HL Deb 19 December 1979 vol 403 cc1739-43

6.15 p.m.

Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTON

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.

Moved, that the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Paget of Northampton.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORD in the Chair.]

Clause 1 [Prohibition of export of furskins]:

Lord SKELMERSDALE had given Notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 1: Page 1, line 6, after (" article ") insert (" derived from any animal captured by any of the means specified in Schedule 2 to this Act ").

The noble Lord said: When I had recovered from the body blow inflicted on me and those of like views as a result of the Division on Second Reading, I looked around and felt that the correct stance I should take was to try to improve it as much as I could according to my likes. With that end in view, I approached my noble friend Lord de Clifford and the noble Lord, Lord Wynne-Jones, who unfortunately cannot be with us tonight, and they agreed with me in principle. I then went ahead and wrote my amendments and, perhaps a little too enthusiastically and exuberantly, they agreed with the amendments I had drafted.

However, none of us in our thoughts examined what I might describe as the acid test, which of course in your Lordships' House as elsewhere is the question, "Do you believe that once the amendments have been discussed and, hopefully, agreed to, the Bill will be improved to your satisfaction?" That was brought to my attention only this morning and, in view of the vast number of amendments appearing on the Marshalled List, I had in all honesty to say to those noble Lords with whom I had spoken privately and to members of the public outside that I really did not think that that would in fact be the case. Therefore, with the agreement again of the noble Lords, Lord de Clifford and Lord Wynne-Jones, I do not propose to move any of the amendments standing in any of our names on the Marshalled List.

[Amendments Nos. 1 to 5 not moved.]

Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTON had given Notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 6:

Page 1, line 10, at end insert— ("(3) Where any furskin or any piece or cutting of any furskin is being exported, or has been brought to any place for the purpose of being exported, a person commissioned by the Commissioners of Customs and Excise or a person authorised by them may require any person possessing or having control of the furskin or piece or cutting to furnish proof that its exportation is not unlawful by virtue of this section; and if such proof is not furnished to the satisfaction of the said Commissioners the furskin or piece or cutting shall be liable to forfeiture under the Customs and Excise Act 1952.").

The noble Lord said: T thank the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, for the line he has taken, and I intend to follow his example; like him, I do not propose to move an amendment. When the Bill leaves your Lordships' House it either dies or gets accepted by the department. Its acceptance by the department will be the job of my friends in another place; they will have to do their thing and then, if the department accepts it, the department will then put in any amendments it considers desirable. The noble Lord, Lord Mowbray and Stourton, suggested on Second Reading an amendment on these lines. The draftsmen who helped me with this matter drafted this amendment, and if and when the Department come to consider it, it will decide whether this is a suitable form or whether another form would be suitable; but so far as I am concerned I do not feel that it is at all necessary for the purpose of my Bill. My Bill is a very narrow one and a very short one. It is intended quite simply to prevent our wildlife from being upset and to prevent poaching from being encouraged on a large scale to comply with a temporary European fashion. If it is illegal to export these skins, one will have the full co-operation of the fur trade in not exporting them, and without the fur trade's participation I am sure that they will not be exported. If anybody tried to do so, I think the fur trade would very soon see that nobody "horned in on their racket ", if T may put it that way. So I am quite confident that this will be a self-policing Bill, and therefore I do not move my amendment.

Clause 1 agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 7 to 9 not moved.]

Clauses 2 to 5 agreed to.

Clause 6 [Citation, commencement and extent]:

On Question, Whether Clause 6 shall stand part of the Bill?

Lord DE CLIFFORD

May I say at this stage that my noble friend Lord Skelmersdale and I felt very strongly about the Bill, and I must confess that I still do, but I totally appreciate the reason why it is inappropriate that we should go on with it. There are certain basic points in the Bill that I do not like. One point which made me very reluctant to agree with my noble friend was the fact that one of the propositions that we wanted to include here related to the method by which these wild animals were taken. I considered this matter rather carefully and I thought that in view of the fact that the Government were not immediately producing a wildlife Bill this would be a moment when we could perhaps put a little pressure on them. I fully appreciate what my noble friend has said and I do not propose to go any further with it. However, I trust that the noble Lord, Lord Mowbray and Stourton, will consider that we might advance a little in the protection of our wildlife and give more haste to the new wildlife Bill that is coming.

Lord MOWBRAY and STOURTON I had intended to speak on the Question, that the House do now resume, but as my noble friend has started a discussion perhaps I should come in at this juncture. We all recognise the work that my noble friend Lord Skelmersdale has done in preparing amendments designed to give the Bill a clearer aim and a semblance of enforcability, and to cure some of its many other defects. I appreciate also what the noble Lord, Lord Paget of Northampton, has said about his amendment. I must say to him, rather briefly, that any proposal that enforcement of this export prohibition should be undertaken by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise must be considered against the background of the need for economy in both expenditure and manpower in the public services. However, I am grateful that he has not moved the amendment because, as I see it, there is little future in trying to turn this measure, which we consider is a bad measure and is not needed, into something quite different, dealing with a matter which is already adequately covered by existing legislation or with points which we have already indicated will be covered by our wildlife and countryside Bill. We see little point in trying to convert this defective Bill into anything else, so I welcome wholeheartedly the decisions of noble Lords not to move their amendments.

Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTON

I am most grateful to the noble Lord for agreeing with me that the Bill does not need to be altered into anything else. I certainly do not want it altered into anything else, and when close discussions later take place in the noble Lord's Ministry it will be found that the Bill makes no real charge on expenditure in regard to enforcement. I am most grateful to the noble Lord.

Clause 6 agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 10 to 12 not moved.]

House resumed: Bill reported without amendment.