Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]

I have much sympathy with what the noble Baroness has said and understand why she wants in the Bill reference to the public interest in the marine environment. However, I am worried about that and want to explain briefly what my worries are. I regard the primary purpose of the Bill to be the establishment of marine reserves. I hope that nothing is done during the passage of the Bill that weakens that primary objective. It is urgent that we press on with the establishment of marine reserves. If we try to make the MMO an organisation that satisfies every conceivable side-interest that could become involved in marine activity, we may end by weakening our principal objective. I know that it is important that we consider the impact of renewable energy, of dredging and of public enjoyment of the marine environment—all matters about which the noble Baroness spoke—but we must consider their impact on the establishment of marine reserves to try to rescue from extinction many species of fish and marine animal life, which are now placed at real risk. The biodiversity policy officer of the Marine Conservation Society stated in a report in the Daily Telegraph of 9 December: "““We have dithered while Rome burns. Marine reserves are a cost-effective way to achieve benefits for wildlife and the fish species that rely on habitats are being protected for the long term””." That is so vital and so important that I hope that nothing that happens during the passage of the Bill will detract from our pursuit of that objective.