Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Greenway (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 15 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.


Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

My Lords, I also oppose Amendment No. 52. I was not present in Committee when we debated a similar amendment, but I made my feelings clear at an earlier stage in Committee when I said that I opposed any effort to write the Sandford principle into the Bill. It is most important that we retain a balance between the different interests, which conflict from time to time. We must also remember that the remit of Natural England covers urban areas as well as the countryside; that would make the amendment more difficult to work with. Things have been slanted slightly in favour of environmental issues as a result of the habitats directive already; that will have to be taken into account by Natural England. I have been intrigued to see that a number of noble Lords who have spoken seem to have changed their mind since Committee. I do not know whether that is because of what the Minister said on that occasion, but I have not changed my mind—I still very much oppose Amendment No. 52. My noble friend Lord Erroll, who was here a moment ago, got called away to host a reception but would also have spoken against Amendment No. 52.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c1271 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Birds Conservation Climate change Countryside Biodiversity Finance Environment protection Functions Imports National Lottery Public bodies Non-departmental public bodies Sustainable development Wildlife Rural areas Regional development agencies Rural Development Service Commission for Rural Communities Natural England
Legislation
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk