Government considering scrapping wildlife protection laws?

[Red Robin]

Originally Posted by SheffieldLass

If you don't want to use the 38 degrees website on this you can always use the RSPB one instead

The RSPB: Campaigns

....Out of curiosity, why would someone not want to use the 38 degrees website?

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by RKB

All they are doing is asking people to suggest which bits of red tape interfere with their lives the most ....

That is precisely the problem with it. The regulations have been brought in over time for protection of the public/general good, which is more important than, and should be put above individual interests. This 'red tape challenge' is looking at it from the side of individual/industry interests and not from the side of the public good. The use of the term 'red tape' is a derogatory term and devalues and distracts attention from the purposes of the regulations (and, in my view, has been deliberately chosen for that reason).

Quite frankly I have greater faith in parliamentary procedure (debate, scrutiny, cross-party commmittees etc) that took place before the regulations were made statute, than in a 'consultation' that is heavily skewed to receiving the views of vested interests that may have much to gain from the scrapping of legislation/regulation, rather than those who may lose out, those people and things (like the environment) that are receiving some protection under the regulations.

How many of the general public are going to look at the 21,000 regulatory statutes that are on the governement's scrap list (many of which will be protecting them) and comment on them? Whilst the 'general' ones such as equality and the high profile ones such as environmental protection will get some response, thanks in part to the likes of 38 degrees, RSPB, etc bringing the whole 'red tape challenge' to our attention, the responses to the industry specific regulations will be dominated by those from the specific industrial sectors.

I go to the dentist. Will I bother to look to see what their regs are about and comment on them? I have to listen to the icecream van's jingles, and may occasionally buy an ice cream from them, but will I comment on their regulations? And so on, for all 21,000 of them .... I very much doubt it. It is quite clearly a rigged consultation, and I fear more than a bit of political PR froth.

[PMG]

Originally Posted by SheffieldLass

That is precisely the problem with it. The regulations have been brought in over time for protection of the public/general good, which is more important than, and should be put above individual interests. This 'red tape challenge' is looking at it from the side of individual/industry interests and not from the side of the public good. The use of the term 'red tape' is a derogatory term and devalues and distracts attention from the purposes of the regulations (and, in my view, has been deliberately chosen for that reason).

Quite frankly I have greater faith in parliamentary procedure (debate, scrutiny, cross-party commmittees etc) that took place before the regulations were made statute, than in a 'consultation' that is heavily skewed to receiving the views of vested interests that may have much to gain from the scrapping of legislation/regulation, rather than those who may lose out, those people and things (like the environment) that are receiving some protection under the regulations.

How many of the general public are going to look at the 21,000 regulatory statutes that are on the governement's scrap list (many of which will be protecting them) and comment on them? Whilst the 'general' ones such as equality and the high profile ones such as environmental protection will get some response, thanks in part to the likes of 38 degrees, RSPB, etc bringing the whole 'red tape challenge' to our attention, the responses to the industry specific regulations will be dominated by those from the specific industrial sectors.

I go to the dentist. Will I bother to look to see what their regs are about and comment on them? I have to listen to the icecream van's jingles, and may occasionally buy an ice cream from them, but will I comment on their regulations? And so on, for all 21,000 of them .... I very much doubt it. It is quite clearly a rigged consultation, and I fear more than a bit of political PR froth.

Well said - thats it in a nutshell
Pauline

[darrenm]

maybe in these cash strapped times the Government feels if it downgrades, amends or abolishes environmental legislation and calls it red tape enough of the public will be convinced they are doing a good thing and then they can sell off OUR Nature reserves to American Billionaires to turn into Golf Courses....but that would never happen would it

[PMG]

Originally Posted by darrenm

maybe in these cash strapped times the Government feels if it downgrades, amends or abolishes environmental legislation and calls it red tape enough of the public will be convinced they are doing a good thing and then they can sell off OUR Nature reserves to American Billionaires to turn into Golf Courses....but that would never happen would it

and thats another nutshell for me - well said - I think thats exactly what they are doing - and most of the public will be fooled cos they think that what is outside doesn't matter ........

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by darrenm

maybe in these cash strapped times the Government feels if it downgrades, amends or abolishes environmental legislation and calls it red tape enough of the public will be convinced they are doing a good thing and then they can sell off OUR Nature reserves to American Billionaires to turn into Golf Courses....but that would never happen would it

thing is - as trumpton demonstrated , the current wildlife laws dont stop them doing that anyway - things like that are controlled by the (fairly weak) planning process which isnt part of the "redtape" consultation.

it also strikes me that the guvmint can't win because they were panned on the forestry sell off for not consulting the public - and nowe they are being panned for consulting the public.

and finally anyone who thinks the current wildlife legislation isnt overly complex and bureaucratic has probably never experienced the joy of trying to enforce it

I'm not saying scrap it, but it could do with a serious rewrite and simplify, and some of the older acts which have been superceded could be struck from the statute ledger without effecting the situation on the ground one jot or tiffle.

The really silly thing is that most of the people getting hot under the collar probably dont actually know what all the provisions of the WCA 1981 (and amended 1985) are and may never have read it.

And that is why I dont trust 38 degrees - they are opposed to the government on political grounds and therefore it is their political motivation to oppose goverment policy by whipping up the public - If Mr Cameron wanted to strengthen wildlife legislation, or the planning process etc we would probably see a 38 deg campaign to stop him on the grounds it was eroding civil liberties.

[darrenm]

Why are the RSPB getting 'Hot under the collar'?...... or are they totally missguided too??? OR are they part of yet another 'left wing conspiracy' to undermine and overthrow this goodly government who have all of our interests at heart really and are just missunderstood.

I doubt most Government ministers will have read the WCA unlike a lot of people here have.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by darrenm

Why are the RSPB getting 'Hot under the collar'?...... or are they totally missguided too??? OR are they part of yet another 'left wing conspiracy' to undermine and overthrow this goodly government who have all of our interests at heart really and are just missunderstood.

I doubt most Government ministers will have read the WCA unlike a lot of people here have.

I didnt say that those who oppose scrapping the laws were misguided - the point is that this is a consultation and the rspb (who are apolitical and motivated by their mission) are rightly motiovating people to ensure that they respond to the consultation

38 degrees meanwhile have a political mission - no one said that they were trying to overthrow the government, but if you dont believe that they are motivated by politics - ask yourself where they were when the previous government was busy commiting environmental sins - It was the RSPB mfor instance who put the kybosh on Dibden bay container terminal.

and i'm not naive enough to trust this government - but I dont mistrust them anymore than I did the brown/blair government, or the thatcher/major government before that.

All governments bear watching, but like i said above I intend to judge them on their policies and actions - not what their political oponents tell us their policies and actions are (and this would be equally true if it were a left wing govt and a rightwing campaign group)

what I meant about 'hot under the collar' tho was all the ranting about how scrapping the WCA would allow them to build on the countryside - anyone with a good grip of the current legislation would realise that it doesnt stop them from doing that anyway.

I dont believe that scrapping the WCA would be a good thing - but lets oppose such scrapage based on facts not hysteria, because the latter does nothing to help the case.

[al woodcock]

The government wants to scrap some laws that help to protect our wildlife!!

STOP the UK government scrapping the laws that protect our wildlife! | causes.com

[Red Robin]

Originally Posted by al woodcock

The government wants to scrap some laws that help to protect our wildlife!!

STOP the UK government scrapping the laws that protect our wildlife! | causes.com

....You appear to be asking people to join your cause without being at all specific about the wildlife laws which you claim are wanting to be scrapped.

With this woeful lack of information you are promoting a knee-jerk reaction which will most likely recruit only those with political motivation. Such subjects as wildlife protection really are beyond party politics and so they should be.