---

Treaty of Lisbon (No. 7)

It would be so simple to put that down to the fact that they are single-species fisheries, but I believe that they also manage their fisheries very well. We have a separate set of problems with mixed fisheries such as the North sea. Now I really must hurry on. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs says that it has appointed itself the"““UK policy custodian for the marine and aquatic environment””, " committed to delivering"““clean, safe, healthy, productive and biologically diverse oceans and seas.””" Well, not any more. How can it be the ““policy custodian”” for our seas when the Government are surrendering all powers in this area to Brussels? The Lisbon treaty refers to"““marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy””," but it is uncertain whether that provision could extend to covering most of the marine environment. The Government have already admitted—for example, in the 2004 strategy unit report ““Net Benefits””, and in the discussions over the marine strategy directive—that the present marine management arrangements between the EU and the UK are unclear. However, they have refused to take action to elucidate them. If given ““exclusive competence””, what action could the EU take to protect the pink sea fans in Lyme bay, where there is a conflict between conservationists and scallop dredgers, or to protect the sea bed that is so important to those corals? During the marine Bill consultation, more than 90 per cent. of respondents believed that existing measures to protect marine species were not adequate. What a damning indictment of EU and Government policies. This year, the draft marine Bill is expected to be published, but Ministers have already conceded that any marine conservation zones and protected areas implemented under the Bill would have no legal force over vessels with historical fishing rights between our six and 12 nautical mile limits. There could be many more occasions like the discussion on the pair trawling ban, when Ministers stroll down to Brussels, make their case and desperately plead with the Commission's pen-pushing bureaucrats, only to have their ambitions torn apart and thrown out, and then return to Britain defeated and without the necessary protection for our marine environment. The development of marine spatial plans could be affected by discord between Brussels and the UK. Brussels could also interfere in sea-bed mining and dredging, in the interests of upholding"““the conservation of marine biological resources.””" Before the much-promised marine Bill has even been presented to Parliament in draft form, the Government have already acted to dilute the Bill's contents and benefits by accepting the Lisbon treaty. They have accepted that"““more needs to be done to better manage and protect our seas””," but they can hardly take decisive action if they need to run off to get permission from Brussels. Just 0.001 per cent. of UK seas benefit from the highest level of protection, namely the 3.3 sq km Lundy marine nature reserve. That is an area equivalent to the size of Kensington gardens. Sir David Attenborough has stated:"““As an island nation, I find it astonishing that we have protected less than a thousandth of one per cent of our seas from fishing and all damaging activities.””" It is indeed ridiculous. At present, there are two types of protected marine area for nature conservation. The first are the marine nature reserves, of which there are just three—Lundy, Skomer and Strangford lough—and the Government have no intention of designating any more. If the plan envisaged in the treaty goes ahead, I doubt that they would be able to, either. The second are the European marine sites, of which there are more than 100 in the UK, but they cover a very limited range of habitats, such as"““sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time””, " where fishing, dredging and other activities continue. For example, the Fal estuary, a protected European site, is being damaged by scallop dredging. The public want to see more of our seas protected. A survey last year found that 78 per cent. of the public thought the UK's seas were important, and that 94 per cent. rated as important the health of the marine environment. We have to ask why the Government did not use the Lisbon treaty as an opportunity to bring powers back to the UK for environmental benefits, and to strengthen out ability to protect our seas. We need to ensure that our forthcoming marine Bill can actually offer the protection that we all want it to provide.