I’ve just listened to George Eustice, the Secretary of State for DEFRA, giving an environmental speech and answering a few questions from green NGOs.
Mr Eustice is a farmer, a devoted (rather than an opportunist) Brexiteer and a Tory but he is quite an impressive act (which I’ve said before). This may partly come from the fact that he has been a DEFRA minister for a very long time (with a break when he resigned his post over Brexit on matters of principle (not principles I share but that is not the point)) and therefore has a mass of experience and plenty of practice in more or less answering the question. And Mr Eustice comes much closer, much more often, to answering the question than do most politicians. This, I think, is because he knows the answers because he is not a lazy ‘let’s just make it up’ politician, but also because he believes what he is saying (right or wrong, and whether I believe him or not). He is a straight-talking Cornishman and he comes across well.
I liked the bit where Mr Eustice said that there were too many lawyers but not enough scientists involved in nature conservation these days – I can’t imagine what he had in mind. Speaking as an ecologist, which Mr Eustice isn’t, I can tell him that if his government had not got rid of so many ecologists since 2010, and taken so little notice of them since 2010, then he wouldn’t have to spend so much time with lawyers these days. But it’s always good to get positive feedback of this sort from ministers – nothing is so encouraging as a minister who shows they are a bit rattled.
Beccy Speight (from RSPB) and Tanya Steele (WWF) responded to the minister. Beccy was nowhere near as focussed or fierce as the RSPB press release issued ahead of the event when it came to it, but Tanya was pretty clear and fairly sharp with her points.
When this government fails to deliver a better environment or the means to achieve it then we can be sure that it will not be because George Eustice is stupid or lazy (both possibilities with previous DEFRA ministers) but it will be because DEFRA is a weak department in the scale of things or because he didn’t really mean any of it. Let’s see which it is.
[registration_form]
“I can tell him that if his government had not got rid of so many ecologists since 2010, and taken so little notice of them since 2010, then he wouldn’t have to spend so much time with lawyers these days.”
Bang on, Mark.
This is the complaint of a burglar bemoaning that there are fewer locksmiths and too many cops around these days. Cognitive dissonance incarnate.
As Martin Harper just said of the SoS talk: seems like groundhog day!
George Eustice may or may not be well intentioned but sitting over the top of him are the Treasury and Boris Johnson. I have not a single element of confidence in any of them. The Tories record on wildlife protection and enhancement down the years is appalling, apart for Winston Churchill’s Government in the early 1950s and Winston was not really a Tory anyway he was very much disliked by most traditional Tories. Putting aside all the words and there are an awful lot of those, I would strongly suggest that we should not expect anything of significant benefit to nature and wildlife from this current Government. In fact the contrary is much more likely.
So, “Wild Justice” I think you need to prepare for a very busy time.
The triangulation on a new approach to land management is fiendishly challenging. That is before you factor in the politics – sadly Mr Eustice doesn’t look a good prospect for abandoning ‘farmer first’ policies. Nor has the conservation input been exactly brilliant – maybe there’s a good explanation, but I still don’t understand whybthe work of the Natural Capital Committee has been ignored: surely it is time to recognise that demands for hundreds of millions of £ always face an Everest sized uphill struggle – so why not go round the mountain and get behind 100,000 hectares of new wrtland, for example ?