Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

It certainly will be, and I shall make sure that that is done at the earliest possible opportunity. I shall now deal with the amendments as briefly as I can. Amendment No. 225, in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Cameron, among others, seeks to make statutory the role of rural advocate by combining it formally with the position of chairman of the CRC board. Let me begin by clarifying that the current chairman of the Countryside Agency and the rural advocate are, as is well known to the Committee, already the same person—Dr Stuart Burgess—who has been referred to in the debate. Dr Burgess was appointed chairman by the Secretary of State and subsequently designated rural advocate by the Prime Minister in 2004. The arrangement derives from the 2000 rural White Paper, which announced the creation of the role of rural advocate to,"““argue the case on countryside issues and for rural people at the highest levels in Government and outside””." The role was to be a designation, not an appointment. Although it has seemed eminently sensible to us to link it to the chairman post—the noble Lord, Lord Cameron, if he will forgive me saying so, was the first person to whom the designation was given—we believe this is better done by custom and practice than by force of law. The report on our draft Bill, published in March last year, by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee in another place emphasised that this role is vital and welcomed our assurance that it was likely that the chairman of the CRC would be designated the rural advocate. In our response we stated that the CRC would provide substantial back-up to the rural advocate in what will undoubtedly be a pretty challenging role. We do not believe it necessary to add the designation to the specification for the chairman in Schedule 2, in that, unlike with the Countryside Agency, the concept of rural advocacy is built into the general purposes and powers of the CRC in Clauses 18 and 19 of this Bill. The ability of the rural advocate to carry out his responsibilities has not been restricted by not having statutory backing. He already enjoys access to the Government and to Parliament, to the whole range of local, regional and national bodies concerned with rural affairs, and obviously to rural people themselves. Access to the Prime Minister is built into the description of the chairman’s role. At present we are not convinced that the chairman of the CRC should be given any special functions over and above the wide remit and functions already set out in Chapter 2. That is our response at this stage to the noble Lord’s amendment. I shall take Amendments Nos. 241, 251 and 252 together. This group seeks to alter how the purpose and roles of the CRC are described in Clauses 18 and 19. Amendment No. 241 would formalise the CRC’s monitoring role in a way which is not spelt out elsewhere in the Bill. It would raise the CRC’s information and advisory roles to a more prominent position as one of two elements of its general purpose. Crucially, it would also remove the requirement for the CRC to promote sustainability in meeting rural needs. Sustainable rural communities are of course one of our main aims, as well as one of the main aims of the CRC and other bodies concerned with rural communities. The amended Clause 18(1)(a), mentioned in Amendment No. 241, would not add anything genuinely new to the commission’s purpose. Ensuring that government policies do not disadvantage persons living in rural areas is already embedded in all the CRC’s monitoring and watchdog work. The revision to Clause 18(1)(b) similarly would not add anything substantially new as information collection and publication is already thoroughly embedded in the advisory function of the CRC and, we think, covered adequately in Clauses 19(b) and 20. Amendment No. 251, tabled in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, would remove the CRC’s advisory role. She told us that this is a probing amendment. The CRC will be a key source of independent expert advice to government and to other public, private and voluntary bodies on the social and economic needs of people and communities in rural areas. It has already demonstrated some of the ways in which it will exercise this function, through its thematic study on rural disadvantage and its report, the State of the Countryside 2005. The CRC’s continuation of this role will be of great value to all those concerned with the facts about rural needs. I turn to Amendment No. 252, tabled in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Miller. My answer to her is this: at that stage it would be too late for the CRC to monitor and report on the development of policies which would have already been adopted by relevant persons. However, I think her response to me would be that while the wording of her amendment may not be absolutely appropriate, the CRC should be looking at the development of policies as much as anything else. I shall take that back. Amendment No. 242 seeks to widen the commission’s general purpose to include promoting awareness of rural-proofing, a definition of which would be added to Clause 18. Amendment No. 247 seeks to widen the commission’s general purpose to include promoting awareness of rural proofing, a definition of which, again, would be added to Clause 18. Amendment No. 255 seeks to impose a duty to monitor and to report to Parliament directly on rural proofing, not through the Secretary of State as at present. This reporting duty would extend to,"““the social, economic and environmental state of rural England””." We do not think the amendments are necessary. The second amendment would place on the CRC a further burden of responsibility and formally require it to do something already at the heart of its role and work. Defra already supports the commission with funds to monitor and report annually on rural-proofing activities across all levels of government. Similarly, the CRC is already funded by Defra to produce an annual state-of-the-countryside report, about which we have heard. It covers, to use the wording in the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Cameron,"““the social, economic and environmental state of rural England””." The existing wording will empower the commission to continue to carry out these functions. That is why we do not consider the amendments necessary, although, of course, we appreciate the positive motives behind them. Let me deal next with Amendments Nos. 243, 244, 250, 253 and 254 together. We do not believe there is an obvious purpose to these amendments. Amendments Nos. 243, 244, 250 and 254 would redefine the focus of the CRC’s work from ““rural needs”” to,"““the needs of the inhabitants of rural communities””." We are not sure that that would bring any significant benefits. Clause 18(3) contains an adequate definition of ““rural needs”” as,"““the social and economic needs of persons in rural areas of England””," which the amendments would not change or omit. Amendment No. 253 seeks to alter the wording of Clause 19(c). Again, we do not think it adds anything. By implication, where the commission reports on the way in which policies adopted by relevant persons have been implemented, such a report would highlight both the good and the bad. The use of the word ““extent”” in this clause would also render the extra words ““or not meeting”” superfluous. As to Amendments Nos. 245, 246 and 248, the role of the commission will be to focus on the social and economic needs of rural communities, focusing primarily on the disadvantaged. However, in championing those affected by social disadvantage or in areas of economic underperformance, it will enhance not weaken the relationship between rural communities and their environment. In answer to the noble Earl, Lord Peel, I can assure the Committee that the CRC will not be looking at social and economic needs in isolation from environmental needs. It will raise awareness of the relationships between farmers and land managers and their neighbouring rural communities, including social dependencies. The Bill requires the commission, Natural England and the Joint Conservation Committee all to contribute to sustainable development through the functions they each perform. The CRC is tasked with promoting sustainable ways of meeting the needs of rural people and rural areas on the basis that anything that is not sustainable is, frankly, not in their interests.