I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, who was as fluent as ever regardless of whether he had the correct glasses on. He presented a very powerful argument. Although I cannot agree with every detail of the amendment, we agree with the concept of using an ecosystem approach when designating the MCZ network. We should very much like to see the Bill changed to reflect that. I hope the Minister will agree with us that the lack of a definition of what a network represents is a weakness in the Bill. I also hope that he can return with an improved drafting which seeks to define it.
We do not, however, agree with the statutory target of 30 per cent. We therefore cannot support the amendment. Setting an arbitrary target of the sea area to be covered would go against our view that MCZs should be established on a clear scientific basis and have the flexibility to respond to improving scientific research and changing circumstances on the ground. From a legislative point of view, we prefer to see an effective conservation network put in place by ensuring that duties and expectations laid upon the Secretary of State are clear.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Taylor of Holbeach
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 11 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 c1210-1 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:12:36 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_537139
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_537139
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_537139