My hon. Friend rightly makes the point that there can be positives as well as negatives in these measures if we manage the marine environment correctly. In fact, we want to reach a point where the positives significantly outweigh the negatives, but that requires an approach such as that which we see in this Bill—a properly planned and managed approach to the marine environment.
Let me turn to amendment 42 and new clause 10, tabled by the hon. Member for St. Ives and my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby. They were tabled with the objective of making it a legal requirement that UK and foreign fishing vessels must receive equal treatment under offence clauses in MCZs. The sea fishing defence is a blunt instrument that the common fisheries policy—itself in urgent need of reform—requires us to put in place. The amendments become relevant in the light of my own amendment in this group to create a power for the Secretary of State to restrict or remove the sea fishing defence by order. As I said in Committee and have made clear again today, it is my firm intention that that power should be used in an equitable way. We will not use it to discriminate against part of the UK fishing fleet, as to do so would be to shoot ourselves in the foot.
Neither of the amendments is therefore necessary to ensure fair treatment of UK fishermen. The Government are happy to commit that any exercise of the new power would be made in close consultation with Scottish and Welsh Ministers, the industry, the MMO, inshore fisheries and conservation authorities and many others. All these people and organisations have an interest in supporting a vibrant fishing fleet, and not disadvantaging our fishermen.
The amendments also have a technical deficiency as they could have a consequential impact on our ability to manage local fisheries matters where, to pick up the point raised by my hon. Friends earlier, we can bring in byelaws, after local consultation, to manage local fisheries impacts. The amendments could bring into doubt our ability to bring in MMO byelaws in the 6 to 12 nautical mile zone restricting sea fisheries activities which apply only to UK vessels, because in practice foreign boats do not and will not conduct the same sort of activity. The amendments would remove that flexibility.
We have the ability actively to manage our inshore area through IFCAs and MMO byelaws in the Bill, and the House has made it clear that it wants to see effective enforcement take place. I would not want to undermine our ability to act where necessary at a local level.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Huw Irranca-Davies
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 26 October 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
498 c113 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:21:41 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588303
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588303
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588303