I make no apology for the fact that this amendment may take a little time, because it concerns two matters of immense importance. The first general matter that I must ask the Government about is whether they feel that the Crown Estate’s duty to maximise its returns may be at odds with some of the other aims of the Bill; for example, with regard to the Marine Management Organisation. It will be asking the Crown Estate to take less return, for example, from a highly protected marine conservation zone than, say, from a wind farm. That is the big issue.
The amendment addresses a specific issue of enormous importance. The amendment deletes the provision by which the Crown Estate has a power under the Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act 1967 effectively to veto the granting of several regulating orders. I have very good briefing from the Crown Estate and the Shellfish Association of Great Britain. Both parties are very anxious to clarify the position that has been left following a court judgment.
I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox, will speak to this amendment so I will not dwell for very long on the huge importance of the shellfish industry to this country, save to say that its final sale value is some £900 million, of which 80 per cent is from exports. The other point that I should bring to the Minister’s attention is that the immense food value of shellfish should not be underestimated. As long ago as when Collins produced its New Naturalist series, it was pointed out that an acre of mussel bed was by a factor of thousands a more efficient way of producing protein than an acre of beef field. This is obviously not a competition, but as we think about food security it is important to safeguard the good and sustainable sources of food. I am sure that the Minister is interested to make sure that the terrible situation hanging over the shellfish industry is resolved as soon as possible.
In brief, what has happened as regards the court case is that some 10 years ago a marina developer applied for planning permission to build a marina in the Menai Strait near Anglesey. The foreshore belongs to Anglesey council and the sea bed to the Crown Estate. The grantees of the fishery order, the regional sea fisheries committee, claim that the development would be illegal, and the two landowners, despite their respective saving provisions in the order, have no right to allow the development to proceed. That area is, I gather, subject to a 60-year lease in terms of the shell fishery.
Faced with this claim, the council and the Crown Estate instigated declaratory proceedings to determine their rights. The case has been through its initial court proceedings and the Appeal Court. The appeal is awaiting judgment. The difficulty is that the Crown Estate as a result has felt that it has been unable to consent to any new or renewal orders anywhere else around our coasts, because the problem is that if it consents unconditionally to the orders, it may not, in light of the present judgments, be afforded the protection of the saving clause. If the Crown Estate puts conditions on the consent, in the view of Defra, which makes the order, this would render the consent non-compliant with the legislation; so the Crown Estate would fail in its duty to maximise returns, Defra cannot do anything about it, and meanwhile the shellfish industry is suffering enormously.
The one thing that a shellfish industry needs in order to develop and continue is certainty. It is quite stunning how much work it takes to get an order; it can take several years, it is very expensive and a number of conditions have to be fulfilled—a five-year management plan must be produced, the proposals must be advertised and any significant objection will provoke a public inquiry. The applicant has to pay for all this and the whole process can take up to two years. The Crown Estate says that it can give temporary permission for a period, which has increased from six months to two years, but the process of applying for an order is more than two years, and then the development of the bed can take decades until the operation becomes satisfactory.
It is for that reason that I move the amendment. The amendment would effectively take the Crown Estate out of the loop of the order granting; it would prevent it having the duty to have a veto over the order in this situation. It is a problem that the Bill could solve. It desperately needs to be solved as otherwise the shellfish industry will very shortly be on its knees. I hope that the Government will be able to use the Bill as a vehicle for solving this very difficult situation. I beg to move.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 16 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
709 c100-2 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:11:46 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_538804
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_538804
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_538804