A switched-on MSP has recognised the importance of the Hen Harrier Framework report and its relevance to the current WANE Bill debates, and has raised formal questions in the Scottish Parliament about its delayed publication.
On December 21st 2010, MSP Peter Peacock (Labour: Highlands & Islands) lodged the following two written questions:
To ask the Scottish Executive what the (a) timetable and (b) launch date is for the publication and promotion of the hen harrier conservation framework report by the Scottish Raptor Monitoring Scheme partnership;
To ask the Scottish Executive whether the contents of the hen harrier conservation framework report have been made available to the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee and, if not, whether the report will be published before the Parliament has completed consideration of the Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Bill.
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/businessBulletin/bb-10/bb-12-22e.htm
Parliamentary questions can be asked by any MSP to the Scottish Government/Executive. The questions provide a means for MSPs to obtain factual and statistical information from the Scottish Government. Written questions must be answered within 10 working days (20 working days during recess). Peter Peacock’s questions are due for answer on Thursday 27 January 2011.
Peter Peacock is no stranger to the WANE Bill, as he is a member of the Rural Affairs & Environment Committee (the committee tasked to consider the finer details of the proposed Bill). He has emerged as one of the leading MSPs trying to introduce measures to ensure that those responsible for illegal raptor persecution are brought to justice for their crimes. He obviously recognises that the information contained within the Hen Harrier Framework report could have a strong influence on the outcome of these proposed measures. The report is alleged to contain “damning evidence” about hen harrier persecution in Scotland and its link to grouse moors – evidence that might just persuade MSPs that the time for strong action against these criminal activities is long overdue.
Unsurprisingly, there have been no calls of concern over the delayed publication of the Hen Harrier Framework report from groups with an interest in game shooting. Is it because they already know the extent of the “damning evidence“, and know that the release of this evidence will weaken their stance as they try to oppose measures such as vicarious liability or estate licensing? Below is a link to a news report from The Independent dating back to 2003, where Scottish Gamekeeper’s Association Chairman Alex Hogg seeks licences for gamekeepers to kill hen harriers. But not all hen harriers, of course, only those that are considered to be “problem” birds. The difficulty here is that many gamekeepers consider ALL hen harriers to be “problem” birds (because they eat red grouse and pheasants) – and they’ll kill them whether they have a licence to do so or not – as the contents of the Hen Harrier Framework report will show. Interesting also to note that in 2003 the Scottish Government introduced “tough new legislation to arrest and imprison anybody who poisons, traps or shoots birds of prey“. Nearly eight years later, how effective has that “tough new legislation” been? I’d say totally ineffective, given the pitiful sentences handed out by Sheriffs to people convicted of such crimes.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/gamekeepers-want-to-kill-birds-of-prey-598863.html



