This has been a useful debate and I thank the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, for his support on the need for clarity and my noble friend Lord Kingsland for reinforcing my questioning of the word "protecting" rather than "remedying". I thank the Minister for underlining the requirement to remedy the damage caused and for clarifying the steps necessary to bring any damage case to a satisfactory conclusion, in particular that he causing the harm must put it right. However, I know that this is a very difficult area and that it is not always possible to do that. The Minister also said that it will probably be possible to revoke the licences of persistent offenders and that, where remedial work is not possible, compensation might be necessary. I also thank him for agreeing to take back the point made by my noble friend Lord Kingsland about protecting the environment—that is, what is left of the environment—after damage has been done.
Clause 88, as amended, agreed.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Cathcart
(Conservative)
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 c657-8 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:52:03 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533705
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533705
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533705