My Lords, a government amendment is grouped with this amendment, and I will not attempt to pre-empt that.
Clause 53 provides for the delegation of functions relating to marine plans. A direction can be given to delegate the functions by a public body. My concern is that a public body as defined in the Bill includes statutory undertakers. Most statutory undertakers are not public: they are private, albeit subject to particular regulation. I query whether it is proper or appropriate to delegate marine plan functions—preparing a plan, identifying the plan area and so forth—to the private sector, even with the Secretary of State's long-stop powers. That is not to say that a marine plan authority should not be working with or consulting statutory undertakers along with other bodies that fall within the normal definition of a public body: of course they should work together. Statutory undertakers will have a role because they have knowledge and views, but to give them the delegation of functions is quite a different matter. Therefore, my amendment would exclude statutory undertakers from the definition of public bodies used in the clause. I beg to move.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
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 c961-2 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:33:45 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556820
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556820
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556820