Investigating the Oceans

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his use of the word "assiduousness". I will dig in and ensure that I fulfil that role determinedly. It is right that whether we are talking about the Marine and Coastal Access Bill, reform of the common fisheries policy, or our international and European obligations under habitats directives and so on, we must move ahead, as my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Blackley (Graham Stringer) said, with special areas of conservation, special protection areas and so on. That must be underpinned by the best available science and evidence, because that provides the basis on which to argue the pros and cons, and the way forward, and to obtain genuine ownership from all stakeholders on how to proceed on the marine environment. At the start of the evidence to the Committee last year, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State was very clear about the importance of marine science in helping us to understand the huge challenges facing society, such as climate change, and in providing evidence to shape policy responses. My new role as ministerial champion emphasises the continuing importance that we attach to marine science. A prime example of the importance of science to policy is underpinning initiatives that will be taken forward through the Marine and Coastal Access Bill. I welcome the comments of the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert) on that Bill, which has certainly taken longer in the other place than anticipated. I recognise that the other place has a scrutiny role, and we look forward to the Bill coming to this place to probe, strengthen and modify it, but we will not delay it unduly. It has had five, six or more years of pre-legislative scrutiny and we must put it on the statute book so that we can move on and put into place the sort of framework for the marine environment that we all want. We have spoken, and I have spoken to colleagues of the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Carmichael) who will, I hope, lead for the Liberal Democrats, to see how we can jointly work together to scrutinise the Bill, but also to deliver it in a timely fashion so that the Marine Management Organisation is up and running, and so on. The Bill is in Committee in the other place, as hon. Members know. It has received considerable scrutiny and attention in the past 12 months, and it has helped to raise the profile of marine issues. In my role as a marine champion, marine science is important and the Bill shows our commitment. We have stated that the Bill's implementation will need a significant amount of evidence based particularly on marine science, and I shall come to the MMO in a moment. The marine strategy will help to deliver our vision for clean, safe, healthy and productive seas, and the MSCC will bring the available scientific evidence from across the UK together in a comprehensive body of evidence. I will flesh that out in a moment. DEFRA is funding about £37 million of marine science research in 2009-10, which makes the UK not the largest, but one of the largest funders of marine science in Europe. We are providing more than £600,000 over 18 months for the Marine Science Coordination Committee secretariat, which shows how committed the Government are and how committed I am as the champion in this area. Mention has rightly been made of the quality of our expertise in marine science in the UK, and we must retain that. The estimated number of people employed in marine science in the UK in 2000—I do not have more up-to-date figures—is about 2,200 researchers at the cutting edge of marine science in all its complex and different areas. We must identify gaps in the strategy, where there could be better co-ordination, and where there is overlapping so that we can make the best use of that research base most cost-effectively. I shall return to that. I was delighted to announce that the home of the MMO will be Tyneside. I know that there were different views on where it should be located, and I know that some of those views strongly suggested Plymouth, Liverpool and elsewhere. I also know that the people involved in the academic and marine sectors in Newcastle were a little surprised at the suggestion, implicit or otherwise, that they may not have been the best for the job. Let me make clear the difference between the MMO and the marine science agency. Having stated our commitment to the strategy and the need to bring together and co-ordinate more effectively marine science which will underpin much of the MMO's work, it is critically a marine planning, implementation, enforcement and strategic body. It must make its decisions on the best available evidence, whether from the huge centres of excellence in Plymouth, in Liverpool, in Southampton, or—the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland rightly made this point—in the centres of expertise in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and elsewhere. It is not critical that the MMO lives at the centre of the science, because the science is dispersed. I am sorry, but I forgot to mention the Government-funded Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science and the Scottish equivalent. What is vital—this will be clear in the way in which the MMO and its shadow organisation leading up to it are set up—is that the MMO will be charged with building intricate links with the best science bases in the UK and, sometimes, elsewhere, so that its decisions are based on all the best science. Part of the strategy that we are taking forward alongside that is to ensure that all the academic institutions, commercial institutions and others are better co-ordinated to support it. In a moment, I shall come to issues about the Crown estate, which were rightly raised, and about how we share experience and data.