I thank the Minister for giving way. My noble friend raises a problem on which an attempt was made to draw a balance. It is a difficult problem. The purists would say that we should protect everything, and that that should take priority over any socio-economic factors. I do not think that my noble friend has a copy of the relevant recommendations. Recommendation 54 states: ""We do not think it is appropriate to place any set percentage for highly protected areas on the face of the Bill. However, we recommend that the Bill sets out the need to establish Highly Protected Marine Reserves, and that their contribution to the overall Marine Protected Areas network and UK biodiversity targets should be reviewed after a stated period of time"."
If you were thinking literally of biodiversity in its own right, you would not do anything, but, unfortunately, life has to be lived. A question that exercised some of us more than others concerned the feasibility of linking networks together. Some may not be linked in the way that certain people may wish. These difficult decisions will have to be taken in the future. I am trying to reinforce the point that the Minister made. I am reasonably happy with what we have at present.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Byford
(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 c682-3 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:09:33 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533765
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533765
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533765