Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is their analysis of the impact of palm-oil production on (1) indigenous small farmers, (2) global climate, (3) food manufacturing, and (4) consumer diets and health.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
To inform our policies on palm oil, the Government draws on the analysis of experts and NGOs, as well as working with the UK roundtable on sustainable palm oil, and the work of certification schemes like Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. In addition, we utilise government programming like Partnerships for Forests and the independent Global Resource Initiative to help inform policies on palm oil and on supply chains more widely.
This analysis has indicated that palm oil can be associated with negative environmental impacts, such as deforestation, land conversion and associated climate impacts. However, it also shows that oil palm is a very efficient crop, producing more oil per hectare than other vegetable oil crops. Substitution with other oils (e.g. soybean, rapeseed, sunflower), which typically require significantly more land to produce, may lead to greater deforestation as more land is converted to agricultural use. More than 3 million smallholder farmers make a living from palm oil, providing 40% of total production, and palm oil is important for food security in many countries
Certifiably sustainable palm oil increases traceability and transparency through the supply chain, supporting manufacturers and retail to make more informed decisions about their sourcing, and allowing them to source from producers with a lower environmental footprint. The UK’s Partnership for Forests programme includes support to develop new standards for the sustainable production of palm oil, and support to test new ways of growing oil palm that brings greater benefits to local communities and protects forests.
Finally, palm oil is an important part of food production globally. We want the entire supply chain to help to deliver healthier food and encourage healthy eating. To that end, our Food Strategy White Paper will build on existing policy work such as that developed under the Agriculture Act, and the obesity strategy, to help ensure our food system delivers healthy and affordable food for all people and is built upon a resilient and sustainable agriculture sector.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of amendment 53 to the Environment Bill at report stage in the House of Lords regarding the diversity of insect life and pollination.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Decisions on pesticide authorisation are based on expert assessment by the Health and Safety Executive. The independent UK Expert Committee on Pesticides advises on novel scientific issues. Current legislation already requires that active substances and pesticide products have “no unacceptable effects on the environment … having particular regard to its impact on non-target species”, which can include impacts on bees and other pollinators.
The scientific risk assessment relies on detailed data requirements and processes, carried across from EU law at the end of the transition period. The Government will ensure that these are updated to keep in step with developments in scientific understanding. Risk assessments made for active substances are already subject to public consultation. These assessments establish the key risks posed by pesticide substances in representative conditions of use.
Protecting pollinators is a priority. The National Pollinator Strategy, developed and updated alongside many partners following thorough scientific review, identifies pressures on pollinators on which we are acting, including potential harm from pesticide use, habitat loss and fragmentation, and invasive species.
We continue making decisions on pesticides use based on scientific risk assessments, while aiming to achieve high levels of protection for people, wildlife, and the environment.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of House of Lords report stage amendment 53 to the Environment Bill, which would insert a clause on the protection of pollinators from pesticides.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Decisions on pesticide authorisation are based on expert assessment by the Health and Safety Executive. The independent UK Expert Committee on Pesticides advises on novel scientific issues. Current legislation already requires that active substances and pesticide products have “no unacceptable effects on the environment … having particular regard to its impact on non-target species”, which can include impacts on bees and other pollinators.
The scientific risk assessment relies on detailed data requirements and processes, carried across from EU law at the end of the transition period. The Government will ensure that these are updated to keep in step with developments in scientific understanding. Risk assessments made for active substances are already subject to public consultation. These assessments establish the key risks posed by pesticide substances in representative conditions of use.
Protecting pollinators is a priority. The National Pollinator Strategy, developed and updated alongside many partners following thorough scientific review, identifies pressures on pollinators on which we are acting, including potential harm from pesticide use, habitat loss and fragmentation, and invasive species.
We continue making decisions on pesticides use based on scientific risk assessments, while aiming to achieve high levels of protection for people, wildlife, and the environment.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that all (1) removal of forest and woodland cover, and (2) peat extraction, is balanced by new or replacement planting.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
The recently published England Trees Action Plan and England Peat Action Plan set out our ambitions to massively increase woodland creation, peatland restoration, and their protection and management in support of Net Zero commitments and nature recovery. This is being kickstarted using the £640m Nature for Climate Fund.
The Government has a general policy against permanent loss of woodland and tree cover, and the management and felling of trees is managed through the felling licence regime. We have developed the National Framework of Green Infrastructure Standards to help local authorities, developers and communities improve greening provisions in their areas.
The Government open habitat policy helps balancing conversion of woodland to open habitat and protection of existing woodland, to generate landscapes that provide benefits for people and wildlife for the 21st century.
There are an estimated 24 extraction licences currently in operation in England and each extraction permission already contains a condition requiring the restoration of the site at the conclusion of the permission to ensure a return over time to as near a natural state as possible. We have taken action to tackle domestic extraction of peat which includes the National Planning Policy Framework, first published in 2012. This ends the granting of licences for peat extraction on new sites or extensions to existing sites and peat extraction in England will therefore end when those remaining licenses expire. Peatland restoration has already begun on some sites.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what evidence they have received that organised and violent criminals are involved with bird trapping in Cyprus, especially in the Sovereign Base Areas.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Whilst songbirds are a protected species under both Cypriot and Sovereign Base Areas law, trapping and eating songbirds unfortunately remains a practice in some Cypriot communities, and substantial profits can still be made by those who organise and control this activity. Nevertheless, the Sovereign Base Areas Administration takes wildlife crime seriously. Those who commit offences under the Game and Wild Bird Ordinance and other legislation that protects our wildlife face significant penalties including up to three years in prison and/or a €17,086 fine.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps have been taken since 2004 to reduce, and if possible eliminate, the (1) trapping, and (2) shooting, of migrating birds in the Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus, in particular since the Larnaca Declaration of 2011.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
The Sovereign Base Areas Administration (SBAA) has a zero tolerance policy towards the trapping and killing of wild birds and continues to make significant efforts to prevent the trapping in the Eastern Sovereign Base Areas of Cyprus, using increased enforcement and denial of trapping opportunities.
The Sovereign Base Areas (SBA) Police continue to use a detect, deter and disrupt strategy against the trappers. This includes seeking improved evidence collection, using enhanced surveillance equipment, resulting in greater fixed penalty notices and/or court sentences. The programme of seizing bird trapping paraphernalia continues, as does extensive patrolling by the SBA Police during the migratory seasons.
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and BirdLife Cyprus have recognised the SBAA’s continued efforts highlighting an estimated 94% reduction in mist netting activity in 2020 compared to the baseline year of 2002.
All opportunities are taken to enhance the excellent cooperation between the SBAA, the RSPB, BirdLife Cyprus and other NGOs involved in preventing illegal bird trapping.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to consult all European countries about the reported declines in insect populations.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
The UK Government is committed to action for pollinators, globally and at home. We regularly discuss and share information on research, policy and practical activities with a number of countries, in and beyond Europe, on reported declines and how best to address them.
The UK is a member of ‘Promote Pollinators’, an international coalition of the willing, with 60 members, including countries in Europe and across the world, committed to action to protect pollinators.
We have also supported collaborative international research which has underpinned such initiatives, including a major global review of the status and threats to insect pollinators, published in 2015 by the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.
The UK continues to play a leading role in the development of an ambitious post-2020 global framework for biodiversity to be adopted at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. We will be supporting ambitious targets to bend the curve on biodiversity loss by 2030 - including in areas which will help to recover insect populations, such as ecosystem restoration and species recovery - supported by strengthened reporting and review mechanisms to help facilitate the implementation of the targets.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the evidence of the impact of urban light pollution on (1) migrating birds, (2) resident birds, and (3) astronomy; and what plans they have to reducing the adverse effects of light pollution.
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Defra has published or contributed to a range of assessments of the impact of artificial light on insects and wider biodiversity, as well as global and national assessments of the drivers of biodiversity loss more generally.
There has been no systematic research on or appraisal of the effects of urban lighting on migratory or resident birds. There is some evidence that artificial lighting can assist nocturnal feeding for some species under certain circumstances and prolong activity of birds beyond their normal periods. More significantly, there is evidence that shows strong light sources can disorient birds in flight and lead to direct mortality due to collisions with the light sources, their associated structures, and the ground.
In particular research suggests that artificial light can have an adverse effect on migratory birds’ ability to undertake long distance migrations. Birds attracted to light are not only at risk of death or injury due to collision with buildings and other structures, but are also at risk of exhaustion, starvation, or predation.
However, neither national nor global research has identified artificial light as a significant threat to UK bird populations. The UK’s recent report to the EU under Article 12 of the Birds Directive identified a medium threat to storm petrels from ‘attraction to and incineration by flares from oil platforms and rigs.
Government officials have met with relevant stakeholders including the Commission for Dark Skies but have not made an assessment of the impact of light pollution on astronomy.
The National Planning Policy Framework sets out how the possible ecological impacts of artificial light should be considered in the planning system. It makes clear that policies and decisions should limit the impact of light pollution on local amenity, dark landscapes, and nature conservation, including where there may be impacts on wildlife and ecosystems. Defra has contributed to associated guidance published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what provision they plan to make (1) in 2021, and (2) in later years, for the recruitment of seasonal workers in (a) agriculture, (b) horticulture, and (c) food-processing.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The Government knows how important seasonal workers are to our farmers and growers and to the food-processing sector, supporting the growth and prosperity of our farming, fisheries and food and drink sectors by helping to ensure that produce is picked and processed.
In 2021 and beyond, agricultural businesses will continue to be able to rely on EU nationals living in the UK with settled or pre-settled status - around 3.5 million EU citizens and their families have been granted settled or pre-settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme - and there will continue to be other flexibility in the system.
Defra has been encouraging the horticulture sector to employ domestic workers, which has been supported by the 'Pick for Britain' campaign this year. This was a joint Defra and industry initiative to support the recruitment of British workers to help with this year's harvest during the Covid-19 pandemic. We will take lessons from this campaign to help inform the future needs of the sector.
The Seasonal Workers Pilot has operated in 2019 and 2020 and allowed the recruitment of up to 10,000 non-EEA seasonal workers this year. The Pilot will run until the end of December 2020 when the new points-based immigration system will come into force. The Pilot will be evaluated ahead of any decisions being taken on how future needs of the sector will be addressed.
Asked by: Lord Hylton (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to secure a global ban on the sale of bush-meat, in particular with regard to preventing the transfer of diseases from animals to humans
Answered by Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
We remain concerned about the impact the bush-meat trade can have on endangered species. However, we are not currently seeking a blanket ban on the sale of bush-meat as a means of preventing the transfer of zoonotic diseases. It is clear that poorly managed and illegal wildlife trade (IWT) poses threats to animal health and welfare, diminishes our biodiversity, undermines governance, and can result in serious public health issues. However, well managed, sustainable trade can make important contributions to biodiversity conservation, livelihoods and wealth creation, social cohesion and cultural identity, and help meet the nutritional needs of local and rural communities in developing nations.