• Replies 39 replies
  • Subscribers 96 subscribers
  • Views 5594 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Latest posts

Why do our parliamentarians so seldom speak up for birds?

Jim Wright
03/07/2023 20:51


A JOINT initiative by the RSPB and other conservation organisations seems to have fallen into disrepair.

Six years ago, parliamentarians were invited to put themselves forward to become 'species champions' - in effect, to act as guardian angels for certain creatures deemed to be under threat.

A total of just 17 (out of 650) MPs nominated birds, and, since then, the project seems to have floundered.

The list has shortened rather than lengthened, and MPs seldom speak up for birds - a notable exception being Matt Warman (Con, Boston and Skegness) who recently described his constituency, which includes the RSPB reserve at Frampton Marsh, as "one of the best in the UK both for breeding and migrating birds".

Wetlands enthusiast Mr Warman, who 'champions' the redshank (pictured), was particularly chuffed that, this summer, black-winged stilts are nesting at Frampton - the first record for Lincolnshire.

The rest of the Class of 2017 comprises:

* Jake Berry: Curlew
* James Cartlidge: Turtle dove
* Therese Coffey: Bittern
* Mark Garnier: Lesser spotted woodpecker
* Nick Herbert (now in the House of Lords): Lapwing
* Kevin Hollinrake: Puffin
* Kerry McCarthy: Swift
* Jess Phillips: Dunnock
* Rebecca Pow: Snipe
* Angela Smith (no longer an MP): Hen harrier
* Dame Caroline Spelman (no longer an MP): Willow tit
* Derek Thomas: Manx shearwater
* Kelly Tolhurst: Nightingale
* Anna Turley (no longer an MP): Little tern
* Gavin Williamson: Barn owl
* Sarah Wollaston (no longer an MP): Cirl bunting


The RSPB has its own dedicated parliamentary officer, so perhaps the time has come for the 'champions' scheme to be refreshed and revitalised.

Perhaps one MP on  this list - or the RSPB - might even establish an All Party Parliamentary Group for birds just as there is one for trees and many other subjects (including philately, women's football and professional wrestling).

  • 14/09/2023 18:58

    There are a number of MP’s and ex-MP’s of all the UK’s main political parties and also members of organisations who are members of the RSPB. An interesting question to all of you! Have you ever wondered how many Gamekeepers etc and other similar organisations are members of the RSPB. You might get a shock or surprise if you knew. I’ll say no more about. As all of you could find out as well quite easily. I’ll say no more about that. Even if asked by anyone on this community forum I won’t reply or answer any more about that subject!

    Regards,

    Ian.

  • 14/09/2023 21:43 in reply to stealthybutnotthatstealthy
    stealthybutnotthatstealthy said:
    If I became PM, my first act would be to make politicians lying a criminal offense.

    I always said you'd be good at the job, didn't I?  

    stealthybutnotthatstealthy said:
    .clearly MPs think people are beyond thick....

    Some people are beyond thick.  Some of them are in Parliament.

    Our herring gulls are red listed birds.  Think about that the next time you hear some flaming idiot calling for a cull of them.

  • 14/09/2023 22:23 in reply to stealthybutnotthatstealthy
    "If I became PM, my first act would be to make politicians lying a criminal offense."

    To become PM you first have to be elected as a MP.

    Then it would be a very long road to enacting your desire. MPs don't lie - they can be found to have misled parliament, but they cannot lie because they are "honourable".
  • 14/09/2023 22:35
    He'd have my vote.

    I know MPs are supposed to be honourable ...... but that's been considerably tainted lately.

    Our herring gulls are red listed birds.  Think about that the next time you hear some flaming idiot calling for a cull of them.

  • 18/09/2023 13:10 in reply to tuwit

    tuwit said:
    "If I became PM, my first act would be to make politicians lying a criminal offense."

    To become PM you first have to be elected as a MP.

    Then it would be a very long road to enacting your desire. MPs don't lie - they can be found to have misled parliament, but they cannot lie because they are "honourable".

    I am not referring to the play acting in House of Commons. I am referring to lying at elections, in interviews, on leaflets and in manifestos.

    Re PM needing to be elected as MP first, MP has to be selected to be elected first....and it can be taken back further than that if you would like.

  • 20/09/2023 07:45

    MP's in my opinion are overpaid and overrated public servants out to win a popularity contests, Strictly Politics, not the country. To quote someone I know, "Parliament is a Big Top of clowns, clever clowns, but not wise ones....."

    I've just been catching up on a BBC program, Laura Kuenssberg State Of Chaos. Quite early on, Phyl Rycroft, a former Public Secretary, talking about Brexit says "To deliver what ministers wanted"

    Shouldn't that be what the people wanted......

    regards

    John

  • 20/09/2023 23:16 in reply to stealthybutnotthatstealthy
    Partially based on when I sat as a juror on a (minor) court case.

    What would/could happen if a jury decided that they could not provide any judgement?

    "How do you find? Guilty or not guilty?"

    "We are sorry, your honour, but we cannot find the defendants guilty and neither can we find them not guilty. Perhaps the law is not being applied correctly?"

    I suppose the judge could 'direct' them in their judgement (I sat on one such case). The (potential) penalty for not following the judge's 'direction' being contempt of court (I seem to remember being reminded of this by the judge).
  • 20/09/2023 23:20 in reply to tuwit
    N.B. I then went on and sat as a juror on a much more serious case, and was excused from jury service for a large period of time. Not a pleasant experience.

    No aspects of what was discussed as a jury has ever been exposed. Neither have the specific cases.
  • 21/09/2023 09:35
    Making lying on manifestos (and elsewhere) a criminal offence would reduce the lying.....hopefully. Any that goes on and ends up in court, as with any criminal trial, it's 'guilty' or 'not (proven) guilty'.....if someone on the jury wants to think 40 new hospitals have been built when evidence suggests otherwise, then that's up to them and the verdict can become 'not (proven) guilty'. Judge can accept majority verdict.

    Making lying by politicians an offence is a deterrent.....that needs to happen as it's beyond a joke. Only have to listen to the last 24hrs of news....which no doubt some people won't have done but will defend.....