Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]

I agree: what was the point of the 2001 manifesto commitment if it is not honoured? I was simply making the point that the Bill has been delayed and that there is considerable concern among conservation bodies that it should now get safely on to the statute book, because the measures that it contains are urgent and necessary. As my hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge said back in October 2001 at his Bill's Second Reading:""At least half of the United Kingdom's biodiversity is found in the marine environment, but existing laws do not adequately address its protection and management...For too long, the marine environment has been the Cinderella of wildlife conservation—a case of out of sight, out of mind."—[Official Report, 26 October 2001; Vol. 373, c. 527-528.]" What a pity it was that the Bill ultimately ran out of time in the other place. However, better late than never, we now have this Bill before us. My criticism over the delay, however, does not extend to the other place, which scrutinised a complex Bill thoroughly. It is fair to say that much of the "heavy lifting" of the Bill has been done already. The format and objectives of the proposed marine management organisation, the functioning of the proposed marine conservation zones and the process for establishing the coastal route have all been markedly improved, but there remain a number of outstanding issues of concern. The core of the Bill is the proposed creation of the MMO. We support that proposal, as there is a genuine need for a co-ordinated management of the marine environment but, as the wildlife trusts have said,""this will be a very important body....It will need to be a strong organisation and will take the lead on the implementation."" We need to ensure both that the MMO has adequate powers to fulfil its important role, and that it is accountable for how it uses those powers. As Lord Taylor of Holbeach, who did so much to improve the Bill in the other place, said:""The MMO will be a powerful body with a broad remit of functions and a high-profile central objective. It is therefore important that it is seen to be as transparent as possible."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 12 January 2009; Vol. 706, c. 1070.]" We are therefore pleased that a duty has been added to the Bill to require the guidance relating to the sustainability criteria to be consulted on and laid before the House, and that these criteria have been strengthened. Minsters also accepted calls to improve the sustainability aspect of marine planning statements through a requirement to carry out an appraisal. Sustainability must be at the core of our approach to the marine environment, and we are pleased that the Bill now reflects this. It is also welcome that clause 2 now contains a specific reference to the need for decisions taken by the MMO to be based on scientific evidence. As the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation recently reported, it has been the lack of scientific evidence guiding fisheries policy around the world that has done so much to damage fish stocks and the wider marine eco-system. We welcome the amendments to ensure that a chief scientific adviser will be appointed to lead the MMO in that area, as well as in further marine science more generally. Those requirements will be important in ensuring the best possible protection for the marine environment. An outstanding issue that has not been adequately resolved is the relationship between the MMO and the Infrastructure Planning Commission. As the House will be aware, the Opposition did not support the creation of an infrastructure planning commission, principally because it would embody a democratic deficit, and it is our intention to replace any such commission with a speeded-up planning process, in which the Secretary of State remains ultimately responsible and accountable to Parliament for decisions on controversial applications. In the meantime, with the formation of the IPC and its remit in the marine sphere, it makes little sense to create an organisation such as the MMO, which should be the prime delivery body for managing the marine environment, without giving it control over all relevant development. Given the potential impact of some development at sea on the operation of the MMO, it seems wrong merely to require developers to consult the organisation about proposed developments while the final decision rests with the IPC. The Government need to explain why they are so keen that planning applications in the marine environment should be adjudicated by the IPC when the MMO, with its marine experts and scientists, will be most in tune with the impact of development at sea. We have concerns about the status of the proposed marine conservation zones. The WWF has described them as""a vital management tool to address the threats to marine biodiversity."" They offer an opportunity to make a lasting improvement to the marine environment, but they must have enough flexibility with regard to designation and restriction to ensure that they can be successfully designated and enforced, and that real ecological benefits accrue. As Wildlife and Countryside Link has highlighted, it is essential that the Bill does not repeat some of the weaknesses of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 in relation to the creation of marine nature reserves. Since that Act only three small reserves have been created, including Lundy island, which I had the pleasure of visiting a few years ago. According to the wildlife trusts, a complete fishing ban around Lundy in 2003 resulted in dramatic changes, noticeably an increase in the abundance of shellfish. The experience of Lundy and of international examples in New Zealand and Australia shows the benefit of designation both to wildlife and to those who use the sea commercially. Fish are given the opportunity to recover and abundant stocks spill out of the no-take zones, improving catches locally. However, such levels of protection, which include outright fishing bans, are clearly the most exceptional form of designation; we need to achieve the protection of larger areas of the seas with a flexible and ecologically coherent network of conservation zones.