Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Earl Cathcart (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 5 May 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].


Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]

My Lords, I have some sympathy with Amendment 62, proposed by the noble Baroness. If something in the marine policy statement is going to lead to bad decisions, and if that is then recognised, as things stand the mechanism is that there will be a review to try and update it. I think that this amendment is trying to say, "All applications must be suspended until we’ve got this right. Because we don’t want the applications in the pipeline to be based on those bad decisions, let’s suspend part or all of the MPS until the review has taken place and the right framework is put in place". I support this amendment; there has to be some sort of mechanism for getting this right, either in the Bill or within guidance. I will be interested to know how the Minister proposes to deal with this.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
710 c524-5 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Conservation Coastal areas Archaeology Devolution Cultural heritage Fisheries Licensing Electricity generation Fishing vessels Legislative competence Insolvency Local government Public appointments Planning Ports Power stations National Assembly for Wales Nature conservation Scotland Sustainable development Wales Scottish Parliament Renewable energy Seas and oceans Territorial waters Science Seals Marine Management Organisation
Legislation
Marine and Coastal Access Bill (HL) 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk