HL Deb 24 October 1990 vol 522 cc1333-5

2.57 p.m.

Lord Gisborough asked Her Majesty's Government:

What steps they have taken to seek an amendment to the EC Birds Directive to ensure the continuing availability of measures to control bird species listed as pests in Schedule 2, Part II, to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, the Government have consistently urged the European Commission to bring forward proposals for amending the directive which, without compromising its conservation objectives, would permit member states to control effectively the problems and damage caused by pests such as crows and magpies. We raised the matter in the Agriculture Council only last month. Very recently the Government have learnt that the Commission may intend to come forward with a proposal to address the problem. Any such changes would need the unanimous approval of all member states.

Lord Gisborough

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Is she aware that it will come as a great relief to sheep farmers who suffer from damage caused by black-backed gulls and crows, arable farmers suffering from damage caused by pigeons and those interested in wildlife which may be wiped out by crows and magpies? Will the Minister do all she possibly can to try to have this matter placed on a permanent basis rather than subject to an annual licence?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, it will come as a great relief to us all, and to the Government in particular, if we can bring about a change to the directive to deal with the problem of pest control. I can give my noble friend an absolute assurance that we shall do all we can to press for such changes.

The Earl of Carnarvon

My Lords, is the Minister aware that the commissioners and their officers are looking again at the birds directive, and that many representations have been made to them? Can she therefore explain why the Government are so insistent that the order must be made by 1st December this year? If there is no change of direction in Brussels, would it not be preferable to contest the European Commissioners' decision in the European Court rather than introduce a ridiculous, defective and unenforceable licensing system for the control of bird pests?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, the Government have absolutely no choice in the matter of conforming with the directive. We have recently received formal notification that we are in breach of the directive. We have to respond to that formal notification and we are doing so. I repeat that we shall do all that we can to make sure that the changes to the directive are brought about. I am assured by much legal advice that we should stand no chance whatever in the European court. Knowing that our chances are somewhat slim, it would not be a good idea to continue in breach. We should use all our energies to bring about a change in the directive.

Baroness Nicol

My Lords, will the Minister accept that if a review of the present lists were accompanied by improved monitoring, the result would be very acceptable to the RSPB? That has long stressed the need for continued monitoring of the species on the list of pests. The RSPB take a sensible view about the need to control certain bird species. However, the necessity to re-examine the list is illustrated by the fact that golden plovers, for example, can be shot by someone without a licence and those birds are now becoming very rare. Whatever happens about the list generally, can she assure the House that there will be continuous monitoring of birds which are either included or excluded?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, the Wildlife and Countryside Act has served very well in terms of making sure that if we are to kill birds, it will be pests that we kill. Speaking on behalf of the Government, I am the first to say that if we are able to bring about a change in the directive, we shall do so after severe scrutiny of any birds prescribed for the list.

Lord Mackie of Benshie

My Lords, is the Minister aware that in Scotland the wood pigeon is a big pest, but magpies cannot get a living? The wood pigeon does enormous damage all the year round. Wood pigeons can clean out a field of oilseed rape in two nights. Does she agree that if this order is not amended, the Government, along with the Commission, will be stigmatised in most rural areas and constituencies as stark raving mad?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, I am tempted to say "Caw!" I learn something every day at the Dispatch Box. I am grateful to the noble Lord for improving my education on these matters. We are talking about a very serious problem. It is not about conservation but about pests. My understanding is that there has been a great increase in the number of magpies, for example, and if we are not allowed to bring about this change and operate sensibly, as we do in this country, we shall have a very serious problem here. That gives urgency to the need for a change.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, does my noble friend agree I that she could usefully bear in mind when encouraging the European Commission to bring forward an amendment that several of the species in Schedule 1 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act are preyed upon by these species which are now to be afforded further protection in Part II of Schedule 2? Is not that in itself a major nonsense?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, I have now learnt something else. I note what the noble Lord said, and in any representations that we make we shall bear it in mind.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that in this country we suffer from a torrent of regulations and directives which constitute an onerous burden on the British public and British business? Does she agree that it is about time that we had a close season on these regulations and directives?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, given that we have spent so much time recently discussing matters in the Chamber, I do not believe that anybody could argue against a European approach to protection of wildlife. That is what we are talking about in this directive. We are full members of the Community and if we believe that there is a nonsense, as we do in this case, we should do what we can and use all our energies to remedy the situation.

3.5 p.m.

The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Belstead)

My Lords, I must put it to your Lordships that this Question could continue for a very long time indeed. Possibly this is one occasion on which we should resort to a little rough justice. Perhaps I may suggest to the House for once that we end this Question now. We can always return to it on another occasion.

Forward to