Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Earl Peel (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 February 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.


Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

I am grateful to the noble Lord for his response. I shall read very carefully what he has said. I am disappointed in his reply. Perhaps there is a technical reason why a wildlife inspector should be treated differently in legislative terms from a pesticide inspector. The noble Lord tried to explain that and I shall need to read his words very carefully. I thought he rather glossed over my point about what I described as the leading NGO and the recommendations made by the investigations officer. I hope that the noble Lord will condemn outright any suggestion that the police or the wildlife inspectors will be co-operating behind the scenes with NGOs to try to secure a prosecution. It seems to me that they have to remain absolutely independent. I hope that that will be made quite clear in the code of practice. I hope that the Minister will confirm that what I have suggested should in fact be the situation.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c65 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Animal welfare Codes of practice Birds Agriculture Badgers Countryside Biodiversity Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Deer Land Environment protection Environment Infectious diseases Land use Imports Powers of entry Protection Nature conservation Pesticides National parks Trade Rights of way Right of search Wildlife Road signs and markings Rural areas Seals Sites of special scientific interest Avian influenza Parrots Natural England Bracken
Legislation
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk