I agree. There are, and will continue to be, different priorities in different parts of the fishing fraternity. However, one of the benefits of the consultation will be that those interests are genuinely represented in that process. That does not mean that there will not be difficult challenges that will require people to sit down and agree the priorities in their IFCA area. However, the important thing is first to ensure that the membership is properly representative and then to argue that out. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that the worst possible way forward would be for a Minister to prescribe exactly who should be on or to say arbitrarily, "We'll make sure that we have one recreational sea angler, one rod-and-line angler," and so on. That is not the way, because things will differ among the 10 IFCA areas.
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].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
498 c41 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:52:30 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588137
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588137
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588137