Well how would I know? Well apart from Tim Bonner’s oft-mentioned dislike of the European legislation, such as the Habitats Directive (drafted by arch-lefty Stanley Johnson, remember)(see here and here) and maybe from keeping an eye on what they do…
Here are three examples from two shooters, both of whom spoke in the 2016 Westminster Hall debate on banning driven grouse shooting.
First up is Bill Wiggin MP, old Etonian, who is sometimes known, I’ve always thought affectionately known, as Bungalow Bill because he hasn’t got much on top in the cranial capacity. We can see that Mr Wiggin must be a lot brighter than the nickname suggests because he earns a packet for his 8 hours a week job as a company director and gets performance bonuses too. He has an interest in Bermuda and the Caymans.
But he is also striving to make the Environment Bill better from his perspective by tabling the following amendment;
I’m looking forward to the change in government policy which will say that I may pay my income tax rather than I must – it’s only changing three letters to two letters after all. This would water down the protection of all sites of the highest nature conservation importance (in England). Did BB think this up himself or did Mr Bonner help, I wonder?
But Mr Wiggin is keen to amend another aspect of the Environment Bill, thus:
That seems odd – this is the Environment Bill, Bill, not the Pollution Bill, Bill. The Environment Agency describe phosporous as ‘the most common cause of water quality failures under the W[ater] F[ramework] D[irective] in England because it is the number one reason for water bodies not achieving good ecological status‘. But Mr Wiggin doesn’t want planning authorities to consider this issue at all… Why might that be?
Let us move on to another stalwart Tory shooter, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP. He has been thinking about the Environment Bill too, and he wants;
I’m not sure I understand all of the implications of that but I can spot that it would mean that one wouldn’t be precautionary about risks that are serious but are reversible. That would be analogous to not taking precautions about pandemics because we’ll be bound to find a way to cope with them eventually. Did Sir Geoffrey think this up by himself or did Mr Bonner have a part to play, I wonder? Whatever the answer, this would be a retrograde move.
To be fair, as always, there are three other amendments by Tory MPs and they are all, I think, rather helpful, one from Chris Grayling, one from Charles Walker and a third from Neil Parish;
[registration_form]
Bill Wiggin is a farmer and MP for a rural, predominantly farming constituency (North Herefordshire). It seems he doesn’t want Herefordshire Council to have to consider phosphate levels when they determine planning applications because 40% of the county is subject to a moratorium on new housing as a result of excess phosphate load in the River Wye and River Lugg SACs, mainly attributable to agriculture, at reported cost of £500m to the house building sector – see British Wildlife vol 32 No. 2 November 2020 (page 148) and https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/20/its-like-pea-soup-poultry-farms-turn-wye-into-wildlife-death-trap
This is a cross-border problem and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) is expected to publish a data review which is likely to show the Upper Wye has been exceeding its permitted phosphate levels for at least the last four years. As a result, NRW may soon be advising planning authorities in the Wye SAC catchment in Wales that any domestic, industrial or agricultural planning application will need to offset its phosphate impact on the river – i.e. placing Welsh planning authorities in the same situation as Herefordshire Council is now.
NRW and EA have already set new tighter controls at sewage works, and on storm discharges from sewerage systems, which Dwr Cymru Welsh Water must meet to reduce phosphate in its discharges to rivers and streams between now and 2025. Based on monitoring data gathered by the company and its regulators to inform a ‘fair share assessment’, it’s likely Dwr Cymru Welsh Water will not be required by its regulators to make further asset management investments after 2025 until and unless P inputs from other sources, principally agriculture, have been addressed.
And then there’s the vandalism inflicted on the Lugg in the Leominster area in the past week or so. All the national bodies (FC, EA, NE and the police) have an interest and can’t comment. It isn’t as if they didn’t receive a heads-up on what was going on.
Absolutely terrifying how a few little changes of words could completely remove the power of the strongest piece of nature protection we have (Bill Wiggins proposed changes to the Habitats Regulations)
Breaking news on Radio 4 Today programme 4/12 and in the Hereford Times 3/12 about the importance of environmental standards which my local MP, Bill Wiggin, will struggle to ignore …
https://www.herefordshirewt.org/news/horror-destruction-nationally-important-uk-river
Extensive damage along a 1.5km length of the river bank wiill exacerbate the phosphate and sediment levels in the river, increase downstream flood risk and cause loss of habitat for protected species (e.g. otter, crayfish, atlantic salmon, water crowfoot et al) at a time when the Wye and Usk Foundation reported 3/12 that the river is experiencing its best winter salmon spawning run for many years.
It will add to Herefordshire Council’s problems with the housing moratorium and increase pressure on the statutory agencies to prosecute and ensure the perpetrators face the full weight of current legal protections afforded to the River Lugg SAC and SSSI under the EU Habitats Directive and Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), and loss of public subsidy (BPS) under cross-compliance.
The appalling vandalism on the Lugg was all over Twatface yesterday and even made the MSM today. Looking at images of the damage I can’t even begin to imagine what it was for – someone paid good money for that rather competent levelling and bank profiling. I hope the perpetrators are taken to the Cleaners by the Powers That Be.
It seems a bit odd that no-one noticed this going on over one and a half miles until it was finished.
It was also pointed out on Twatface that similar vandalism, funded by taxes, will eventually be perpetrated over 140 miles of HS2. Or, as there is an up and a down line, 280 miles.
The damage is horrific but none of the reports explain why anyone would do this sort of damage. Why would (presumably) a landowner spend thousands of pounds bulldozing the riverbank. I am a retired ecologist and I can’t think of a sound reason for it. I can guess at unsound ones! It will interesting to see what the (hard-pressed) regulatory authorities do about this. It sounds as though a number of laws have been broken. What are the chances of anyone having their collar felt, let alone being taken to court? My prediction is that the media will have lost interest by tomorrow and we’ll hear no more about it. I hope to be proved wrong!
The regional press have been banging the canalise and dredge drum over flooding in the area for a while, I would imagine that one of the don’t trust experts/I’ll do as I please mob in the farming community probably thought they could just go ahead and fuck everyone else because they could.
Hardly surprising. These types of people that like to kill our wildlife for fun want to push the clock back to the Victorian age when any aspect of nature that is apparently in their way is either killed or bulldozed out the way. Thanks goodness for the Scottish Government and their declaration to license these wretched shooters.
They appear to be people who believe that man does live by money & bread alone and nothing higher.
And as they and their pals have got plenty of money, that’s ok isn’t it?