HL Deb 25 June 1980 vol 410 cc1645-9

5.2 p.m.

Report received.

Clause 1 [Obligation to plant new trees]:

The Earl of CORK and ORRERY moved Amendment No. 1: Page 1, line 5, leave out ("or any person acting on its behalf").

The noble Earl said: My Lords, I apologise to the House for not moving this amendment at the Committee stage, but I should explain that I had not actually noticed the necessity for it. Having done so now, I think that probably everybody else has noticed it as well and, therefore, I need say very little about it.

The effect of the words which I ask the House to delete from the Bill is a curious one. The Bill as drafted says: Any local authority, or person acting on its behalf … shall be required, if he cuts down a tree, to plant another two trees. This implies that if the local parish council, or whatever it may be, employs a man to cut down a tree, that man, as the Council's agent is responsible for planting two more trees in its place. That cannot be the intention of the Bill and I do not think that the noble Lord, Lord Somers, intended that to be the effect. I submit that the Bill would read correctly if those words were simply deleted from the clause. I beg to move.

Lord SOMERS

My Lords, I can quite see the difficulties in these words. I wonder whether it would be possible to reword the clause so that after "any person acting on its behalf" the words "the said Council shall plant" et cetera, could be added. Of course, that is possibly a matter for Third Reading, and I am perfectly happy to accept this amendment now.

Lord MOWBRAY and STOURTON

My Lords, I take the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Somers, but I think that the noble Earl, Lord Cork and Orrery, has made a better point. There would be a legal obligation on the man who actually fells the tree, acting on behalf of the local authority, to plant two trees at some other time in his life. He might not even be employed by the local authority when it came to the planting season. I think that this must be a good, commonsense amendment.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 2 [Planting of new trees]:

Lord KILBRACKEN moved Amendment No. 2: Page 1, line 17, leave out ("trees which have been growing for less than three years") and insert ("naturally regenerated trees less than two metres in height").

The noble Lord said: My Lords as at present drafted, the Bill provides in Clause 2(4) that: Section 1 above shall not apply to trees which have been growing for less than three years".

On Second Reading the noble Lord, Lord Somers, made it clear that he was here thinking of terms of self-sown or self-seeded trees. At the Committee stage it seemed to many noble Lords, including the noble Earl who has just sat down and myself, who tabled amendments, that this was too sweeping and that it should be stated specifically in the Bill that it should apply only to self-sown trees.

My proposed amendment would have made it apply to self-sown trees of any age. This amendment seemed to be gaining the approval of the Committee when it was dealt two mortal blows; first, by the noble Lord, Lord Inglewood, who pointed out—and he was subsequently supported by the noble Viscount, Lord Simon—that it was impossible to tell in a tree of a considerable age—50 to 100 years—whether or not it was self-sown. Secondly, the noble Lord, Lord Balerno, pointed out that not all trees reproduce themselves by seeding and that, therefore, the phrase "self-sown" was inappropriate. It was he who suggested the phrase, "naturally regenerated".

The amendment that I now put before your Lordships would confine the exclusion to: naturally regenerated trees less than two metres in height". I have preferred to limit it by reference to their height rather than to their age because it is impossible to tell how old a tree is without cutting it down and counting the annual rings. Therefore, I felt that the height was more appropriate. I am aware that by limiting it to two metres I am probably excluding more trees than if it was limited to trees under three years of age. But some of these self-sown, self-planted or naturally regenerated trees grow at a great rate, and I do not think that two metres is excessive. I beg to move.

Lord SOMERS

My Lords, I think that this is a distinct improvement to the Bill. I am perfectly happy to accept it. I must point out to the noble Lord, however, that it is perfectly possible to tell the age of a tree by counting the years' shoots on a branch without cutting it down. However, I think that this is a much better way, and I imagine that before very long we shall all know what a metre is; I think that it is something like a yard. In any case, we shall soon get used to it.

Lord MOWBRAY and STOURTON

My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Somers, likes this amendment because I, too, think that it is a very sensible amendment.

The Earl of CORK and ORRERY

My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord Somers, has accepted the amendment I am loath to waste the time of the House by saying any more about it. But I would draw attention, with diffidence, to the words "naturally regenerated". I believe that they emanated from the noble Lord, Lord Balerno, who is a scientist. The noble Lord is not in his place, but I am not quite sure whether he was speaking from his scientific knowledge or simply off the cuff. My idea of what happens when a tree or any other creature is given birth to is that it is generated. Regeneration implies a kind of second birth, which is not very common in nature. I do not know whether that is the appropriate word. Whether or not the word is right, I do not believe that one can have unnatural generation or unnatural regeneration. I simply commend to the noble Lord, Lord Somers, the thought that perhaps he might consider this phraseology between now and Third Reading.

Lord SOMERS

My Lords, I think that I am far too ignorant about generation and regeneration to be able to do that with any authority.

Lord TREFGARNE

My Lords, I apologise for intervening, but this is a Report stage and the noble Lord should have asked the leave of the House.

Lord SOMERS

My Lords, I apologise.

Lord KILBRACKEN

My Lords, as the mover of the amendment I believe that I am entitled to reply. I am grateful to noble Lords who have supported the amendment. I say to the noble Earl that certainly it is the practice in forestry always to talk about regeneration, whether it is etymologically correct or not.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Schedule [Species and variety of trees to which Section 1 applies]:

Lord SOMERS moved Amendment No. 3: Leave out the Schedule.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment is simply to take the place of one put down at Committee stage by the noble Lord, Lord Kilbracken, who unfortunately was not here to move it. Since the alteration in the earlier part of the Bill there is now no point in having a schedule at all. Therefore, I beg to move.

Lord KILBRACKEN

My Lords, this amendment is consequential on an amendment of mine that was approved at Committee stage. I should only like to apologise to the House for the fact that I was unavoidably unable to be present on the second day of the Committee stage and could not then move it.

On Question, amendment agreed to.