Introduction
1. There have been calls for an integrated new Marine
Bill to replace the current confusion of legislation for a number
of years. At the forefront off those calling for new statutory
provision for the marine environment has been WWF-UK. In September
2000, it issued its report, Marine Health Check 2000, which
called for "co-ordinated legislation—an Oceans Act—in
order to provide the best legislative support for protecting and
managing our precious marine environment, for the benefit of wildlife
and coastal communities."[1]
This was followed by concerted calls for a new Marine Bill from
a number of environmental and conservation groups.
2. In September 2004, the Prime Minister, the Rt
Hon Tony Blair, MP, declared that "there are strong arguments
for a new approach to managing our seas, including a new Marine
Bill".[2] On 8 December
2004, this was echoed when DEFRA launched its Five Year Strategy
which included plans for a new Marine Bill "to ensure greater
protection of marine resources and simplify regulations so that
all uses of the sea can develop in a sustainable and harmonious
way." [3] In order
to help inform what would inevitably be a complex debate, WWF-UK
with help from the Marine Task Force from Wildlife and Countryside
Link (hereafter, Link) drew up a draft Marine Bill which set out
its "long-term vision for managing the marine environment
and … the key principles for achieving the sustainable use
of marine resources."[4]
3. The Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) in the
last Parliament had occasion to touch upon the need for a new
Marine Bill in the context of its Twelfth Report of Session 2003-04
on Environmental Crime: Wildlife Crime. In that
Report, published on 7 October 2004, our predecessor Committee
noted the complexity and out-datedness of much marine legislation
which meant, for example, that no prosecutions for crimes against
marine wildlife had taken place for over twenty-five years.[5]
With regard to threats posed to the marine environment, during
that inquiry WWF-UK told that Committee:
"In terms of the marine environment, we
have a myriad of layers of national
legislation, European legislation and international
legislation. This very complicated
web is impossible for people to penetrate, both
people who want to get consents and
permissions and people who want to protect the
marine environment. Added to
that, you have a situation where the protection
of our nationally important sites is all
done voluntarily at the moment. So if you have
a number of stakeholders involved in
trying to protect areas, whether they are fishery,
industry, whatever, if that voluntary
co-operation breaks down, you very often do not
have any protection for the site." [6]
The EAC Report of 2004 therefore recommended, in
the interests of combating wildlife crime, that DEFRA work closely
with WWF-UK in fine-tuning the latter's draft Bill and in securing
parliamentary time to take that Bill forward. [7]
4. The Government Response to the Wildlife Crime
Report, published by our predecessor Committee on 17 March 2005,
commented favourably that there were "strong arguments for
a new approach to managing our seas, including a new Marine Bill"
and that the "content of any Bill …[would]… need
to reflect Government conclusions, including the Devolved Administrations,
but it will also take account of the views of stakeholders, including
the environmental organisations." [8]
5. Following the Queen's Speech of May 2005, the
Government made clear its intention that a Marine Bill should
be brought before Parliament as a draft Bill and be therefore
subject to pre-legislative scrutiny. On account of the considerable
extent of the Bill, the difficulty of ensuring that its provisions
across the United Kingdom locked in properly to the differing
administrative, legislative and legal structures of Wales, Scotland
and Northern Ireland, and the untidy and incoherent state of the
panoply of legislative material currently covering marine matters,
proposals for the draft bill were to be themselves subject to
consultation before any draft Bill would appear before Parliament.
The original intention was that this might happen by the end
of 2006, with a Bill proper being introduced to Parliament the
following year.
6. After lengthy discussions with stakeholders and
other interested bodies, DEFRA issued its consultation paper,
A Marine Bill, on 29 March 2006. The paper was very long
and posed 141 separate questions.[9]
The consultation process itself was set to conclude on 23 June
2006, and was to be accompanied by a number of nationwide Marine
Bill Forums. However, a number of months before this consultation
paper was published, those groups pressing most eagerly for a
new Marine Bill, brought their concerns at the continuing slow
progress in this areas to the attention of members of the new
EAC. This was the background against which we decided to conduct
a short inquiry into DEFRA's proposals for a new Marine Bill in
order to try and direct attention inside and outside Parliament
to the many important and urgent issues with which any eventual
such Bill would have to deal.
7. We issued a press release announcing our inquiry
following the publication of the DEFRA consultation paper, on
20th April 2006. It proposed the following questions:
- The Consultation Paper outlines
five main themes for a new Marine Bill. These are: managing marine
fisheries, planning in the marine area, licensing marine activities,
improving marine nature conservation and the potential for a new
marine management organisation. In identifying these five themes
has DEFRA focused on the areas most likely to help deliver an
effective and coherent Marine Bill?
- The seas around the British Isles are a valuable
and diverse eco-system. They represent a source of income for
many coastal communities and they also represent a significant
source of renewable energy in the years to come. Does the Consultation
Paper give due consideration to the many, varied and often competing
demands placed on the marine environment and, if not, where would
any new Bill need to be strengthened to rectify this omission?
8. During the course of the inquiry we took evidence
from Wildlife and Countryside Link (comprising representatives
from the RSPB, WWF-UK, the Wildlife Trust and the Marine Conservation
Society), from the Sea User Developer Group and the British Marine
Federation, from Scottish Renewables and the British Wind Association,
and from Ben Bradshaw MP, Minister for Local Environment, Marine
and Animal Welfare, companied by officials from DEFRA. We also
received 26 memoranda. We would like to thank all those who gave
evidence to us and otherwise helped us with this inquiry.
9. We commend WWF-UK, and those bodies with whom
it works, for drawing up its own draft Marine Bill and for pressing
DEFRA to move forward in this area. Likewise we commend DEFRA
for the openness of its dialogue with WWF-UK and other interested
bodies prior to its decision to go ahead with plans to introduce
a Government Bill for the marine environment.
1 Marine Health Check 2000 - a Report to gauge the
health of the UK's sea life:http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/mhcr.pdf Back
2
http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/page6333.asp Back
3
DEFRA Five Year Strategy: http://www.defra.gov.uk.environment/water/marine/uk/policy/marine-bill/here.htm Back
4
WWF's draft Marine Bill summary: http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/draftmarinebillsummary.pdf Back
5
Environmental Crime: Wildlife Crime, Twelfth Report of
Session 2003-04, HC 605: para 32 Back
6
ibid., Q351 Back
7
ibid., Recommendation 17 Back
8
Government Response to the Committee's Twelfth Report of
Session 2003-04, on Environmental Crime: Wildlife Crime, First
Special Report of Session 2004-05, HC438, Appendix, para 29 Back
9
A Marine Bill, http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/marinebill/index.htm Back
|
