| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Jenkin: Will the Minister give us an assurance that no secondary legislation that does not have the appropriate regulatory constraints applied to it will be delegated to the assembly?
Mr. Griffiths: Further advice has come my way. The hon. Member for West Dorset (Mr. Letwin) asked whether the assembly could decide not to have any regulatory appraisals at all. The answer is no, it could not adopt an all-embracing policy to set such matters to one side. Primary legislation governs what the assembly will be able to do, just as primary legislation governs what this Parliament is able to do.
Mr. John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings): Now that we are clear on what the assembly cannot do, will the Minister explain why there is no difference between the clauses and no discretion is provided? That is the point that he has not dealt with. He has dealt with what the assembly cannot do, but he has not said why the clauses are in the Bill, given the complete lack of discretion that they provide.
Mr. Griffiths: If the hon. Gentleman had been in the Chamber for the beginning of the debate, he would have heard me say that the Government have included in the Bill a framework for regulatory appraisal, which will make the process much clearer in the National Assembly for Wales. As the hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin) said, it is based-- It being Ten o'clock, The Chairman, pursuant to the Order [15 January] and the Resolution [this day], put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair. Amendment negatived.
The Chairman then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded at that hour.
Clause 64 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 65 to 70 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Motion made, and Question proposed,
Motion made, and Question proposed,
Motion made, and Question proposed,
Motion made, and Question proposed,
Motion made, and Question proposed,
Motion made, and Question proposed,
Amendment made: No. 282, in page 35, line 18, at end insert
'fails to comply with or'.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Clause 71, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 72 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Amendment made: No. 283, in page 36, line 26, leave out 'either'.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Clause 73, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Schedule 4 agreed to.
Amendments made: No. 390, in page 36, line 41, after 'concerned,' insert
'or such other person as may be authorised by the standing orders'.
No. 391, in page 36, line 42, at end insert
'and may administer the oath (or affirmation) to him.'.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Clause 74, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 75 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Amendment made: No. 284, in page 38, line 8, at end insert
'and shall be treated as if it were a Minister of the Crown for the purposes of paragraph 11(1)(c) of that Schedule (report of proceedings of person appointed by a Minister etc. for the purposes of an inquiry).'.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Clause 76, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 77 to 79 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
It being after Ten o'clock, The Chairman left the Chair to report progress and ask leave to sit again.
To report progress and ask leave to sit again.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Committee report progress; to sit again tomorrow.
That, at the sitting on Thursday 5th February, notwithstanding Standing Order No. 16 (Proceedings under an Act or on European Community documents), the Speaker shall put the Questions on any Motions in the name of Mr. Secretary Prescott relating to Local Government Finance not later than Ten o'clock.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Hon. Members:
Object.
That Mrs. Anne McGuire and Ms Hazel Blears be discharged from the Select Committee on European Legislation and Mr. Jim Dobbin and Mrs. Rosemary McKenna be added to the Committee.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Hon. Members:
Object.
That Mr. Huw Edwards be discharged from the Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons and Mr. David Drew be added to the Committee.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Hon. Members:
Object.
That Fiona Mactaggart be discharged from the Select Committee on Public Administration and Helen Jones be added to the Committee.--[Mr. Jon Owen Jones.]
Hon. Members:
Object.
That Mr. Alan Johnson be discharged from the Trade and Industry Committee and Mr. Lindsay Hoyle be added to the Committee.--[Mr. John McWilliam, on behalf of the Committee of Selection.]
Hon. Members:
Object.
That Ms Margaret Moran be discharged from the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and Mr. Stephen Hesford be added to the Committee.--[Mr. John McWilliam, on behalf of the Committee of Selection.]
Hon. Members:
Object.
Big Cats (Norfolk)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mr. Jamieson.]
10.4 pm
Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk): I must begin by thanking the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for attending this Adjournment debate on the subject of big cats in Norfolk. My objective in asking for the debate was to establish ministerial responsibility for monitoring big cats and to consider how we can best evaluate any evidence of the probability of big cats living in our countryside. This is a subject which, as hon. Members may know, has excited a great deal of public and media interest, especially in my constituency of Mid-Norfolk.
Over the past 20 years, there has been a steady increase in the number of sightings of big cats in many parts of the United Kingdom. These are often described as pumas, leopards or panthers. A survey carried out in 1996 claimed sightings of big cats in 34 English counties, so Norfolk's big cat has to compete with, among others, the Fen tiger, the beast of Bodmin, the Durham puma, the Nottingham lion and the cougar of Cupar. I must say that many of these sound like the nicknames of hon. Members.
Norfolk has had its fair share of sightings of big cats. Last year, Norfolk police received reports of 54 sightings of big cats from July to December, and they still receive, on average, reports of two sightings a week. In my constituency, there have been reported sightings at Dereham, Beetley, Lenwade and Crostwick, to name just a few places.
I must commend the Norfolk police who have consistently taken sightings of big cats seriously and who have attempted to monitor them. There are 36 volunteer police officers trained as wildlife liaison officers who participate in this monitoring. I must also commend two of my local newspapers--the Eastern Daily Press and the Evening News--which have taken a responsible attitude to the sightings and have genuinely sought to inform public opinion.
Many sightings have been reported in my constituency by members of the public who were out walking their dogs or driving down country roads, often at dawn or at dusk. Usually the sighting is of a big cat, frequently described as a puma or leopard. There have also been a number of incidents in which it has been claimed that ewes, lambs and horses have been attacked--and, in some cases, killed--and have received injuries more extensive than could have been inflicted by dogs or foxes. Of course, the fact remains that, despite many sightings and some superficial evidence, we do not yet have authoritative evidence that big cats are at large in Mid-Norfolk or, for that matter, in other parts of the UK.
How should we regard the sightings of big cats in Mid-Norfolk? It could be merely an extension of folklore going back to the 18th century. Perhaps Old Shuck or Black Shuck, the mythical large dog which roamed our Norfolk landscape looking for his master all those years ago, has returned to haunt his descendants--perhaps, but unlikely. Perhaps it is merely a question of farmers looking for compensation on a scale the likes of which they have never seen--perhaps, but unlikely. Perhaps our thriving tourist industry in Mid-Norfolk is looking for its
equivalent of the Loch Ness monster or the hound of the Baskervilles to attract even more tourists--perhaps, but unlikely.
Some reports are undoubtedly hoaxes. At least one recent sighting reported to the police suggested that the large cats had been brought down by the Martians, and there is always a suspicion that a few sightings may be the consequences of late-night spiritual imbibing. However, the overwhelming majority of sightings of big cats, not only in my constituency but elsewhere in the UK, have been reported by perfectly normal, rational members of the public.
I suspect that many people have not reported sightings on the ground that they would be considered eccentric, to say the least. Even if one accepts that in the majority of cases, people have genuinely mistaken large domestic cats, dogs or foxes for big cats, there is still an element of probability that, at least in some cases, there may be a big cat explanation.
A number of distinguished wildlife experts have suggested that some pumas or leopards could have been released into the countryside when the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 made it illegal to own such animals without a licence. They would have been able to roam over a wide area of countryside, live off wild or domestic animals and possibly breed. I realise that this case is not directly comparable, but I am old enough to remember as a child in Norfolk the spread of the coypu 40 years ago as a consequence of several escaping from captivity and breeding in the wild on such a scale that they threatened to destroy our river banks.
So what is to be done? How do we best establish a rational method, at national and local levels, to monitor the sightings of big cats and to evaluate the evidence scientifically? Last year, I attempted to establish ministerial responsibility and learnt from a written answer that
"The Home Office has no responsibility for monitoring the sightings of big cats"--[Official Report, 1 December 1997; Vol. 302, c. 49.]
In practice, monitoring is done very conscientiously at local level by the police. A similar question to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food produced the following reply from the Minister:
"A number of Departments have responsibilities in relation to 'big cats'. This Department is concerned with the safety of livestock, the Home Office for the safety of people and the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions for the legal keeping of such animals by, for example, zoos and circuses. These Departments co-ordinate their actions according to the circumstances of the case."--[Official Report, 2 December 1997; Vol. 302, c. 149.]
Many of us, in one way or another, are old Whitehall warriors, and that final sentence gave it away. There is obviously a certain element of pass the parcel.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |