Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

moved Amendment No. 299:"Page 63, leave out lines 30 to 32." The noble Baroness said: Like many other noble Lords, I am sure, I listen to the wildlife programmes on Radio 4. Fortunately for me, many of them are broadcast at the weekends. A common theme in recent months has been the way that certain animals and plants are changing the habitat of native species, and, in some cases, killing them. We have had debates about striking a balance between protecting the red and the grey squirrels. The noble Lord will not be surprised that I was disappointed by the Government’s response. I believe that far more relevant action is needed than is currently taking place. In recent weeks we have also heard about the two species of crayfish, both emanating from America, that are becoming a serious, and possibly terminal, threat to our variety. That is to say nothing of the destruction they cause to riverbanks. We have for many years now faced the whole question of rhododendrons and, more recently, Japanese knotweed. As I am sure that noble Lords are aware, there are many further examples I could draw upon. The important factor in the context of this debate is that they usually start from small beginnings and then romp away. By the time the threat is appreciated, it is already out of control, or nearly so. I cannot see a single valid reason for time-limiting the prosecution of someone who breaks the rules on importing destructive animals, or indeed any form of proscribed wildlife. If such an offence comes to light, perhaps in the course of another investigation, it should surely be prosecuted no matter what the time interval. I ask the Minister why the interval of two years has been chosen. Several Members of this House have been trying by various means to slow the illegal inflow of bushmeat, wild birds and other items dangerous to humans or animals in this country. Many questions have been asked; the replies make it clear that prosecutions of those caught in breach of those rules are rare. ““Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”” does not seem to apply to those plying illegal trades through our borders. I beg to move.