Clause 127
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]
6:45 pm
Huw Irranca-Davies (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Marine and Natural Environment), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Ogmore, Labour)
I hope the hon. Gentleman does not push it to a vote because, while the amendment is well intentioned, it might not do what it is intended to do. The approach we have taken with MCZs is based on achieving conservation objectives in a focused and intelligent way. That is what is in the Bill. We want a conservation mechanism that is an easy tool for everyone to work with and, as the hon. Gentleman said, does not impose unnecessary burdens on any sector or interests. I agree with the thrust of the amendment which, as he has just explained, is concerned to ensure that statutory conservation bodies advise on monitoring activities in MCZs and that the costs of such monitoring should be reasonable and proportionate. I do not think that anybody will disagree with that.
Clause 127 outlines the scope of the advisory role of the statutory conservation bodies. It gives the bodies a power, and in some circumstances a duty, to give advice and guidance on a range of matters in relation to MCZs, which could include marine monitoring requirements where appropriate. These bodies also have general powers to offer advice to public authorities and make representations to them. Public authorities would have to take such advice and representations into account when making decisions. I fully expect the conservation bodies to carry out the advisory functions under the Bill, like all their functions, in a reasonable manner without specific requirement in the Bill. The amendment would require that an advance assessment be made of the costs of monitoring requirements, as well as overall project costs and the value of any environmental benefits. That would probably be an impossible obligation for conservation bodies to fulfil in their advisory capacity. It is important that we do not blur the distinction between the responsibilities for giving advice and for making decisions—between advisory bodies and those who take the decisions. It is for the licensing authority, rather than conservation bodies, to determine what conditions need to be attached to any licence that they issue.
Licensing authorities, such as the MMO, which will issue marine licences under part 4 of the Bill, will receive advice from conservation bodies, but will also take into account a number of other factors, including socio-economic ones, when determining whether to grant a licence and, if they do, what conditions should be placed on it. That could include environmental monitoring. Any environmental monitoring conditions in a licence granted by a licensing authority should be proportionate to the environmental risks posed by the development, and not proportionate to the total costs of the project.