Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

I thank the Minister for his response. We have started out with an interesting group of three amendments. If I may follow on from the noble Baroness, Lady Miller of Chilthorne Domer, when we debated the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which was before the Minister’s time in his present position, we realised too late that we should have had a section on marine life within the Bill. The House recognised that biodiversity should be included, because we moved an amendment and the Government came back with a replacement amendment, for which we were grateful. At the time they perhaps had not registered the importance of the issue being included in the Bill. That is a byway to bring the Minister up to date. I thank noble Lords who have spoken in the debate. I pick up particularly on the amendment tabled by my noble friend Lord Peel. I want him to speak to it first, but it is an important amendment and I am grateful to the Minister, who is going to consider it. My noble friend Lord Dixon-Smith raised an important point about climate change, which we debated last time. The announcement of the likelihood of water shortages emphasises that that is an urgent issue, which needs addressing. I turn briefly to my noble friend Lord Rotherwick’s contribution. I was going to raise the question of the report with my next amendment, so I shall not comment on it now. Many of the amendments seek clarification. I wonder whether the Minister in hindsight wishes that the Government had not put in a general purpose clause, as that would have solved many problems. We all know where we want to get to, but having such definitions in the Bill gives the Government problems. When we look at the responsibilities of the JNCC and its purpose, we see that the two do not tie up together, as my amendment suggests.