Swan Deaths: Anglers' Lead Weights (Hansard, 30 January 1986)

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, we have already declared our firm intention to take effective action to protect swans from poisoning by anglers' lead weights. We will ban the sale of most lead weights for angling from 1st January 1987 if the voluntary approach supported by angling organisations has not proved successful by the end of the current fishing season. In addition, my right honourable friends the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretary of State for Wales have issued a model by-law to water authorities, so they can, if they wish, ban the use of lead weights for fishing in their areas. The use of lead weights in royal parks will also have been fully phased out by the start of the next fishing season.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply, which is slightly encouraging. But is he aware that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals are, in principle, both against the suggested by-law of the Anglian Water Authority, which is considerably less stringent than the MAFF by-law, and that even the MAFF by-law does not come up to the standards which they require? Does the Minister agree that this problem has gone on long enough and that action should now be taken to go ahead and bring in legislation, especially since one has been told that very good non-toxic substitutes have been successfully used in competition?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the House will remember that we made very firm commitments when this subject was under discussion in your Lordships' House last year and the Government are sticking 795 absolutely to their word. As regards the noble Baroness's reference to the comments of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds to the Anglian Water Authority, I have a copy of their letter. I would point out, although I am well aware of the concern expressed therein, that individual by-laws, even if based on model clauses, have to be confirmed by the Government. Before doing so, we will consider all objections. This includes the points made in that letter and by the noble Baroness this afternoon.

§ Lord Melchett
My Lords, the noble Lord's commitment to legislate is very welcome, but it is conditional on the voluntary system not working. Will the noble Lord confirm that the voluntary restraint is not working and that the introduction of model bylaws seems likely to confuse matters rather than simplify them, because different water authorities are taking a different approach? In those circumstances, would it not be better for the Government to get on and legislate as quickly as possible?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
No, my Lords. We have said quite clearly that we will give the anglers and the angling organisations time to put their own house in order. I have given a date for this, which is 15th March this year. If this does not come about, we will legislate.

§ Lord Sefton of Garston
My Lords, may I have an assurance that there is no lead poisoning occasioned by the activities of certain brave men pursuing such savage creatures as pheasants and grouse by the discharge of shotguns which contain lead pellets?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the objective of a shotgun pellet is to kill. The objective of a lead weight is to sink.

Lord Chelwood
My Lords, is not the manufacture and sale of split lead shots the real yardstick by which to measure what progress is being made and can my noble friend say whether the trade is co-operating here?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, obviously the manufacture and sale of lead-free substitutes is a very important point. But there will be old stocks and we must make certain that we can ban the sale of lead shots in the circumstances that I have already described to the House.

§ Lord Melchett
My Lords, in view of the Government's firm commitment to legislate can the noble Lord assure the House that the Government have seen a way forward for doing that which will not give rise to legal or other difficulties should they decide to do so?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, we have had constant discussions over the last year on the right way ahead and we are certain that we have come to the right solution. I say again that should we need to legislate we will bring the matter forward for consultation and, of course, we will discuss it in your Lordships' House.

§ Lord Sefton of Garston
My Lords, am I to understand that the Minister is telling this Chamber that the lead contained in shotgun pellets has different properties as regards sinking from those of lead used by anglers?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
No, my Lords. It is a totally different question and I did not say that in the first place.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, the Minister referred to the fact that discussions have taken place. My understanding is that when MAFF produced its bylaw it did so with little or no discussion, and indeed that one of the difficulties both for anglers and for the others concerned was that MAFF apparently produced its by-law out of the blue without any discussion. Can he comment on that?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
No, my Lords, I cannot comment on that. But when I spoke of discussion I was referring to inter-departmental discussion about where we might go on legislation, which is a rather different point.