification and management of competition and conflict in the use of coastal resources. The Government have helped to introduce integrated coastal management, to address coastal resource use issues in coral reef and mangrove management on the island of Sumatra in Indonesia, and in South Africa. We are also funding research to resolve resource use conflicts in coastal areas of Sri Lanka and Vietnam. A great deal is being done by our Department in integrated coastal management.

Mr. Dalyell

I can confirm what the Minister has said. I attended the recent seminar at Canning house, which he will know well from the days before he was a Minister. When I asked about the reefs report, the Mexican ambassador, Mr. Ornate, confirmed the value of joint projects in the Caribbean, so it is not only the Government who say that such co-operation is good, but the Mexican ambassador speaking on behalf of the Latin American ambassadors.

Mr. Foulkes

I accept what my hon. Friend says. Other Governments are increasingly concerned about the matter. Canning house provides an excellent forum for such discussions.

My hon. Friend would agree that the basis of planning is knowledge, and the "Reefs at Risk" report makes it clear that it is based on indications of potential threat. My Department is engaged, with a number of international and national organisations, in developing a better understanding of the relationship, which we have been discussing, between protection of the coral reef and coastal environment and the eradication of poverty in coastal communities.

Assessment of change in reefs is the first step, and we have funded the development of cost-effective methods to assess the quality of coral reefs, and provided support to, for example, British Virgin Islands and Anguilla to map their coral reefs. We were able to help the Government of the Maldives to identify the effect on their reef fisheries of coral rock mining, and subsequently to develop a management system to accelerate the recovery rate of the ruined reef.

Our current programme of support to the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO includes funding and expertise to develop a regional component of the global coral reef monitoring network, which will implement a coral reef monitoring plan in south Asia. That has produced immediate benefits in defining the extent and impact of recent damage to coral in the Indian ocean because of high sea temperatures. We have also helped the Government of Anguilla to assess the impact of tropical storms on their coral reefs and supported research to assess the potential impact of global warming on coral reefs.

I hope that my hon. Friend will agree that the UK Government have been giving a great deal of help. He has been very effective in bringing the matter to the top of the ministerial agenda in the UK.

Mr. Dalyell

I agree that the Government have been effective, but the $64 million question is how one protects coral reefs against the depredation—that is not too strong a word—of trawlers from certain countries. That begs the question whether military force can be deployed in the form of fishery protection. I do not ask for an answer to that question in an Adjournment debate, but I hope at least that the Government will discuss with UNESCO and other international authorities how the policing is to take place. In particular, I hope that they will discuss with the Americans the critical issue of the British Indian ocean territories' coral reefs and whether there should be some coral reef fishery protection operating out of Diego Garcia.

Mr. Foulkes

I shall deal directly with that question. Until 1996, the territories' Administration chartered a fisheries patrol vessel during the tuna fishing season, and only from November 1996 to February 1998 was there continuous coverage. The local Administration considered that that was not a cost-effective solution to inshore fishery protection, and the vessel was withdrawn at the end of its charter, which is what my hon. Friend was alluding to. The territories' Administration now intend to have a patrol vessel in place for the start of the next tuna fishing season in November 1998, and in the longer term, they hope to be able to purchase a vessel to ensure all-year-round cover. The Administration are actively considering how best to take that forward.

I hesitate to venture on to the subject of naval protection, which my hon. Friend mentioned, but no doubt he will be able to raise it with some of my colleagues. I hope that he will be reassured by what I have already said about the fisheries protection vessel.

My hon. Friend mentioned the Darwin initiative, which is managed by my colleagues in the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. The Darwin initiative for the survival of species is a Government-funded initiative that supports the efforts of British institutions to safeguard the world's biodiversity. Since the initiative commenced, about 5 per cent. of its funds—a substantial proportion—have been invested in six projects focused on coral reefs in Belize, Egypt, Kenya, Sri Lanka, Mozambique and St. Lucia. A particularly welcome project has been helping schools in the Caribbean to implement coral reef protection policies. I know that my hon. Friend was once a teacher on a cruise ship, so he will be aware of the importance of education on that matter.

The Government also actively enforce the protection given by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species to more than 250 species of corals used in the ornament and jewellery trades. In 1995 and 1996, customs seized more than 2,500 pieces of coral that were being imported without the necessary permits.

My hon. Friend will also welcome the fact that when the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and I attended the CARICOM conference at Nassau in February, we announced a British Government-sponsored regional workshop to consider the protection of marine biodiversity in the Caribbean region. We shall co-host that with the Government of Jamaica. The meeting will be held at the end of October at Montego Bay, which the "Reefs at Risk" report identifies as having some seriously degraded reefs. That will, we hope, concentrate the minds of the delegates at the workshop.

Mr. Dalyell

I should like to register the appreciation for the work of customs of those who are most concerned with this issue. Asking customs officers to identify coral reef is a pretty tall order, but they have done an excellent job.

Mr. Foulkes

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, and I am sure that his comment will be passed on to those concerned.

My hon. Friend mentioned overseas territories. We take seriously our responsibility to our overseas territories, and I am glad that we have been able to rename them, because overseas territories is a much more appropriate term than dependent territories. Our objective is to promote sustainable development. That requires that economic development proposals are appraised for their potential interactions with the environment.

Proposed developments in the Turks and Caicos Islands such as the East Caicos development project—which my hon. Friend mentioned—and the Grand Turk harbour development, are to be subjected to full environmental impact assessment before approval. Those assessments are to be carried out by consultants acceptable to the appropriate Government Department of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Similarly, the proposed development at Sombrero Island in Anguilla, to which my hon. Friend referred, is currently being subjected to a full environmental impact appraisal by an environmental consultancy firm, ICF Kaiser. UK Government officials have worked with ICF Kaiser to define the scope of the environmental assessment for that development, and the report will be a significant factor in deciding whether to allow the development to go ahead next year. I hope that that reassures my hon. Friend.

Given the dependence of some of the UK overseas territories on the quality and health of their coral reefs, the Government recognise that such assessments are important, and we shall offer support wherever possible. However, recent correspondence with staff at the World Conservation Monitoring Centre has suggested that the coral reefs in British overseas territories are in comparatively good condition, and we welcome that independent statement from such an authoritative source.

We greatly welcome my hon. Friend's initiative in raising the matter today. I was particularly pleased that he paid such a warm tribute to many of the members of staff of the Department, who do much to understand the issue and brief Ministers on it. The Government recognise the important role that coral reefs can and should continue to play in sustainable development. It is important not only to monitor what is happening but to develop—with the participation of local communities and using partnerships between Government, business and civil society—effective ways of managing and sustaining the goods and services that derive from coral reefs around the world. I assure the House and my hon. Friend that the British Government will, with the considerable expertise that is available in UK, continue to play a leading role.

I hope that my hon. Friend has been reassured not only on his specific points that I have dealt with, but on the general matter of our deep concern about the report. We are looking at the implications and taking serious account of it. We shall deal with all the points that arise from it.

Mr. Dalyell

Unlike my 14 Adjournment debates on Lockerbie, I should like to put it on record that I am extremely satisfied with the content and tone of my hon. Friend's reply.

Mr. Foulkes

I cannot comment on any other subject, but I thank my hon. Friend for his generous commendation.

Back to