Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]

These amendments, which we support, derive from the Link coalition of wildlife and environmental groups, and we are very grateful to it for suggesting them to us. The noble Baroness can be forgiven because, on the earlier list of amendments, the name of my noble friend Lord Hanningfield and not hers was attached to this one. That was a technical error, which is rare in this place, but she can be forgiven for being confused by it. We feel a great deal of sympathy for the amendments, which are designed to clarify terms used in the Bill, making them more specific and transparent. The Committee has already spent much time on marine policy statements. The Minister described an MPS as a statement that will bring together all our maritime policies, covering social, economic and environmental considerations, set out a clear and consistent framework for coastal and marine regulators and users, and help everyone to work together towards common, agreed objectives. That is no mean aspiration and, even if it might sound like motherhood and apple pie, I cannot disagree that this must be the objective. However, it is even more crucial that public authorities will be required to obey marine policy statements. If there are areas where ““relevant considerations”” can be used not to follow the marine provisions, they must be defined clearly and beyond doubt. If the marine planning statement is heralded as a truly uniting and effective document, it is necessary to ensure that marine plans will not be out of sync with it and that public authorities will be unable to disregard the appropriate marine policy statements without due cause as defined in the Bill. We understand the Government’s desire for flexibility. Does the Minister not agree that too much room for manoeuvre will just mean that the Marine and Coastal Access Bill will not be as powerful or as effective as it could be? Does he not share a concern that ““relevant considerations”” could be exploited by those in a marine planning area who would like to be exempt from the MPS or by a public authority that does not want to act in accordance with a marine policy document? To this end, we also support the production of guidance about the sort of relevant considerations that would allow marine plans not to follow the MPS.