Clause 140
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]
9:15 am
Richard Benyon (Shadow Minister, Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Newbury, Conservative)
This is an interesting amendment, which comes down to the definition of the word “disturbed”—the previous word in clause 140 is “recklessly”. “Disturbed” has a very wide descriptive meaning. I am constantly disturbed by the thoughts and actions of my children—and sometimes by those of my colleagues—but that is not relevant in this context. We have to think about the impact on an MCZ, because we could be limiting actions in an MCZ in the wrong sort of way.
I am inclined to support the hon. Member for St. Ives, provided that we do not damage the kind of activities that we want to see in MCZs. For example, tourism, even eco-tourism, could in certain circumstances be described as disturbing wildlife in the marine environment. Certain sustainable fishing activities, such as recreational angling, could be permissible in or close to a MCZ, but they could be described in a pedantic following of the letter of the law as damaging. I support the hon. Gentleman’s intention and look forward to the Minister’s words on the impact that it will have, because I do not want unintended consequences in the protection provided to MCZs.