The noble Baroness, Lady Carnegy, referred to Devon and Cornwall and the western approaches, which are dear to my heart. The common fisheries policy is the elephant in the room—or perhaps one should say the whale in the Jacuzzi. We clearly must cross-reference the Government’s policy with the development of the CFP. When my noble friend Lord Teverson was a Member of the European Parliament he spent a huge amount of time trying to develop the thesis that the management of the fisheries around the European Union shores should be as far as possible a matter of subsidiarity, so that those most directly affected by those fisheries should be directly effective in their management. That is why this probing amendment is so important—it deals with both consultation and implementation. If the Bill is to be a success, it is absolutely critical that those two processes go together.
The Committee deserves an explanation of how the Minister and the Government anticipate that the MCZs will be treated by EU fisheries management. Clearly it would be absurd if we tried to develop an effective degree of conservation management only to find that we were subject to quite different approaches by other member states with historic rights, either within the 12 nautical mile limit or beyond, to an extent which could completely undermine the purposes of the zones.
I support the attempt by the Conservative Members of the Committee to elicit from the Minister a statement on precisely how the Government see these two important policy objectives interrelating. If we do not get clarity there will be considerable scepticism, and, indeed, cynicism, about how best to manage these zones in the future.
The western approaches are but one area where this issue will be particularly sensitive. The noble Baroness referred to the fact that we have in the past had our fishing rights infringed by the French, Spanish and Portuguese fishing fleets; it has long been a sensitive area. I am particularly concerned that the fishing communities all around the United Kingdom, especially in the south-west, should feel that the Bill is of general long-term value in conserving fish stocks, and that it will not be undermined by the short-term approaches of other member states. That is in no way incompatible with the long-term development of the common fisheries policy, nor does it undermine the purposes of the European Union, which is attempting to devote more attention to this important long-term strategic objective.
I hope the Minister will be able to give a positive reply. Without one, there will be an important lacuna at the very centre of this part of the Bill.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Tyler
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c717-8 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:09:06 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533801
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533801
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_533801