View PDF - United Kingdom Parliament

119 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 26 OCTOBER 2009 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 120
[Lords]
[Lords]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland
(Ann McKechin): I thank my hon. Friend for her comments
and commend the work of the Coast group on the Isle
of Arran. It has done much good work in trying to
create a community initiative on marine conservation. I
will be happy to meet her and the group’s members if
that would be of assistance to them in brokering progress
as regards their very good work.
Ms Clark: It would be of great assistance; I appreciate
the Minister’s comments.
Coast proposes that the whole bay should be considered
as a conservation zone. At the moment, there is only a
no-take zone in part of the bay. To assist hon. Members,
a no-take zone basically means that there can be no
fishing, whereas in some marine conservation zones
fishing is allowed in particular circumstances. Lamlash
bay is the first zone of its type in Scotland. We have
already heard about the experience on Lundy, where
there has been an MCZ since 1993.
This is not a problem for Britain alone—it is worldwide.
Similar debates are taking place in countries throughout
the world. South Africa has already taken the decision
to designate 20 per cent. of its territorial waters as
marine protected areas. I understand that it has already
achieved 18 per cent. In Australia 40,000 square miles
of the great barrier reef are designated as a marine
reserve. Country after country have taken steps in that
direction, but we have been slow to go down that path.
The Bill is a significant development, and I welcome the
fact that we will soon be getting legislation on the
matter.
Robert Key (Salisbury) (Con): I have been looking
forward all day to speaking on this group of amendments,
and I congratulate the hon. Lady on hers. Given the
disgraceful guillotining of the Bill, it is unlikely that
many of us will be able to speak tonight. Will she at
least give us the comfort that she intends to press the
amendment to a vote when the time comes?
Ms Clark: I will listen very carefully to what the
Minister has to say at the end of the debate, but I agree
that it is a great shame that we have such a short time to
debate these issues. It is a complete underestimation of
their importance. I will keep my comments relatively
brief to enable other Members to come in.
Marine diversity is not about one particular type of
fauna, flora or fish. We are facing a situation in which
our whole marine ecosystem is under threat. We have to
recognise the scale of the problem not just by passing
the Bill but in the steps that we take thereafter, to ensure
that we get a network of marine conservation zones to
protect the whole marine ecosystem.
Often, steps are taken to provide protection for
fashionable types of creature, and some of the most
important types of ecosystem might be protected, but
the reality is that the world we live in and the marine
environment are interlinked and interwoven. The
consequences of the ecosystem deteriorating are significant
for all of us. We debate climate change and other
environmental issues regularly, but we often do not give
marine life the attention that it deserves. Unless we
ensure that we have a significant network of marine
reserves, we will all be under threat.
I will listen carefully to what the Minister says. I
would like an explanation of why the Government
believe the amendment is not necessary, and I want
assurances that this Government or any future Minister
will be able to do whatever they can under the Bill’s
current wording. Many of us feel that the amendment
would be a significant improvement and extend the
range of circumstances in which an MCZ could be
created.
Mr. Benyon: I congratulate the hon. Member for
North Ayrshire and Arran (Ms Clark) on tabling the
amendment. Right from the start, we have supported an
ecosystem approach to the designation of marine
conservation zones, and we believe that the amendment
would provide further options for designation.
In Committee, I was opposed to attempts to require
the designation of a defined percentage of our seas, and
I stand by that position as I want the Bill to be effective.
It would be easy for any Government to achieve a
particular percentage by designating relatively benign
or uninteresting parts of the sea. We want an ecologically
coherent network of MCZs to be implemented as quickly
as possible.
I am inclined to support amendment 3, as it leads on
from that original proposal in a more sensible way. It
would not serve to upset the balance that has been
achieved between socio-economic and environmental
considerations, and if it is pressed to a vote, we will
support it.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: I shall not detain the House
long, but I am concerned to introduce the principle that
the existing social and economic interests of fishing
communities be a dominant consideration in deciding
on and running MCZs. The embryonic science that
could underpin a scientific basis for designation does
not exist—we do not know enough about the marine
environment and the science is not strong enough.
Therefore, a science-only approach is not going to work—it
needs to be supplemented by a concern for safeguarding
the interests of coastal communities, which have a special
interest in keeping the fishing industry going and in
fishing in such areas.
In other words, the science is uncertain, but fishermen’s
livings are clear and certain, and they need to be taken
into account. Amendments 16, 19 and 21, which I
tabled, simply emphasise the importance of the social
and economic interests of existing fishing communities
and the fishing industry in the zones. To my mind, that
must be a dominant and important consideration, but it
is not in the Bill.
Mr. Gummer: I rise to support amendment 3, which
has been moved by the hon. Member for North Ayrshire
and Arran (Ms Clark). The first reason is that to talk
about the zones without talking at this point about
ecosystems misses the point—it does not make the vital
point that the system is a central part of a sensible
conservation measure.
We have for too long believed that we can take bits
out of the natural order of things and protect them, and
not think about the total system. I must tell the hon.
Member for Great Grimsby (Mr. Mitchell) that to say
that not knowing enough about something means that
we should not do it is a very frightening concept. We