My Lords, my name is also to these amendments. As the House would expect, I support my noble friend Lord Taylor on them. We have talked a great deal throughout the Bill on the best way to improve the planning system so that the most appropriate decision can be made expeditiously. That is right. We have also debated keenly who should play a part in the planning process, and that is quite right too. The amendments fill a gap that we risk leaving open. By agreeing to them, the Minister will be able to ensure that the most appropriate decisions on marine planning are taken by the right people.
We have mentioned wind farms today. The noble Lord, Lord Woolmer, mentioned wave and tide. There are also cable and pipelines that may have to be laid in the marine environment.
As the Bill stands, as my noble friend has already said, the IPC has the power to determine proposals in the marine environment. That runs contrary to the Government’s stated aim of creating a strategic overview and reducing complexity at sea through marine planning and reformed marine licensing. The proposed marine Bill, we are told, will create a marine management organisation. If that specialised body is to be created, it would be better to leave decisions with the Secretary of State until such time as the MMO is ready to take over.
If the IPC must retain jurisdiction in this area, it is vital, as my noble friend has said, that the expertise of the MMO is put to good use and that it should provide advice on both coastal and offshore applications that impact on the marine environment. The Planning Bill is vital, as I have said, but it is only part of the jigsaw puzzle. The other pieces, as has been said, are the Climate Change Bill, the Energy Bill and, soon, the marine Bill, as well as, as the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, said, the Housing and Regeneration Bill. Those Bills all have to take account of one another, so I support my noble friend on these amendments, which would take account of the marine Bill. It is a simple exercise in joined-up government, as I am sure the Minister will agree. If the Minister does not like the wording of these amendments, I ask him to agree to take them away and come back at Third Reading with his own amendments to ensure that the correct interaction between the Bill and the forthcoming marine Bill takes place.
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Cathcart
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
705 c461 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 22:55:53 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508054
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508054
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508054