I have great sympathy with the approach taken by my noble friend Lord Taylor of Holbeach and I understand his objective in doing so. One of the worries and anxieties that I have had derived from the original Explanatory Memorandum issued by the Government that stated in relation to subsection (7): ""Where an area contains features that are rare, threatened or declining, or forms a biodiversity hotspot, greater weight is likely to be attached to ecological considerations. Where there is a choice of alternative areas which are equally suitable on ecological grounds, socio-economic factors could be more significant in deciding which areas may be designated as an MCZ"."
I think that my noble friend put this the other way around to ensure that the interests of marine life triumph over the socio-economic factors. None the less, there is the potential here for considerable conflict, and my worry as the Bill goes on—and that worry increases—is that the Government’s position is being progressively weakened. It seems to me that, somewhere behind the scenes, powerful voices representing other interests are coming to bear on this legislation to reduce the original objective which I thought the Government had set themselves in bringing the Bill forward.
When this whole subject was being considered and marine reserves were being canvassed on and discussed in 2001, eminent marine experts considering marine reserves concluded that those reserves resulted in, ""long-lasting and often rapid increases in the abundance, diversity and productivity of marine organisms","
and that, ""full protection is critical to achieve the full range of benefits"."
I stress that last point: full protection is critical to achieve the full range of benefits. That is what persuades me to support the noble Baroness, Lady Young of Old Scone.
The Bill says that, ""the appropriate authority may have regard to any economic or social consequences of doing so"."
My noble friend has strengthened that a little further, which is a wrong step to take. I have sympathy with the views that he has expressed from the official opposition Front Bench, but the right approach is that of the noble Baroness, Lady Young. Why is it not possible for the marine environment and areas of high protection to be given the same treatment that is given on land through the medium of SSSIs? SSSIs completely exclude other activities that might damage the purpose and objective behind the creation of the SSSI. There is no question of these other factors being brought to bear. Representations can of course be made, just as they could be made in the case of areas of high protection in the marine environment. I am sure that the IPC would ensure that its voice and the interests that it will represent will be sufficiently strongly heard. In fact, an almost parallel power is given to the IPC in the representation that it has from the Marine Management Organisation membership within its own ranks to ensure that its voice is fully taken into account. I do not see why it is necessary to import socio-economic factors at this stage when we are trying to protect the marine environment.
There is a view that you can parcel up an area of the sea and allow within that area a variety of different activities that could include dredging and turbines for power generation, for example, and that somehow marine life will go on and accept these things and take them in its stride. Surely we have learnt enough already to know that that is not the case and that we need to emphasise as strongly as we can the need to protect marine life: marine flora and fauna. If that is not spelt out strongly enough, the Bill will be weakened, and, when it becomes an Act, many other voices will be heard and many other representations will be made and its whole objective will have been lost. I hope that, somehow or another, the Government will go back to their original concept and seek to give full power to the MMO to establish marine conservation zones and areas of the highest possible protection within those zones to ensure that our marine life has the opportunity to replenish and recover from centuries of depredation by mankind.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Eden of Winton
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 9 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 c1022-3 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:58:25 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_535901
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_535901
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_535901