Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-995, in the name of Ross Finnie, that the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill be passed.
I am pleased to open the stage 3 debate on the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill. Let me deal first with an important formality. For the purposes of rule 9.11 of the standing orders, I advise the Parliament that Her Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill, has consented to place her prerogative and interests, so far as they are affected by the bill, at the disposal of the Parliament for the purposes of the bill.
Hear, hear!
Members who were present earlier heard, and those who read the Official Report tomorrow will see, a touching and moving speech of thanks to Her Majesty by Dennis Canavan. Further, those who were present earlier observed what other members can read about in the Official Report, which was the Tories rising in support of amendment 1, claiming to be the supporters and defenders of Her Majesty. Members will find that the Tories abstained in the vote on amendment 1. I am sure that Her Majesty will be deeply comforted by that support.
The bill is the culmination of more than three years of careful and sometimes gruelling work by the Executive and a broad range of stakeholders, consultees and members of the Parliament, particularly the members of the committee that scrutinised the bill. The bill lays the foundation for a new, integrated system of nature conservation for Scotland. Efforts to conserve our natural heritage and protect our environment cannot be pursued in isolation. That is why we have put the conservation of biodiversity at the heart of the bill.
The effective protection of Scotland's most special natural places—our sites of special scientific interest—is hugely important. Further measures to clamp down on wildlife crime reflect how seriously we take that issue. However, the bill's big vision and innovation is the new biodiversity duty that we place on public bodies. A fragmented approach to nature conservation that protects a few isolated nature reserves but ignores the bigger picture simply could not succeed in the longer term.
A key theme of the bill has been an emphasis on people and nature and the recognition that nature conservation and protection of the environment do not happen in a vacuum. We need to reconnect people with the natural world to achieve a sensible, sustainable balance for the future. The bill will make a difference on many levels. It forms part of a coherent larger vision for not only a new system of nature conservation, but a sustainable relationship with our natural environment and the planet on which we live. I urge the whole of Parliament to pass the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill be passed.
I thank again the staff of the Environment and Rural Development Committee, who worked extremely hard throughout all the bill's stages, but particularly at stage 2. I am grateful to all the outside organisations that showed an interest in the bill's progress and supported committee members with evidence, briefings and proposals for amendments.
I said at the start of the stage 1 debate that the Scottish National Party had no hesitation in supporting the bill's general principles; indeed, we have supported the bill right through to this stage. A number of my concerns about detail at earlier stages of the bill were addressed by concessions that the minister made as a result of amendments that other members and I had lodged. The amendments were either agreed to at stage 2 or brought back in slightly altered form by the minister today at stage 3. I am grateful for that consideration.
I am pleased that the minister took on board my arguments at stage 2 about the need to make it clear that the bill covers all holders of any public office that might have an impact on biodiversity. The bill sets out explicitly that the duty applies to all of a body's functions and that bodies cannot red-line certain areas. The minister also accepted my arguments about the need for section 12 to focus more on the effect that the functions of public bodies will have on SSSIs and the need to acknowledge explicitly the importance of maintaining the integrity of the SSSI series in addition to safeguarding individual sites.
I am particularly pleased to support section 51, which relates to wildlife crime. When I first entered the Parliament and was considering a possible member's bill, that was the subject to which I gave serious consideration. There had been a number of incidents of raptor poisoning in my constituency and I was concerned that the powers that were available to the police and the courts were far from strong enough. I was told that wildlife crime would not be an appropriate topic for a member's bill because the Executive was going to introduce legislation on that subject. The legislation is here at last and I am delighted to support it.
Two news stories this week have underlined to me the importance of the bill, which emphasises the unacceptability of wildlife crime. Members will have read reports of Lord Tryon, who is being sued for constructive dismissal by his former estate manager. The former manager alleges that, on seeing a golden eagle, his lordship told him:
"Eagles have no place on my grouse moor."
That took place near Comrie, which is in my constituency. The current edition of The Hebridean newspaper carries a front-page report of a raid on a golden eagle's eyrie, in which collectors stole the eggs. Frankly, I cannot understand what motivates people to kill such wonderful creatures or to steal their eggs. However, it is clear that such things happen and that the bill is necessary.
There have been a couple of controversial issues this afternoon—snaring and pigeons—and despite the broad consensus across all parties in support of the bill, there were areas of contention. We have dealt with snares, and I tell members for the avoidance of all doubt that the SNP also had a free vote on the issue of pigeons. I did not support Alex Neil's amendment, as I felt that the scientific evidence was such as to make it unnecessary. I do not see the point of unnecessarily anthropomorphising animals. Eagles are no more cruel than my cat is cruel—they simply are what they are—and to judge them on that basis is quite wrong.
The bill will be an important measure in protecting and conserving Scotland's natural heritage, and it will assist us in meeting our commitments under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. I am pleased to say that I and my fellow SNP members will vote for it.
The Conservatives will also support the bill. The bill has been characterised by the way in which it has passed through Parliament, as it has perhaps offered a contrast to some of the legislation that was imposed during the first session of Parliament. The bill is welcome and it will contribute many things that will be of benefit. We can broadly welcome the commitment to biodiversity and we look forward to seeing the results in the longer term.
The consultations that took place with interested parties on changes in the regulations for sites of special scientific interest have resulted in a number of changes that have been broadly accepted by landowning and land-managing interests. The bill also serves to change the way in which compensation is paid to those who have sites of special scientific interest on their land, and that provision has also been broadly welcomed by those representative organisations.
In spite of the fact that many of my amendments at stage 2 were not accepted, I believe that the bill will deliver greater openness and transparency in the way in which Scottish Natural Heritage deals with sites of special scientific interest and other commitments that it is responsible for managing. The bad relationship that has existed in certain quarters is a result of failure to ensure that that openness existed, and the bill will make a significant step towards promoting greater understanding between those parties.
As far as wildlife crime is concerned, I too welcome the fact that the bill has taken further steps to prevent the use of poison in relation to wildlife. Poisoning is a wholly unacceptable practice and one that we should be very happy to have put a stop to. The issue of snaring has been controversial, but it is my view that we have come to the correct decision during the passage of the bill. I hope that the minister's further commitments will result in further consideration of the process over time to ensure that snaring can continue in the few circumstances in which it is necessary.
One issue that was raised in the Environment and Rural Development Committee at stage 1 but which has not featured so far today is resourcing. I remain concerned that resources may be inadequate to ensure, first, that the system of sites of special scientific interest is properly run and, secondly, that the policing of wildlife crime can be properly financed. When the question was asked, the ministerial response appeared to be that the bill would be largely revenue neutral, but I am sure that we all know that achieving the full objectives of the bill, and getting its full benefits, will cost money. As a consequence, I remain convinced that the bill will require further appropriate resourcing if it is to deliver what we hope it can deliver.
It has been a pleasure and a privilege to work on the bill. The bill has been a long time in the making—more than three years—and over that time there has been a huge input from Scottish Executive staff, non-governmental organisations, individuals, ministers and committee members. All that has been organised and pulled together by the staff who support the Environment and Rural Development Committee and I extend to them many thanks. I think that, between us all, we have done a pretty good job.
Among others, I pressed for provisions to allow arrests and custodial sentences for wildlife crimes to be included in the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003, to get them on the statute book a year earlier than they would have been if we had waited for the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill. I think that we were right to do that, and that has been demonstrated by the fact that those provisions have been used a number of times since then. Section 3 of the bill that we are considering today builds on and reinforces the provisions of the 2003 act. I commend section 3.
A number of people will be disappointed that we have not taken the opportunity that the bill presented to outlaw snaring. However, I believe that we confronted a difficult issue and came to a balanced and correct view. As I have said, we have left the door open to take further action on snaring. On the available evidence, the stance that was taken on pigeon predation was also correct.
Part 2 of the bill, on clarifying and modernising the SSSI system and providing for better involvement of stakeholders and greater understanding of the process, will be of great benefit to everyone involved. The provisions in part 2 are to be commended.
Part 1 of the bill covers biodiversity, which has both an intrinsic and a financially quantifiable value. We can take our pick of the reasons for its importance, but the fact that it is important is well recognised. The figures underline the need to take action to protect biodiversity: there has been a decline in the numbers of native land mammals and, in the two decades of the 1970s and 1980s, one third of bird species—including 60 per cent of farmland birds—showed marked reductions in range. It is not only the birds and the beasts that we should worry about. Since the 1940s, we have lost about a third of Scotland's native woodland of ancient origin. Only about 1 per cent of the original Scots pine forest remains.
That wildlife tourism is the third highest priority for Visitscotland after golf and walking demonstrates how much it underpins a major part of our economy. Both for the intrinsic value of biodiversity and for its economic value, we should protect it.
We are extraordinarily blessed in our land and landscape and in the wonderful birds and beasts that, thankfully, abound. We are the custodians of all that and have the duty and the pleasure of protecting, fostering, sharing and passing on our heritage. In many ways, the bill will help us to do that. I commend it to the Parliament.
This is a landmark day for nature conservation in Scotland. I hope that we will pass the bill—perhaps even unanimously. The bill is stronger as a result of the parliamentary scrutiny process and the comments that we have received from many organisations. The Environment and Rural Development Committee was able to develop consensus, but only after many discussions and arguments and much detailed consideration of the evidence. Organisations will now act on the provisions in the bill and we will see an improvement in our natural heritage and in our wildlife across Scotland.
The bill has the potential to introduce a much more joined-up approach to nature conservation; people have said that we need such an approach. From this bill will come many opportunities that we have not had time to explore this afternoon. For example, opportunities will come from reform of the common agricultural policy and they will have to be considered alongside the provisions in the bill. In the Labour Party, we believe that the bill offers a golden opportunity to improve on our existing agri-environment schemes and to implement new schemes that will deliver greater public benefit from farming to Scotland's environment.
Much of what the bill does is to modernise the framework for the conservation of SSSIs. The bill offers greater opportunities for consultation among people who live locally to SSSIs and among key stakeholders. Such consultation will, I hope, lead to more open processes.
In Scotland, we take it for granted that we have an excellent natural environment of uniform quality, but that is not the case. During the passage of the bill, we learned about the poor state of many of our SSSIs. Attention must be given to them.
Nora Radcliffe spoke about the importance of tourism and the economy. The natural heritage is one of Scotland's key assets and we need to protect and enhance it for the future.
The Environment and Rural Development Committee considered many issues in great depth, but we do not have the time to discuss them today. Maureen Macmillan spoke about fossils; we must ensure that our natural history is properly interpreted and protected. We have not even debated today the issues that surround many of the wildlife species that are better protected as a result of the bill. Birds of prey, badgers and dolphins are now better protected from wildlife crime.
I will finish by talking about the parliamentary process. The committee was expertly supported by hard-working committee members, clerks and researchers from the Scottish Parliament information centre, and by all those who submitted evidence and amendments that helped to shape the bill. We were also supported by the minister's relatively positive approach, which was not to knock out every amendment automatically but to consider the merits of each argument. Although the minister resisted some amendments to the bitter end, he took others away and came back with reworked amendments at stage 3. That, in part, is why the bill is a better bill; there has been a listening process and we have engaged in a dialogue.
My final point is for the business managers. The fact that we have had much longer than usual between stage 2 and stage 3 has assisted that positive approach by giving the minister and his officials a little bit more time to breathe. It also gave us the time to talk to many organisations and to ensure that, by stage 3, we had made use of that space. I think that the result of that has been a better bill, which I hope that everyone will support.
I can give Rob Gibson about two to two and a half minutes.
We have been presented with a significant, welcome and necessary improvement to the law on nature conservation. The Executive is now beholden to deliver on the annual system through which crises in our natural heritage will be reported on from year to year. That will be very important, because the bill at last opens up the possibility of people playing a much more positive part in conserving wildlife and the natural heritage.
In light of some of the debates that we have had, it is interesting that there will be an extended list of protected birds, which the Executive will consult on at an early stage. I am sorry that the bill will not protect game birds, which in some cases are extremely endangered, and I hope that the list of protected birds will be extended in that direction at some future time.
There are some important matters that impinge on the public. Giant hogweed and the other non-native species that we see alongside railways and on roadsides must be dealt with, as they are extremely invasive. It is helpful that we are at last getting to grips with that list.
There are many positive things to say about the bill. I hope that it will be implemented in the spirit that was intended. The Scottish National Party gives the bill its whole-hearted support.
That support is welcome. I am grateful to the members of all parties who have contributed constructively to this stage 3 debate on the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill.
The way in which the bill has been developed and scrutinised over the past seven months has shown our new Scottish Parliament at its very best, as an effective and professional legislature. The bill may well be the best example yet of the new politics that were envisaged by many at the birth of this institution. Its origins provide a first-class example of co-operation, dialogue and debate among stakeholders at large. There has been enormous interest from outside the Parliament in the first Scottish bill for the conservation of our natural heritage.
The fact that Scotland's wider civic society has played a vital role in helping to formulate the bill is a healthy indication that the principles that drove our original vision for devolution are alive, well and prospering.
Will the member give way?
Time does not allow me to take an intervention.
Aw.
Och, okay then.
On amendment 33 in your name, will you give me some indication of the timescale of the consultation exercise on species inclusion that you intend to carry out?
We will do that as soon as is possible.
Time does not allow me to thank everyone who has been involved in the refinement process. Roseanna Cunningham was correct to say that the narrative behind the bill is important. The expert working group toiled for more than three years to consider the intricacies and challenges of reforming the SSSI system and the partnership for action against wildlife crime has been invaluable. The steering group of the Scottish biodiversity forum made a vital contribution, which will also result in the launch later this month of a new biodiversity strategy for Scotland.
All members will want to join me in thanking parliamentary staff and, in particular, the clerk to the Environment and Rural Development Committee and her team for the outstanding assistance that they have provided over the past seven months.
Last, I know that Dennis Canavan will want to join me in giving special thanks to Her Majesty the Queen for all her help and assistance. [Applause.]
I thank everyone for their contributions and for what has been achieved so far. The challenge that has been thrown down—not just for the Executive, dare I say—is to continue the good work, put into effect the provisions of this important bill and, in so doing, better preserve and conserve our invaluable natural heritage for the enjoyment of future generations.