To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the adequacy of legal protections for ancient trees; and whether further measures, including stronger penalties, are needed to prevent their unlawful destruction.

My Lords, felling trees without a licence where one is required carries unlimited fines and a potential prison sentence, and those protections are underpinned by a robust enforcement regime. In addition, ancient and veteran trees benefit from the highest levels of protection within the planning system. Any loss or deterioration should be refused unless there are wholly exceptional reasons. We recognise the importance of this issue and are reviewing these protections to ensure that they remain effective.

I thank the Minister but, under the Forestry Act 1967, the destruction of the Whitewebbs oak in Enfield—still alive at the time—required an application to the Forestry Commission for a felling licence, which was never sought. The commission concluded that no felling licence was required due to legitimate exemptions, meaning that no criminal offence had occurred. But a BBC freedom of information request revealed that the assessment made by the commission’s investigator recommended that no such exemption could legitimately be applied in this case. My understanding is that the Forestry Commission ignored this, simply because the outdated legislation gives it no teeth to adequately protect ancient trees. Will the Government amend the Forestry Act 1967 to explicitly define a higher evidence bar for exempting any ancient tree-felling from licence?

I recognise the situation that the noble Baroness describes, and the Government recognise that we need to look at whether there is more we can do to protect trees. Defra has funded a report, led by the Tree Council and Forest Research, to provide a range of recommendations for improving the protection and stewardship of important trees. We are currently looking at those recommendations, but we will also set out actions to support and protect important trees in the new tree action plan, which we are looking to publish before the end of the year. We are absolutely cognisant of the reasons why more needs to be done.

Is the Minister aware of any rules that control the felling of trees in conservation areas? There seems to be a spate of councils cutting down trees that are much loved by the local community in conservation areas of towns and villages. Is this something she could look at?

I am very happy to look at it. Usually, the local authority will give an order for a tree to be cut down if there is a reason to be concerned about safety. I have an interest in this, as we have just had an order from our local council regarding several ash trees on our land overlooking the road. I am happy to look into it, but usually there is a safety aspect to those orders.

My Lords, the report out today from the Woodland Trust makes the interesting point that there is a 15-degree reduction when standing under a tree, compared with standing out in the open air or on the pavement, and 11 million people live in the equivalent of tree deserts. I know that the Government have a good tree-planting programme. Can the Minister update the House on how that programme is going, and on how quickly enough trees will be planted to make a material difference to lives in, for instance, the heat tomorrow?

The noble Baroness is right that the shade provided by trees is important, not just for human health but for animal health, for livestock and so on. As I mentioned in my Answer to the noble Baroness’s Question, we are looking at the tree action plan, which we will publish by the end of the year, and I will ensure that the concerns around climate change and increasing temperatures are looked at as part of that.

My Lords, is the Forestry Commission case that was cited not further evidence of commissions and quangos ignoring the intentions of Parliament, and indeed the wishes of the public, and being toothless in the face of gross abuses? Is it not time that government departments and Ministers took back control so that perpetrators can be held accountable and the public’s voice can be effectively heard?

The Forestry Commission reports to Defra, to my colleague Mary Creagh MP. I know that she has been working very hard to ensure that the kinds of issues my noble friend talks about are better taken into account, including how the commission manages its estates, the kind of trees that are planted and how to bring in proper enforcement where required.

My Lords, there is a greater problem in incentivising land managers to plant enough of the right trees to protect our watercourses, promote nature recovery, sequester carbon and increase our timber self-sufficiency from the current 27%. Properly planned planting that complies with UK forestry standards can meet all these objectives. What actions are the Minister’s Government taking to increase the percentage of productive tree species planted in England? I refer the House to my registered interest as a forest developer and owner.

The tree action plan and the tree planting that Defra is encouraging are about commercial timber as well as woodland planting for leisure or other requirements. We import far too much of our timber at the moment; it is better for sustainability that we plant our own. But everything has to be planted in the right place, we need the right kind of species and, importantly, we need to look to the future, because climate change will change which species will be viable for the long term.

My Lords—

My Lords—

My Lords—

It is the turn of the Lib Dem Benches.

My Lords, I am happy to hear from the Minister that the recommendations will result in the tree action plan by the end of this year, but will she bear in mind that there are no protections for trees that do not have tree preservation orders? By the time people realise those trees are under threat, it is too late: they have come down.

We are looking at those exact protections as part of what we are doing to better protect trees going forward. As part of that, it is also important that we look at how, within the planning system, we support the trees that need to be supported, and at how we ensure that, where trees are felled, the right species are replanted in the right place to make the difference that we need to see if we are to plant trees as part of our climate change strategy.

My Lords—

My Lords—

It is the turn of the Cross Benches, then the noble Baroness.

My Lords, having just turned 80, I declare an interest in the preservation of ancient trees.

Oh!

That aside, seriously, we have more ancient oaks in England than the rest of Europe put together. Last year, a government-sponsored review found that the current legal protections are insufficient to protect our important trees and recommended a review of current legal frameworks and enforcement mechanisms to ensure their protection. Can the Minister reassure the House that the England tree action plan currently in development will include commitments to adopt the recommendations made by this review, including the need to reform TPOs?

As I mentioned previously, we are looking to bring out the new recommendations on trees by the end of the year. The review is really important. I think it is particularly important for oaks, because our native oaks are threatened by climate change and we really need to think about how we are going to protect them better for the future, but also to look at what oak species we need to consider planting if our temperatures are going to continue to rise, as we have all experienced this week.

My Lords, that plan will of course be too late for the Major oak in Sherwood Forest, a 1,200 year-old tree that it was announced just this week has died. That was put down to a mixture of tourism, climate change and historic bad management. It is too late for that tree, which is as old as the Greensted church in Essex—it was a sapling when that church was being built. The church has grade 1 listing, enormous protection. Should we not afford these so rare and important ancient trees a similar level of protection as buildings of the same kind of age?

The noble Baroness makes a very important point, but I think one of the reasons that tree sadly died was because it was so very, very, very, very old. Trees do not live for ever, but I take her point about protections.

My Lords, can the Minister confirm whether the Sycamore Gap tree felling was the result of a TikTok challenge?

As somebody who does not look at TikTok, I have absolutely no idea.