Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]

Amendment 101ZC is part of a long group. I hope that I manage to pick up all the amendments; again, there are amendments tabled by my noble friend Lord Greaves. Amendment 101ZC to Clause 65, which is about publishing notification of applications, requires the MMO to notify the principal local authorities and the inshore fisheries and conservation authorities of applications for licences in their areas. Those who are familiar with my noble friend’s amendments will not be surprised to see a provision for involving local authorities, and quite rightly so. Councils, in my noble friend’s view and mine, should have a statutory right to information about applications being made. The Bill at present says that the licensing authority must publish notice of the application or require the applicant to do so, "““in such manner as the authority thinks is best calculated to bring the application to the attention of any persons likely to be interested in it””." No doubt local authorities and IFCs would fall within this on any common-sense point of view, but they are important statutory bodies and should not fall foul of the Government’s resistance to including statutory consultees and so on. In these days of electronic communications, it is very easy to send out e-mail lists—I am sure that noble Lords get far more notifications of all sorts of things by e-mail than they really want—and that would be a useful and easy thing to do. Indeed, local authorities often send out lists of planning applications in this way. Amendment 101BZBC is a similar amendment to require these bodies to be consulted on applications as part of the process under Clause 66. It is about a right of consultation, not just notification, so it is stronger than the previous amendment, but the underlying philosophy—the importance of these bodies—is the same. Amendment 101BZBD is also about the consultation process. Clause 66(6) provides: "““A licensing authority may by regulations make further provision as to the procedure to be followed in connection with””," various things. The amendment would add ““the consultation process””. This really amounts to the licensing authority publishing the system of consultation that it will follow, because clearly those who learn of an application, by whatever means, need to know that they can make representations, how they can make representations and so on. Amendment 101BZZB is also an amendment to Clause 66, which lists the things that the licensing authority must have regard to—I think that the Minister has referred to this list already today—including the environment, human health, preventing interference with legitimate uses of the sea and, "““such other matters as the authority thinks relevant””." The amendment to delete those words is a probing amendment, and I invite the Government to give some examples of what they think the authority might think relevant in this context. Clause 66(3) provides that the licensing authority, "““must have regard to any representations which it receives from any person having an interest in the outcome of the application””." Those words after ““person”” would be deleted by Amendment 101BZAB. Again, the amendment is probing. What is meant by ““an interest”” in this context? Mostly, in documents that have a legal effect, ““interest”” is understood to mean a financial interest, ownership, or an interest that might be affected by an application. However, does it mean having an interest in the sense of, ““This is something that we are concerned about””? In other words, is it wider? If it is the latter, surely the point could be met by the deletion of the words. I suspect that it is the former, though I hope that the licensing authority will have regard to applications wherever they come from. We have many examples of applications for development where I would certainly say that those who have a concern about a projected development have a right to be heard—I use that in the widest sense—as well as those who have a legal interest in the subject matter. I suppose that the terrestrial example in my mind is Heathrow Airport, although the Minister would counter this by saying that it should be a matter of policy. A lot of people have an interest in the land that would be the subject of development at Heathrow, but many others have a concern about it. I come to Amendment 101BZZA. When one becomes a Member of your Lordships’ House, one finds all sorts of strange customs. The lettering of amendments is among them. I could swear that it has changed since I joined this House, but maybe not.