My Lords, that is a consideration. Clearly we will want to make this process as vigorous as possible for the reasons that the noble Duke has mentioned. I hope it will not be a situation where enforcement is weak or we are unable to detect who the perpetrators are. It is our intention to have a rigorous system in place.
We will of course use our best endeavours to seek the agreement of other member states to the measures we require. Obviously we are hopeful that we will be able to get appropriate agreement within the EU. Of course, one has to accept that the context in which we discuss these matters is the common fisheries policy. My colleague, Mr Irranca-Davies, the Minister for fisheries, has written to Commissioner Joe Borg on that matter to press the case for the reform of the common fisheries policy. Noble Lords may have seen the recent reference in the media to the commissioner’s views on what I thought were deemed to be acknowledged problems and failures with the CFP as it is. I was encouraged by those remarks. Commissioner Borg has replied to my colleague to say that he shares the Government’s view that the future common fisheries policy needs to take fully into account the wider integrated approach. He also wrote that the CFP needs to become an effective tool in the management of fisheries in the context of marine protection.
Clearly these are early days in the reform process, but that is an encouraging start. However, all those who have been involved in negotiations with the EU, particularly over the common fisheries policy, will know that there is a very long way to go before we have a successful outcome. None the less, we start from a more encouraging base than we have had for many a long year.
On Amendment 120, we want to provide the most effective protection we can for marine conservation. We want to be able to protect marine conservation zones from third country vessels as well as those of the European Union and, on that point, there is merit in the argument put forward by the noble Duke. We will reflect on it further and it is to be hoped that we will come back with something on Third Reading.
On the concerns raised by the noble Lord, Livsey, I shall take the opportunity to check and write to him further. My initial understanding of the point is that they are bound by the rules of the member state in which they are registered. I am not sure that that is a loophole but, as with other matters in relation to fishing, the noble Lord has identified one of the challenges that we have with this.
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 c1017-8 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:34:57 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556915
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556915
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_556915