Asked by: Chris Hinchliff (Labour - North East Hertfordshire)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she has plans to implement the RSPB's Action Plan for Curlew published April 2025.
Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
This Government is committed to recovering our threatened native species, such as curlew, and we welcome the UK Curlew Action Plan which sets out actions which will drive recovery of the species in the UK. Defra officials are carefully considering the Plan’s proposals for action across the six key areas identified and, with Natural England (NE) colleagues, we will continue to engage with the Curlew Recovery Partnership to understand how we can support delivery of the Plan.
We are however, already taking action to support recovery of this species. Agri-environment schemes are providing funding to deliver habitat for wading birds such as curlew. Countryside Stewardship Higher Tier and the Sustainable Farming Incentive include actions for the management of key habitats used by curlew, including wet grasslands, hay meadows and moorlands. Countryside Stewardship Higher Tier also pays for additional support for threatened species that can fund tailored actions to benefit curlews such as later cutting dates in silage fields. In addition, many of the Landscape Recovery projects currently in development aim to implement targeted actions to support curlews.
Furthermore, through their Species Recovery Programme, NE have funded projects to identify causes of decline and are trialling conservation measures to benefit curlew.
The Joint Nature Conservation Committee is co-ordinating the African Eurasian Waterbird Agreement’s (AEWA) International Working Group for Curlew. The group aims to deliver AEWA’s International Single Species Action Plan for the Conservation of the Eurasian Curlew, and to co-ordinate action across the flyway to restore the conservation status of the curlew.
Asked by: Chris Hinchliff (Labour - North East Hertfordshire)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what assessment his Department has made of whether chalk streams are an irreplaceable habitat.
Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 94314 on 3 December 2025.
Asked by: Chris Hinchliff (Labour - North East Hertfordshire)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what plans the Government has to help ensure that local communities receive long-term economic benefits from new AI and data centre developments.
Answered by Kanishka Narayan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
TechUK estimate that the gross value added of data centres is currently £4.7bn in the UK. This government encourages data centre developers to consider the local benefits that data centre build can bring, especially in areas with favourable conditions for heat offtake, or where skills and training can be provided. Last year, the government reformed the National Planning Policy framework to ensure that local planning authorities integrate data centres into an area’s local plan, ensuring alignment with local and national long-term economic goals.
Through the AI Growth Zones initiative, we aim to crowd-in tens of billions of pounds in private investment and drive growth through job creation and by creating opportunities such as creating skills and apprenticeships pathways, R&D partnerships with local universities and creating investment opportunities for British businesses to participate in major AI projects.
We are ensuring that local communities benefit by providing £5m for each AI Growth Zone to support skills and adoption in the area, and by ensuring that local authorities keep 100% of all business rates generated by sites where pre-existing arrangements do not exist.
Asked by: Chris Hinchliff (Labour - North East Hertfordshire)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the answer of 3 December 2025 to 94315, whether planned changes to the Protection of Badgers Act would permit the killing of badgers solely for development purposes.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The changes to the Protection of Badgers Act (PoBA) effected by the Planning and Infrastructure Bill would permit licences for the purpose of preserving public health or safety or for reasons of overriding public interest, to kill or take badgers, or to interfere with a badger sett, within an area specified in the licence. This purpose is derived from the list of eligible purposes for an exemption under the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, with which any species mitigation licence must comply. It is also consistent with similar provisions for other protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.
Overriding public interest can be used to mean development and infrastructure activities but can accommodate other activities such as maintenance or repair work.
Licences that permit the killing of badgers are already available for other purposes, such as scientific or educational purposes, preventing the spread of disease, or preventing serious damage to land, crops, poultry or other form of property.
This provision will be subject to strict safeguards, as the Government is also legislating that any licence issued under the PoBA must meet the strict tests required by the Bern Convention: that there is no other satisfactory solution and that the grant of the licence is not detrimental to the survival of any population of badgers. Killing badgers would therefore remain exceptional, only permissible under strict conditions, and would not become routine for development purposes.