Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

Perhaps I may deal first with the point raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, and the issue supported by the noble Baroness, Lady Byford. Natural environment and biodiversity do include marine. Natural England will be a key player in the new Marine Bill discussions, and it is too early yet to know how those discussions will conclude. Perhaps I may deal first with ““enhance””. For the past 40 years, the Countryside Agency has had programmes aimed at enhancing the landscape to improve people’s quality of life. There have been popular programmes valued by both local communities and visitors, including, for example, the 12 community forests and the National Forest—an area which the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, and I know well. Nor is ““enhancing”” restricted to improving the quality of all the worst landscapes. The Countryside Agency took the lead in developing the Thames Landscape Strategy for London, aimed at restoring and enhancing one of the most spectacular metropolitan landscapes in Europe. We do want to see Natural England continue to innovate in this area. We accept that the amendment would not rule that out as the word ““enhance”” remains in Clause 2(1), but we want to ensure that the staff and customers of Natural England understand that this work will continue—in a way to be decided by the board. With regard to the issue of protecting, Natural England will be able to protect landscapes. The word ““conserved”” in the general purpose includes protection. Since the founding legislation of the Countryside Commission in 1968, the word ““conserve”” has been applied to landscape. References in existing landscape legislation to ““conserve and enhance”” have not curtailed the ability of the Countryside Agency to take action to protect landscapes, should that be required. Indeed, we would find the argument in favour of including the word ““protecting”” more convincing if the Countryside Agency had drawn any attention to an occasion in the past 40 years when the ability of the Countryside Commission, or Countryside Agency, to take action to protect a landscape had been inhibited by its founding legislation, but we can find no evidence of that at all. We have a unique geodiversity and flora and fauna that rely on a rich variety of habitats. I can assure noble Lords that the phrase ““conserved, enhanced and managed”” in the general purpose includes protection of landscapes. We expect Natural England to be a trenchant champion of every aspect of our natural environment, taking action to protect landscapes where that is the priority. The noble Lord, Lord Rotherwick, raised the very interesting point about occasions when there is a conflict. But considering how to help—in that case, artificially—to protect the delicate balance, should it get completely out of hand, is part of the role of enhancing and protecting. That is an area that the noble Earl, Lord Peel, will understand particularly well. Some people have argued that ““protection”” applies to biodiversity, thus elevating its status above landscapes. I need to put on the record here that that is not our intention. Including the word ““protecting”” in Clause 2(2)(a) in relation to biodiversity prevents any spurious claims that Natural England should support activities that may enhance biodiversity adversely, such as through the introduction of non-native species and genetically modified organisms. I am sure that noble Lords have no intention of weakening that particular protection. Following pre-legislative scrutiny at the suggestion of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee, Clause 15 was amended at subsection (3) to include the requirement to consult Natural England and at subsection (6) to include the clarification that Natural England must have regard to guidance. Clause 15(1) on regional planning was also prompted by an EFRA Committee suggestion that Natural England should be under a duty to contribute to regional spatial strategies. The noble Baroness, Lady Byford, raised the issue of the planning system at a very local level. Having served on a local authority’s development control committee, I understand only too well the point that she is making because—