Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

Part of the debate – in the House of Lords at 9:30 pm on 1 February 2006.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Government Whip 9:30, 1 February 2006

I am in the happy position of being able to agree with virtually everything every noble Lord has said on this amendment. This amendment would prevent—in response to the noble Earl, Lord Peel—Natural England offering training directly, and require it to commission third parties. Natural England will always seek to achieve best value for money, and I am certain that this will often lead it to buy training and many other services from specialist bodies. The noble Baroness, Lady Miller of Chilthorne Domer, referred to local authorities and their experience, and to universities and colleges of agriculture.

However, that will not always be the case. In order to further its purpose, Natural England needs to be able to use its expertise directly to help others to deliver. This clause allows, as my noble friend Lord Judd said, Natural England to run its own training courses when doing so is most cost-effective. This might be particularly appropriate, for example, in relation to the nature reserves it manages.

The existing word also sends the positive signal that Natural England will engage directly with customers and stakeholders to deliver its outcomes. I think, on the basis of the virtual unanimity around the House, the noble Baroness will feel able to withdraw her amendment.