Some of the most important amendments to the Bill are contained in this group. I agree with the noble Earl, Lord Cathcart, that we have come to the crunch point—in a different sense from the economic crunch. The relationship between the MMO and the IPC is absolutely crucial. Had we had the marine Bill before the Planning Bill, I believe that most of the contents of these amendments would have been contained within that marine Bill and that the Planning Act would be a somewhat different Act of Parliament from what it is.
The wording of these amendments is very apposite. I can see that the will to drive through the targets for renewable energy impact on both the Planning Act and this Bill. We have not got the balance right between conservation and the production of renewable energy. I believe that the Planning Act could have taken care of part of this without forgoing the importance of conservation. If the MMO were the lead body, which I believe it most definitely should be, there is nothing wrong in it having due regard to the importance of climate change. This is a very important debate and I hope that the Minister will respond sympathetically to the point, which I am sure will be made by others shortly.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Livsey of Talgarth
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c59 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 00:05:27 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530701
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530701
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_530701