Senior Conservative MPs have suggested the nature watchdog Natural England should be stripped of powers in an overhaul of how it manages England’s best wildlife sites, after complaints from landowners.
Wildlife experts have said it is “outrageous” that sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs), which are some of the most important areas for nature in the country, could be “determined by politics rather than science”.
Devon Tory MPs and farmers on Dartmoor have been embroiled in a row with Natural England over its management of the SSSIs on the moor. The watchdog has said taxpayer-funded nature-friendly farming payments could be stripped from farmers who are causing SSSIs to be damaged by overgrazing. It has recommended farmers reduce their sheep stocks.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA), which represents rural landowners, told the government it was “losing confidence” in Natural England after it threatened to take away the payments from landowners in charge of failing SSSIs.
The Tory MP Sir Geoffrey Cox has called for an inquiry, saying “we need to look again at the arm’s length agencies”.
The farming minister Mark Spencer has agreed to hold an inquiry into how Natural England is managing SSSIs on Dartmoor.
During a debate in parliament last week, he said: “I pay tribute to [Cox] for the work that he has done on his plan for us to undertake, as soon as possible, an independent evidence review covering the ecological condition of designated sites on Dartmoor. I subscribe to his view. The plan is worthy of support, and I, alongside the department, will work with him, Natural England and those representatives to undertake that independent review.”
The former environment secretary George Eustice suggested Natural England’s powers could be weakened now the UK had left the EU. “I looked at arm’s length body reform during my tenure at Defra, and the truth is that the structure we have was designed for an EU era,” he said. “Many of these agencies were given powers to, effectively, implement EU law directly, and they were specifically designed to bypass democratic structures.
“It is not sensible for Natural England to have to make the decisions on SSSIs. Instead, ministers should take such decisions, having taken advice from Natural England and others, which would restore accountability.”
There are fears that this could have wider implications in cases where the financial interests of landowners may clash with Natural England’s advice for good management of SSSIs. Some fear that if ministers are in control of management they could make politically expedient decisions rather than the right choices for nature.
Nature organisations said they had feared for some time that the Conservatives had an agenda to undermine environmental institutions in favour of landowning interests.
Craig Bennett, the chief executive of the Wildlife Trusts, said: “It’s outrageous the government is even thinking right now of weakening or dismantling the very institutional infrastructure that is needed to protect and restore nature in this country.
“We have a proud tradition in Britain of trying to follow the science when trying to make policy when it comes to conservation. But we know we have some in government who would rather move to having ‘sites of political convenience’.
“This is not the time to be undermining our institutions. There have been certain sections of the Conservative party who have been thinking this for many years. It is no surprise they are willing to exploit a slight controversy happening on Dartmoor for their own political ends.”
The RSPB has branded Spencer’s decision a “dangerous and slippery slope”. Its site policy officer, Blanaid Denman, said: “As the legal regulator, Natural England must be allowed to do its job without political interference.
“The outrageous implication that favourable conservation status or appropriate management should be determined by politics, rather than science, is a dangerous and slippery slope, which would not only undermine our ability to meet domestic and international targets but leave nature the poorer.”
Richard Benwell, the chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “To meet its 2030 nature targets, the government should increase the funding available for good management of SSSIs. Land managers should be paid much better than they are now to ensure these vital places for nature are quickly restored. But it’s absolutely right that scientific experts should set the terms of those agreements for public payments, not ministers.”
Caroline Cotterell, director of resilient landscapes and seas at Natural England said: “Natural England has a crucial role to play in delivering the government’s environmental improvement plan across England. There are no planned changes to our role, powers or resources.
“As the statutory advisor and regulator of SSSIs we are working with partners towards the target of bringing 75% of protected sites into favourable condition, and use our scientific expertise when determining where new protected sites are needed. Thriving nature and sustainable farming are inextricably interlinked and we are working with farmers across the country to find solutions that work for both.
“We are working hard with farmers in Dartmoor National Park, alongside Defra and local representatives to improve the damaged SSSIs in the national park. We welcome the independent review into how, together, we can best achieve sustainable farming on Dartmoor”
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has been contacted for comment.
