Government considering scrapping wildlife protection laws?

[APC]

Originally Posted by eeyore

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not saying scrap it, but it could do with a serious rewrite and simplify, and some of the older acts which have been superceded could be struck from the statute ledger without effecting the situation on the ground one jot or tiffle.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

This ^ ^

[APC]

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

Stop it! Stop finding things to sign and forward!! It's becoming like some ill-informed chain letter. "It won't do any harm to send it". The harm is that there are no details on anything yet. Wait until the government announce what they are considering.

[DoraMac]

[quote=SheffieldLass;759632]

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.


SheffieldLass,

Agree with your analysis, but the problem with the Regulations is that they are products of secondary legislation, Statutory Instruments, which are not subject to all the scrutinies you mention - no consultations, no parliamentary debates and the cross party committees have no powers. Not democratic in other words.

I would like to see a firming up of conservation issues through proper democratic channels ie Acts of Parliament.

However, a reasonable response to the Red Tape thing is to comment that you do not wish any changes in the law/regulations which would weaken conservation. There is no need to be conversant with all the multitude of Regulations.