Asked by: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government under what arrangements vessels of other EU member states fish in the UK's Exclusive Economic Zone between the 12 and 200 nautical mile limits; and by what process those arrangements could be terminated.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Under the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy regime vessels from EU Member States have access to fisheries in the UK’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) between the 12 and 200 nautical mile limit. When it leaves the EU, the UK will control access to fisheries in its EEZ and will manage its waters in accordance with international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Asked by: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government under what arrangements vessels of other EU member states fish in UK waters between the six and 12 nautical mile limits; and by what process those arrangements could be terminated.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
Under Article 5 (2) of Council Regulation 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, and the 1964 London Fisheries Convention, vessels from Belgium, Germany, France, Netherlands, Denmark and the Republic of Ireland have access to fish in the UK’s six to twelve nautical mile zone.
In order to withdraw from the London Convention signatories must give two years notice
Asked by: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have instigated, or are aware of, measures that prevent the sending of sporting trophies, such as deer horns, to Switzerland or the US.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The export of sporting trophies to the USA and Switzerland is possible in principle. Each consignment would have to comply with import conditions imposed by those countries. Any consignment would also have to comply with EU animal by-product regulations relating to the provenance, condition and treatment of the material.
Asked by: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they support the decision of the United Nations Human Rights Committee that a ban on subsistence hunting, where hunting is an "essential element in the culture of the community", violates Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Answered by Lord De Mauley
The UK Government is fully committed to promoting and protecting human rights for all individuals, including indigenous people, without discrimination on any grounds. We continue to work overseas and through multilateral institutions to improve the situation of indigenous people internationally, and have long provided political and financial support to the economic, social and political development of indigenous peoples around the world.
We regard the General Comments and Decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee as valuable guidance for all State Parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). We do not, however, consider that they are legally binding and have therefore made no assessment of whether a ban on subsistence hunting breaches Section 27 of the ICCPR.
Asked by: Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the United for Wildlife's follow-up to the London Conference on the Illegal Wildlife Trade, what representations they are making to ensure that subsistence hunters are not being criminalised or evicted from their lands in the name of conservation.
Answered by Lord De Mauley
We have not made any specific representations on this issue.
The UK is one of the global leaders in the response to the illegal trade in wildlife. At the London Conference on the Illegal Wildlife Trade held in February 2014 more than 40 Governments committed to action designed to strengthen law enforcement, reduce demand and support alternative livelihoods of communities affected by poaching and trafficking. These Governments recognised the illegal trade in wildlife as a major barrier to sustainable, inclusive and balanced economic development that damages ecosystems, undermines good governance and the rule of law, threatens security, and reduces the revenue and local benefits earned from economic activities such as wildlife‐based tourism and the sustainable utilisation of and legal trade in wildlife. They recognised that sustainable livelihoods will be best supported by engaging with communities living in and around protected areas to reflect their needs alongside those of local wildlife.
We welcome the leadership of the Botswana Government in hosting the Kasane Conference on Illegal Wildlife Trade on 25 March as a follow-up to the London Conference.