My Lords, I will speak to other government amendments in this group as well. The amendments appear complex, but I reassure this House that nothing in them changes whether a function is devolved, or on whom it is conferred. The only effect is to classify functions as either "retained" or "devolved" for the purposes of this part of the Bill and, in particular, for deciding when the marine policy statement should influence public authority decision-making.
Since additional procedural requirements will apply to any devolved marine plan which is intended to affect "retained"—in other words, "non-devolved" functions—it is therefore important that we get the definitions right, and that they are capable of adjusting to the nuances of the different devolution settlements. Otherwise the risk is that we may find that plans could be prepared which affect UK functions without having gone through the correct procedure, or, alternatively, that we are inappropriately constraining the exercise of functions which have been devolved.
The policy which lies behind the amendments is straightforward and is unchanged from the Bill as published in draft and as introduced. If the marine policy statement has been adopted by the policy authority for a marine planning region, then it will be a "relevant marine policy document" for all decisions made by any public authority in relation to that region. Similarly, if a marine plan has been adopted for an area and the plan meets the conditions set out in Clause 57(4), then that plan will also be a "relevant marine plan document" for all decisions in relation to that area. However, the devolution settlements are different for each devolved Administration and use different terminology, which must be properly used to ensure that this Bill has the right effect in practice.
Clause 57(5) presently sets out the effect of the marine policy statement on different decisions. Amendments 91A to 91F amend the present Clause 57(5) to clarify it and insert the new terminology of "secondary" devolved functions and so on, which are used in the new clause inserted by Amendment 91N.
At the same time, Amendment 91G removes the present definition of "retained functions" in Clause 57(7) and (8). Amendment 91N inserts a new clause which defines "retained functions" by providing that all functions are "retained" unless they fall within the classes listed in subsection (1). The subsequent subsections in the new clause provide further detail as to the scope of each of the classes listed in subsection (1). In particular, neither "secondary devolved functions" nor "relevant ancillary functions" can be considered "devolved" if the UK Government still have substantive functions in relation to them.
Finally, Amendments 91H to 91M and 126B update or insert a number of definitions as a result of the changes to Clause 57 and the insertion of the new clause, while Amendments 75A, 77A and 99A update the cross-references to "retained functions" throughout the Bill to refer to the new clause.
I am confident that this drafting delivers the right result and properly respects both UK "retained" functions and the competence of the devolved Administrations. I beg to move.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 12 May 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
710 c943-4 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:32:37 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556769
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556769
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556769