§ 3.4 p.m.
371§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will make a Statement on the outcome of the recent meeting of the Environment Council when further efforts were made to reach agreement on the draft EEC Directive on the protection of wild birds.
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, at the Council of Ministers of the Environment on 30th May general agreement was reached on the text of the EEC Birds Directive. However, the French Government felt unable to accept the lists of birds included in the Annexes and agreed by the other eight Member States. The French wanted a substantial reduction in the list of birds that may be sold having been shot and they wanted the inclusion of the ortolan bunting and the skylark in the list of birds that may be shot. Despite a number of proposals, a compromise acceptable to all nine countries has not yet been found.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, that is very disappointing, and I am not at all critical of the way in which the Government have handled this matter. However, I should like to put two short questions to the Minister. First, does she agree that the French stance is not only illogical but flies in the face of the whole principle on which this Directive is based?—in that it would enable small brown birds of almost any variety to be shot without any restriction whatever, because they are very difficult indeed to tell from each other, many of them, incidentally, migrating to or from this country.
Secondly, does she agree that the problem which she mentioned in her Answer about Annexe III, which deals with the sale of dead birds, is really quite simple to solve, as the Directive quite clearly lays down that any country which wishes to impose greater restrictions than are provided for in the Directive can do so? Surely, there is no need at all for this to be a negotiating matter.
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, the nine Members of the EEC are anxious to come to a general acceptance on this Directive. The other seven Members and ourselves are standing firm and are trying to get France to accept the Directive. 372 Our position on this is that the skylark and ortolan birds are indistinguishable from other small brown birds, which are endangered by large-scale slaughter in Italy and France as the birds migrate, as the noble Lord, Lord Chelwood, said. Unless they, too, are protected, it will not be possible even to protect the more vulnerable species. The French proposed hunting list is already 53, in contrast with the United Kingdom's 34, and it contains species like the thrush and the blackbird which rather horrifies us in this country. We are working towards an agreement, but we do not feel that we can act when our other seven European colleagues are standing firm. We must stand firm with them against the French attitude.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, would it not be possible for us to adopt this Directive ourselves, because although the French may eat skylarks, we do not?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, we are prepared to protect the birds, and in fact a much greater number of birds are protected in this country than in other countries. We do not anticipate that we shall be any less rigorous in our protection of them than we are at the moment.
Lord CHELWOODMy Lords, is it correct that the environment Ministers are not likely to meet again until November next? If that is the case—and it is quite a long way ahead—do the Government have it in mind to take some initiative between now and then? Would it not be rather intolerable if the French were to be so obstinate as to try to wreck this widely-wanted Directive? Would it not be rather uncivilised of them to do so simply on the ground that they want carte blanche to shoot any small brown bird that passes through their country? Incidentally, is the Minister able to say offhand how many larks' tongues are required to make one kilogramme of paté?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, I am not an expert on why the French take the attitude they do or, indeed, on how many larks' tongues they use in their various dishes. We deplore it, but this is a matter for the French Government and we must hope to persuade them that they are wrong, as the other seven countries are hoping as well. Negotiations are still continuing informally at this 373 point in time. My information is that there is likely to be another Ministers' meeting later on in the autumn, but a date has not yet been fixed.
§ Lord WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, as my noble friend will remember, this House has consistently pressed for the strongest possible legislation with regard to the protection of species. Will my noble friend bear this in mind and remember that she will have the full support of this House, independent of Party, in ensuring that steps are taken to stop this destruction of wild life?
§ Baroness STEDMANMy Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for emphasising that, but knowing the feeling of this House on the many occasions that we have discussed endangered species, I was in no doubt that I would have its full backing.