We all recognise that a lot of different interests will come to the fore in the development of any marine plan. The intention is that the process will allow for widespread engagement of those with an interest as the plan is developed. The marine plan authority has to have regard to various representations made throughout the preparation of the plan and the public consultation. That is all there to be done. For that reason I should have thought it a perfectly sensible proposition that the aim all along is to reach a strong consensus.
If the participants know that whatever work is done to achieve a consensus it then has to go through another process of an independent examination, it might lead to their not working quite so hard to achieve consensus. As I said, the construct of the Bill is an attempt to encourage consensus. If it turned out, alas, in the preparation of each plan, however many are developed, that consensus had failed to be reached on strong, substantial issues in each of them, the Bill allows for an independent examination to take place.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 February 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
708 c28 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:53:23 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530650
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530650
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530650