Richard Benyon (Shadow Minister, Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Newbury, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment 17, in clause 120, page 81, line 23, at end add—

‘(6) The appropriate authority must inform any national representative body of sea users of the publication of orders designating MCZs.’.

I do not wish to be flippant, but, just for clarity, during the clause stand part debate a moment ago, the Minister referred to areas of refuse, as opposed to areas of refuge; he might wish to correct the record, because I hope that the Bill will avoid areas of refuse.

The amendment seeks to include a sixth subsection to the clause. By placing a duty on appropriate authorities to inform national representative bodies of MCZ designations, the amendment would allow sea users, via bodies such as the British Marine Federation and the Royal Yachting Association, to comment and give feedback on the proposed zones in a timely fashion.

The RYA is a national body for all forms of recreational and competitive boating. It represents dinghy and yacht racing, motor and sail cruising, rigid inflatable boats and sports boats, as well as powerboat racing, windsurfing, inland cruising and personal watercraft. The RYA manages the British sailing team and Great Britain was the top sailing nation in the 2000, 2004 and 2008 Olympic games. The RYA and the BMF are recognised by all Government offices as the negotiating bodies for the activities that they represent. The RYA has over 100,000 personal members, the majority of whom choose to go afloat for purely recreational, non-competitive pleasure on coastal and inland waters. An estimated further 500,000 boat-owners nationwide are members of over 1,500 RYA-affiliated clubs and class associations. That gives an indication of the importance of organisations such as the RYA and why they must be consulted.

As we heard during the previous clause stand part debate, there is unlikely to be any physical designation of MCZs in the sea itself through the use of buoys and such like. National representative bodies need to mark such areas on charts and communicate the locations of MCZs to their members and to local sea users. I should be grateful if the Minister could clarify whether such bodies will be properly consulted, and whether the amendment, which would require them to be consulted, is needed.

Ann McKechin (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Scotland Office; Glasgow North, Labour)

I fully agree with the sensible intent behind the amendment. We have to make sure that we take every reasonable step to ensure that people who are likely to be affected by an order are made aware of it. Indeed, the issue is already covered by the Bill. I draw the attention of the hon. Member for Newbury to an earlier part of the clause that states that the appropriate authority must publish notice of the making of an order

“in such manner as the appropriate authority thinks is most likely to bring the order to the attention of any persons who are likely to be affected by the making of it”.

I assure the hon. Gentleman that organisations such as the RYA, which shares his concerns, would certainly be included in that definition.

The clause places a duty on the appropriate authority to do everything it reasonably can to bring an order to the attention of people and organisations likely to be affected. It also requires the appropriate authority to make sure that a copy of the order is available for inspection, and to provide a copy to people who ask for one. The provision is all about transparency and is very important, because protection of MCZs will only be improved when more people are aware of their existence and appreciate what they are for. We have no wish to have people unwittingly contravening orders because we have failed properly to publicise them.

In practice, I anticipate that the appropriate authority will publish the order in an appropriate manner, with notifying organisations likely to be affected by e-mail or letter. Organisations would, I believe, include the RYA, but they are also very likely to include local representative organisations which may, in fact, be more directly affected than some members of the RYA. We do not simply send everything to everyone, which would be a disproportionate burden; we must allow the appropriate authority some discretion to make the judgment based on its experience and expertise of marine matters about who is likely to  be affected. In doing so, it has to act reasonably. I believe the clause, as it stands, strikes the right note, and I hope that with the assurances I have given today the hon. Gentleman will withdraw the amendment.

Richard Benyon (Shadow Minister, Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Newbury, Conservative)

I am grateful to the Minister for that clarification. The words that she has put on the record will provide the necessary reassurance to organisations such as the RYA. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.