I turn to the question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Taylor. His amendment would introduce a requirement on the licensing authority to consult transport infrastructure providers that may be affected by a marine licence application He mentioned Network Rail in particular. We have already talked in previous debates about statutory consultees and I have given our reasons for not wanting to have a list. However, he raises a very interesting and important point and I hope to give him the reassurance he requires. I certainly accept that the nature of geological, coastal and estuarine issues and marine processes mean that works at one location on the coastline can have long-term effects many miles away. It is clearly important that the owners of rail infrastructure are consulted on applications that might not be in the immediate vicinity, but I can assure noble Lords that this is something that we envisage licensing authorities doing on a regular basis and I want to reassure the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, that we will make that clear through guidance, because he has raised an important point.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 3 March 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 c621 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:53:20 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533616
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533616
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533616