Asked by: Tracey Crouch (Conservative - Chatham and Aylesford)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if the Government will take steps to (a) help tackle the causes of the covid-19 pandemic, (b) advocate for a global inter country trade ban of wildlife and wildlife products at the G20 meeting in November 2020 and (c) ban the import and export of wild animals and wild animal products coming into the UK.
Answered by Baroness Prentis of Banbury
We are 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 contribute to biodiversity conservation and livelihoods, and can help meet the nutritional needs of local and rural communities in developing nations.
The UK Government is fully committed to tackling the environmental drivers of pandemics, including by reversing global biodiversity loss, tackling both unsustainable and illegal wildlife trade, and pressing for significantly higher standards in live animal markets around the world. We are actively considering the many complex issues around the global trade in wildlife, including its relationship to Covid-19 and will support swift policy interventions where these are shown to be effective in mitigating future risk of zoonotic diseases.
Asked by: Tracey Crouch (Conservative - Chatham and Aylesford)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what plans he has to ensure that recreational sea anglers are consulted on the implementation of Highly Protected Marine Areas.
Answered by Baroness Prentis of Banbury
The Benyon Review was commissioned to investigate whether and how Highly Protected Marine Areas (HPMAs) could be introduced in English waters.
The Government is considering the Review’s recommendations and has started to engage with stakeholders including recreational fishers. Since publication of the Review, Minister Pow has met the Angling Trust (14 July) and Defra officials have met recreational sea anglers (29 July) and the Angling Trust (13 August) to discuss the recommendations of the Review. Further meetings with these groups are planned for early September.
Asked by: Tracey Crouch (Conservative - Chatham and Aylesford)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to the covid-19 pandemic, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of World Animal Protection's proposal to ban the global trade in wild animals and wild animal products that are involved in non-essential global commercial trade.
Answered by Baroness Prentis of Banbury
We are 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 contribute to biodiversity conservation and livelihoods, and can help meet the nutritional needs of local and rural communities in developing nations.
The UK Government is fully committed to tackling the environmental drivers of pandemics, including by reversing global biodiversity loss, tackling both unsustainable and illegal wildlife trade, and pressing for significantly higher standards in live animal markets around the world. We are actively considering the many complex issues around the global trade in wildlife, including its relationship to Covid-19 and will support swift policy interventions where these are shown to be effective in mitigating future risk of zoonotic diseases.
Asked by: Tracey Crouch (Conservative - Chatham and Aylesford)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps he is taking to ensure that the Government’s biodiversity net gain plan is fully implemented.
Answered by Rebecca Pow
The Government is fully committed to the implementation of biodiversity net gain. We have brought forward clauses in the Environment Bill to make the achievement of a 10% gain mandatory for housing and other types of development.
Throughout the two-year transition period, we will continue to work with industry bodies to make sure that appropriate training, expertise and guidance are made available.
The Government recognises the pressure that many local planning authorities are under. The net additional cost of new burdens placed on local authorities through biodiversity net gain will be assessed and funded.
Asked by: Tracey Crouch (Conservative - Chatham and Aylesford)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps he is taking to ensure that the outcomes of biodiversity net gain are (a) monitored and (b) enforced.
Answered by Rebecca Pow
The Government’s response to the net gain consultation, which was published last year, acknowledged the importance of effective monitoring and enforcement in securing meaningful gains for nature and communities.
The Environment Bill includes provisions for a public register of habitat improvement sites. This will provide an accessible public record of habitat enhancements undertaken outside the development site. This register will, as a minimum, detail the location of compensation sites, how many units and of what habitat types are created, and the planning reference of the development to which the units relate.
For delivery of habitats within development sites, planning application data is routinely published by local authorities and will provide key information about how new developments will achieve biodiversity net gain.
The Government does not propose to introduce new enforcement mechanisms for net gain; existing enforcement mechanisms in the planning system will be used. The exception to this is where habitats are secured by conservation covenants. In these cases responsibility for monitoring and enforcement would sit with the organisation that holds the covenant.