Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]

No, I do not, and I do not wish to labour that point, because I want to make my point about landscapes and seascapes. The Campaign for National Parks, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales, the English National Park Authorities Association, Europarc Atlantic Isles, the National Association for Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the National Trust and the Welsh Association of National Park Authorities are all on record as supporting the Bill. However, they are all concerned about its lack of reference to the conservation of our finest seascapes, including the marine dimension of the many protected landscapes such as the Gower area of outstanding natural beauty in my constituency, and the absence of any mechanism for designating nationally important seascapes. The Government accepted the term "seascape" in the high-level objectives for the marine environment published earlier this year. The definition provided is:""An area of sea, coastline and land, whose character results from the actions and interactions of land with sea, by natural and/or human factors."" As with protected landscapes, the term embraces not only biodiversity but physical features, historic and cultural heritage and opportunities for recreation. Of course it includes scenery, but a seascape is more than just the view, as stunning as that can often be on the British coast. In the Marine Bill White Paper of 2007, the Government stated that""important seascapes and views from land would be considered within the marine planning process…The UK marine policy statement could include objectives describing the importance of seascapes, and views and how we wish to treat them. More detailed plans would allow us to consider seascapes and views in the context of the priorities for specific areas"." That seems to me to imply designation. However, in the other place that was ruled out because of various practical difficulties, although on Report the importance of seascapes was again acknowledged. One possible way forward was addressed at the inquiry into the proposed South Downs national park in 2007. It had been suggested that the marine environment adjoining the south downs should be included in the national park. The inspector decided that there was no legal basis for including a marine area in an existing protected area. He regretted that, because as he said in his report to the Secretary of State:""The available evidence convinces me that the PSDNP"—" the proposed South Downs national park—""would be enhanced if it was legally possible for the marine environment to be included."" He went on to recommend that""consideration be given to statutory provisions that would allow marine areas…to be part of a National Park"." Hear, hear to that, and I would add AONBs as the other half of the protected landscape family. Why do we not follow that advice and look first for candidates for quality seascape designation to the seas off our many coastal AONBs and national parks, many of which owe their designation to their relationship with the sea? As I have said, this is a very good Bill, but with a bit of tweaking it can be even better.