Government response
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT COMMITTEE
REPORT: "Proposals for a draft Marine Bill" (Eighth
Report of Session 2005-06)
Introduction
The Government welcomes the Eighth Report of the
Environmental Audit Committee which considers the Government's
consultation on proposals for a Marine Bill. It highlights a number
of the issues Government faces in developing its proposals and
makes helpful recommendations and conclusions.
The conclusions and recommendations emphasise the
importance of an open and transparent process for developing proposals
and of involving everyone with an interest in the issues in that
development process. An extraordinarily broad range of individuals
and organisations have an interest in the proposals we are developing.
The Government continues to be keen to harness the enthusiasm
and commitment of all these groups and individuals. The Government
intends to build on the work and engagement accomplished so far
and to provide the strong leadership and the commitment required
to take the work forward.
This review comes during a period of consultation
on early proposals for a Marine Bill. The scope and content of
future proposals will need to take account of the views expressed
by those with an interest in what was set out in the consultation.
We would not wish to pre-empt the outcome of that process or to
commit Government to any specific approaches until full consideration
has been given to all of the available evidence. With this in
mind, the Government's response to each of the Committee's recommendations
is set out below.
Response to the Committee's Conclusions and Recommendations:
Recommendation 1: 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.
(Paragraph 9)
Agreed. Government recognises the need for full participation
of those with an interest in shaping the scope of our policies
and our overall strategy as an integral part of policy making.
We set out this approach in the 2002 Marine Stewardship Report
. We want to involve stakeholders in developing and taking forward
our proposals and monitoring progress made in meeting our goals.
Recommendation 2: The Government is to be encouraged
to establish a robust structure within the Bill for the resolution
of conflicts between those who appear to favour the economic or
social pillars of sustainable development over the environmental
pillar, and vice-versa. However, it is clear to us that all users
of the sea will have to observe environmental limits if the marine
environment is not to be degraded still further. In that respect,
environmental issues, including marine conservation, must be placed
at the very heart of the Bill. (Paragraph 15)
Agreed. The Government's commitment is to a new framework
for the seas, based on marine spatial planning, that balances
conservation, energy and resource needs. In making that commitment
Government recognised that to obtain best value from different
uses of our valuable marine resources, we must maintain and protect
the ecosystems on which they depend. We want to protect and enhance
what we have, whilst at the same time deriving sustainable economic
and social benefit.
The framework must be compatible with our national
and international commitments and obligations to provide protection
of the marine environment and halt the decline in biodiversity
by 2010. An holistic ecosystem approach already lies at the heart
of our strategy to integrate conservation objectives with sustainable
social and economic development goals. Government has also adopted
strategic goals for the marine environment including conserving
and enhancing the overall quality of our seas, their natural processes
and their biodiversity.
Strengthening our ability to protect and restore
marine habitats and biodiversity is therefore a key element of
the proposals Government is considering, including new mechanisms
such as protected areas for important species and habitats and
improved enforcement arrangements.
Recommendation 3: It is very disappointing that
the timetable for the Marine Bill has slipped. We believe that
some of the delay has been caused by uncertainties and doubts
at the outset as to what the scope of the Bill ought to be. (Paragraph
19)
Recommendation 4: We call on Defra to establish
as soon as possible what the next stage of the process is to be,
to issue a draft Bill or another consultation which deals with
the detailed substance of the Bill, and—if the latter—to
commit itself to place the draft Bill before Parliament before
the end of the next Session, 2006-07, with a view to its enactment
as early as possible in Session 2007-08. If a further round of
consultation does not materially affect the timing of the draft
Bill being brought before Parliament then we think it essential
that such a round proceeds. It would be unsatisfactory were the
Bill's timetable to slip any further. (Paragraph 19)
Partially agreed. Government is working hard to move
forward as quickly as is practicable and to develop and bring
forward proposals for a Marine Bill for introduction during this
Parliament. This is a hugely ambitious and substantially unique
project covering a broad range of issues that have a direct impact
on us all. Many of those with an interest see this as a significant
opportunity to provide a robust forward looking framework to secure
the future health, resilience and productivity of our marine area.
Government has a responsibility to ensure that its proposals are
soundly evidence based and deliver real benefits. We must therefore
take the time to consult widely, to assess the impacts that our
proposals may have and ensure that they are appropriate and proportionate.
We are working to develop and agree proposals across
UK Government and with the administrations in Wales, Scotland
and Northern Ireland so that we can undertake a further round
of consultation as early as possible in 2007. Whether we can progress
to consult on a draft Bill or whether a further consultation on
more detailed proposals is needed first depends on whether we
have the evidence base that we need and if there is sufficient
consensus about the direction we should be taking with our proposals.
Over 1200 responses to the Marine Bill consultation
were submitted, a proportion of which are extensive and detailed.
With so many interested parties it is inevitable that there will
be a wide range of views expressed. Views about the rate of development
of our proposals range from progress being too slow to concerns
that there has been insufficient time and detail to properly consider
our proposals. Our analysis of the responses to the recent consultation
will determine the timetable and arrangements for the next. Nevertheless
we are still committed and striving towards introducing a Bill
in this Parliament.
Recommendation 5: It is disappointing that the
consultation issued by Defra in March does not suggest that the
future Marine Bill will be as holistic a piece of legislation
as so many hoped for, or as really appears to be needed. While
a new consultation may lead to more areas than just the modernisation
of Sea Fisheries Committees being brought from the domain of fisheries
into the draft Bill, Defra needs seriously to consider how successful
a Marine Act will be which fails to integrate something as central
as fisheries into the rest of the marine environment. (Paragraph
27)
Recommendation 6: We press Defra to inform as
much of the second consultation as possible with the substance
of the responses on matters relating to fisheries received from
the first consultation: and to extend the proposals for the Marine
Bill to cover as many fisheries issues as possible in order to
ensure legislative and administrative integration. (Paragraph
27)
Partially agreed. We want to manage fisheries effectively
within a flourishing marine environment and are looking at the
relationship between fisheries and proposals across the scope
of the Marine Bill to ensure this. Fisheries have a major part
to play in the sustainable development of the marine environment
at the national, European and international level. The Government's
objective is to bring forward holistic legislative proposals that
take account of all activities wherever they occur in the marine
area.
The consultation did not make any specific proposals
or invite responses on managing marine fisheries since there has
already been extensive engagement with stakeholders surrounding
the publication of a number of recent reviews of the fisheries
sector, including the Bradley Review on Marine Fisheries and Environmental
Enforcement and the Prime Ministers Strategy Unit Report, Net
Benefits. We set out clearly in the consultation however, a number
of areas where we consider that changes to existing primary legislation
or new legislation may be required to deliver Government commitments
to strengthen the way we manage fisheries and develop fisheries
policy. We also identified where these proposals and fisheries
management as a whole would interact with or have to be taken
into account in other areas such as our proposals for marine planning
and nature conservation.
We are engaging with stakeholders on many of our
proposals for the Marine Bill, most recently on the reform of
Sea Fisheries Committees in England, and this will continue as
we further develop our policies. There will be further opportunity
at the next round of consultation for stakeholders to comment
on the full package of fisheries measures.
Proposals for new legislation are only part of the
Government's approach to achieving its vision of clean healthy
safe productive and biologically diverse oceans and seas. The
Government's preferred approach is to achieve as much as possible
without primary legislation. The proposals set out in the Marine
Bill consultation document should therefore be considered in the
context of the breadth of the Government's other non-legislative
activities and initiatives.
Recommendation 7: It is unsatisfactory and counterproductive
that the oil and gas industries were given a veto over whether
or not they would be part of the new, so-called integrated licensing
scheme. As with fisheries, if one of the key purposes of the Marine
Bill is legislative and administrative integration, then the oil
and gas licensing veto frustrates that purpose. While going back
on his assurances to the industry might be difficult for the Minister,
he must work with those within the industry who can see the benefits
of belonging to the new scheme in order to explain to the rest
of the industry why he now must integrate them into the scheme
something which so many other users and marine groups wish to
see. (Paragraph 28)
Partially agreed. Government has not given any business
sector a veto over their inclusion in any part of the proposals
in our consultation on a Marine Bill. The Petroleum Act 1998 and
matters relating to the exploration and exploitation of oil and
gas were not included in the licensing options in the consultation
following consideration of the practicalities and benefits of
amending or retaining the existing arrangements. Consultees including
the oil and gas sector have commented on the inclusion or exclusion
of certain regimes from the scope of the proposed licensing reforms.
The eventual scope of the proposals for marine licensing reform
will ultimately be determined by the potential environmental,
social and economic costs and benefits of reform.
Recommendation 8: We believe it is right to praise
Defra for the work that it has done in preparation for the consultation
paper, for the paper itself, and for the work that has gone on
since it was published in terms of Marine Bill Forums and Newsletters.
The Bill Team within Defra has been commendably open, hard-working,
conscientious and patient. (Paragraph 29)
Recommendation 9: Almost all those from whom we
received memoranda and took oral evidence had occasion to praise
Defra and the Bill Team for the manner in which all aspects of
the consultation, and the pre-consultations discussions, were
handled. (Paragraph 29)
Defra would like to take this opportunity to thank
all those who have taken the time to submit their comments on
the Marine Bill consultation and who have engaged with us and
continue to do so as we develop our proposals. We want to ensure
that those with an interest are kept fully informed as our proposals
develop and their input will be key to making those proposals
integrated, appropriate and relevant.
Recommendation 10: Defra needs to show greater
leadership to try and encourage coordination and coherence in
decisions made by the Scottish and Welsh administrations and the
UK Government. All efforts must be made to make the legislation
for the marine environment around all of the UK, from shallow
to deep waters, as seamless a robe as possible. We hope that the
UK Government and devolved administrations will accept that the
unique overlapping nature of the marine environment—foreshore,
tidal waters, offshore waters and sea-bed—requires the concerted
use of their powers. (Paragraph 34)
Partially agreed. UK Government and devolved administrations
are committed to both the devolution process and to working in
a joined up way to manage and protect the UK's seas more effectively.
We have adopted a number of strategic goals for the marine environment
and made a commitment to work to ensure that policy development
and management contributes to meeting those strategic goals .
Among these is the goal of using marine resources in a sustainable
and environmentally sensitive manner in order to conserve ecosystems
and achieve optimum environmental, social and economic benefit
from the marine environment. We are therefore working together
to achieve the best and most appropriate means for managing activities
in the marine area around the UK.
Recommendation 11: Defra must punch above its
usual weight in these discussions. Not only is it important that
Defra convinces its colleague departments of the importance and
centrality of sustainable development and environmental limits
for the future of the marine environment, but it must attempt
to do so quickly. Further delay, taking into account the ongoing
degradation of marine biodiversity, is unacceptable. (Paragraph
37)
Partially agreed. Defra and its colleague departments
are working together to bring forward proposals that address the
Government's commitment to obtaining best value from different
uses of our valuable marine resources whilst maintaining and protecting
the ecosystems on which they depend. The Government has recognised
that working across departmental boundaries and through all levels
of Government will be necessary to deliver its challenging sustainable
development agenda .
Recommendation 12: A toothless, non-statutory
system of marine spatial planning would not act to create integration,
will not improve the current complexity, contradictions and clashes
of interest in planning and the marine environment, and would
therefore represent a wasted opportunity. We believe that the
marine management organisation which results from the Marine Bill
needs to have effective powers, beyond the deployment of advice,
to develop and administer spatial planning at sea: this planning
must be reasonably flexible, but also robust, so that industry,
business, and leisure interests can all be accommodated and assisted
within the proper environmental limits. (Paragraph 41)
Partially agreed. We agree that a planning system
that does not act to create integration or improve the current
complexity, contradictions and clashes of interest would represent
a wasted opportunity. There are a number of ways in which a planning
system could achieve those objectives and we must consider the
advantages and disadvantages of these different approaches in
order to identify and bring forward proposals for a system that
will be most effective and deliver the greatest benefit.
No decision has yet been taken to bring forward proposals
to establish a new marine management organisation or on the most
appropriate arrangements for implementing a new marine planning
system. However, whatever the final shape of our proposals for
the structure and arrangements of a robust marine planning system,
it is important that it takes account of all industry, business,
and leisure interests.
Recommendation 13: We hope that Defra will take
RCEP's concern on board and ensure that marine protected areas
are not focused too narrowly on fish stocks. (Paragraph 43)
Agreed. In Government's response to the RCEP's 25th
Report we agreed that marine protected areas have a role to play
as part of the framework for protecting the marine environment
and their implementation needs to be seen as part of a balanced
package of measures.
We are using the opportunity provided by the Marine
Bill to review current legislation used for designating protection
of marine areas for various purposes. The Marine Bill consultation
includes proposals for a new mechanism for the designation of
marine protected areas for the conservation of important species
and habitats. As such the focus is not narrowly on fish stocks
but potentially extends to all aspects of marine biodiversity
and ecosystems.
Such a mechanism would be used to help to deliver
our commitment under the Convention for the Protection of the
Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic (OSPAR) to establish
a coherent network of protected areas. Whilst some of these areas
are likely to require protection from fisheries activities, the
network will conserve the areas that best represent the range
of species, habitats and ecological processes in our waters as
well as protecting vulnerable or sensitive species and habitats.
Recommendation 14: It is vital that marine protected
areas are placed on a strong statutory basis and include where
necessary some zones—to be reviewed over time—of absolute
exclusion. While there will need to be some flexibility in the
setting up and supervision of marine protected areas, it must
be borne in mind that the application of the precautionary principle
and the establishment of environmental limits has to lie at their
heart. (Paragraph 45)
Partially agreed. As with all the policies we are
considering for inclusion in the Bill there are different ways
that marine protected areas could be delivered, including through
both statutory and non-statutory mechanisms. Voluntary conservation
mechanisms have often proved to be successful and we will consider
applying such approaches where we can. Nevertheless, we expect
to bring forward proposals to introduce new mechanisms through
the Marine Bill to enable the establishment of marine protected
areas.
We are proposing to introduce a flexible mechanism
that can address the full range of management requirements and
provide the level of protection needed for each site. The management
measures needed for individual sites will vary widely depending
on the objectives of the site and the sensitivity of the protected
features to different activities and levels of disturbance. In
some cases this may mean that only seasonal or time limited restrictions
are required. In others it could lead to the complete restriction
of activities on a site.
We do not propose to introduce inappropriate restrictions
on development without understanding the impacts of activities
on marine ecosystems and biodiversity. However, there may be cases
where we would wish to take a more precautionary approach.
Understanding and defining environmental limits will
be a difficult task. However, it is important that we understand
these and manage our activities in such a way so as not to result
in unacceptable or catastrophic environmental consequences.
Recommendation 15: The establishment of a marine
management organisation and the rolling out of a programme of
marine spatial planning which has to be flexible and capable of
proper review must be supported by sufficient funding to ascertain
enough reliable and current detailed information about the marine
environment to inform good and robust decision-making. While Defra
still has to provide further information on the cost implications
of the Bill before it is introduced to Parliament, clearly it
would be unfair, especially in the case of the renewable energy
industry, for users to bear all the financial burden of information
provision. We look to Defra to ensure that any new marine management
organisation will have enough resources to acquire the sort of
level of detailed data needed to support reliable and soundly-based
marine spatial planning. (Paragraph 48)
Agreed. Detailed proposals for a system of marine
planning and the organisation that should administer it have yet
to be determined. It is not therefore possible at this stage to
say what proportion of that burden will be borne by business or
by Government. It will be essential that any new arrangements
are suitably resourced to ensure that they are effective.
The use of data will be a key element of any marine
panning arrangements. A number of existing data collection activities
undertaken for various purposes by Government and its agencies,
industry and other sectors have the potential to provide much
of the data needed to implement new arrangements that might be
introduced through a Marine Bill. Coordination of these activities
and facilitating access to the data collected will be one of the
elements for consideration in the development of a marine planning
system.
Steps are already being taken to facilitate this.
Government departments and agencies concerned are committed to
working closely within a UK Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy
process to ensure that the various marine monitoring activities
undertaken by the UK are coordinated and fit for purpose. They
are working to rationalise and simplify existing structures to
achieve a greater integration of marine monitoring across the
UK and to meet new and emerging requirements including those likely
to come forward through a Marine Bill. A Marine Data and Information
Partnership has also been established to work on ways to enable
the dissemination / long term stewardship of marine data and information
collected and held by different organisations, and to facilitate
its use by marine decision makers and users.
Recommendation 16: Defra deserves credit for how
it has conducted the consultation, and for its work in the stages
which led up to it, and for how it has listened fairly to all
the different interests involved. It is to be hoped that there
will indeed be another round of consultation before the draft
Bill emerges, and that the content of that consultation, or of
the draft Bill following, reflects at least some of the concerns
raised in this Report, so that the eventual Marine Act will be
as integrated and successful a measure as all those currently
involved in discussions over it wish to see. (Paragraph 49)
Partially agreed. See our responses to previous recommendations
and in particular those to recommendations 4, 5 and 6.
| 
