The hon. Gentleman anticipates what I was about to say, which is that the MMO must have great expertise on a number of these matters anyway. That includes the marine policy statement, to whose operation it is very much a party. Calling for a more coherent planning regime for offshore renewable energy development does not cut the MMO off from playing a serious role in considering those planning applications. It has a strategic role in the management of the sea bed and conservation zones as well as other aspects of the marine policy statement, so it has to be centrally involved in the planning process.
The amendment would mean that there would not be two specific planning regimes, with one stopping at a wholly theoretical point. Instead, it would establish a unified regime for major planning consents, encompassing both offshore developments and the onshore operations that are an essential part of them.
The amendment would not take away the MMO's central role in planning considerations, but it would make sure that this country's ambitions for the offshore generation of renewable energy were properly aligned with the delivery of that energy into the grid in the best possible way.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Alan Whitehead
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 27 October 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
498 c178 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:24:29 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588593
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588593
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_588593