View PDF - United Kingdom Parliament

107 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 26 OCTOBER 2009 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 108
[Lords]
[Lords]
[Rob Marris]
but I hope that, when he winds up the debate, the
Minister will tell us where else in statute a provision
exists enabling a Secretary of State, by regulation, to
remove a defence.
We all know that regulations create offences from
time to time, but removing a defence and doing it so
quickly—if that is the Government’s intention—strikes
me as very surprising. I hope that the Minister will tell
us whether the Government have any such ideas, if not
a fixed intent. If they have such ideas, perhaps he will
explain why the removal of the defence in subsection (4)
is not itself a Government amendment, rather than the
Secretary of State’s being given an order to take such
action on a whim and on the basis of regulations that
will have much less scrutiny.
Martin Salter: I congratulate the hon. Member for
Great Grimsby (Mr. Mitchell) on lightening our
proceedings. I think that most of us wondered whether
we would achieve such levels of excitement.
Let me begin by identifying an absurdity that has
featured in a number of statements made today. Members
have said that it is not possible to create a patchwork
quilt of marine conservation zones—that they will not
work. Every Member has been lauding the achievements
of Lundy as a no-take zone. That is the first patch in the
patchwork quilt that we need to establish around these
shores, if there are to be any fish left for the people of
Great Grimsby and elsewhere to fish for.
I oppose new clause 8, and I oppose amendment 24,
which seeks to enhance the sea fisheries defence. I
support Government amendment 5, which seeks to
minimise that defence in the context of the reform of
the common fisheries policy, as outlined by the hon.
Member for Newbury (Mr. Benyon). By way of a
change, I support Government amendments 13 and 14,
which seek important reforms to the Salmon and
Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975.
It is a pleasure to follow a number of speeches,
particularly those of my hon. Friend the Member for
Wolverhampton, South-West (Rob Marris) and the hon.
Member for Broxbourne (Mr. Walker). However, I must
take issue with what the hon. Member for Broxbourne
said about accidental damage. There is nothing accidental
about beam trawling. Beam trawling is an environmental
disaster. If we were to translate it to the agricultural
field—pardon the pun—it would mean a farmer ploughing
the same field seven times in a single growing season.
Beam trawling does long-term environmental damage
and cannot exist alongside conservation and sustainable
fisheries. They are completely opposed, and such damage
is not done accidentally.
Mr. Walker: I hope the hon. Gentleman will recognise
that I was expressing concern that accidental damage
might be a universal get-out clause for the fishing
industry.
Martin Salter: I welcome that clarification.
There need not be a conflict between fishing—whether
commercial or recreational—and conservation, provided
that the fishermen decide to come down in favour of
conservation. Turning to my own sport, I have lost
count of the number of arguments I have had with
salmon anglers who opposed the bringing in of the rule
of returning spring salmon before 16 June. It has finally
got into the psyche of Britain’s game anglers that we
cannot continually remove spawning fish from the food
chain and expect a run of salmon in subsequent years.
Fishermen can be conservationists, but the choice is
theirs, and fishermen or their public representatives
who choose to oppose the single most important piece
of environmental legislation affecting the coastline and
seas of this nation have clearly not opted to come down
on the side of conservation.
Mr. MacNeil: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Martin Salter: No, I will not.
I have huge affection and respect for my hon. Friend
the Member for Great Grimsby. He is a doughty champion
for his constituency and for the commercial fishing
interest, but I say to him that he will do them no favours
in the long term if he encourages people to set their
faces against the very conservation measures that are
designed to protect the existence of the fish that his
constituents wish to catch.
I get tired of listening to the argument that people
have had a traditional right to pursue their quarry in
this way. The same argument was made about the white
rhino in Africa until it was hunted to extinction, and the
Spanish and the Portuguese are making the same argument
about the bluefin tuna fishery. Bluefin tuna have got
probably months, and certainly no more than two or
three years, left to exist as a species that can be sustainably
harvested. Sadly, a couple of years ago in Luxembourg
the European Fisheries Council recommended quotas
that were twice as generous as those that should have
been introduced in order to secure sustainability.
Mr. MacNeil: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Martin Salter: No, because there is very little time.
The commercial sector broke those quotas by a factor
of 100 per cent. Unless we change the terms of this
debate, and unless we in this House come down forthrightly
on the side of conservation, there is no hope for the
commercial fishing industry or recreational fishing.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: Will my hon. Friend give way?
Martin Salter: I shall give way to my hon. Friend.
Mr. Mitchell: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his
moving tribute to me, but, as far as I know, we are
talking about white herring, not white rhino. It is not
true that the fishing industry is opposed to conservation
measures; it supports them, but it wants its position to
be made clear within them. As my hon. Friend is such a
passionate supporter of marine conservation zones, will
he tell us whether he wants them to become no-fishing
zones?
Martin Salter: I certainly support the power in the
Bill to have, on the basis of good scientific evidence,
MCZs that are no-take zones where appropriate. They
could be established for a host of reasons, but particularly
in nursery areas for recovery species. We have already
witnessed commercial fishermen in the south-west praising
the fact that their catch has risen as a result of the