Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Plenary, 24 May 2000

24 May 2000 · S1 · Plenary

Item of business

National Parks (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

McGugan, Irene SNP North East Scotland Watch on SPTV

We have had extensive discussion of section 28; we now move on to talk about section 29—marine national parks.

Scottish Natural Heritage admitted that marine national parks were not initially examined. Indeed, in her evidence to the Transport and the Environment Committee last year, the Minister for Transport and the Environment accepted that the bill would be targeted at a terrestrial concept. Section 29 is, therefore, something of an afterthought that has been tacked on in response to public consultation on the draft bill and, I suggest, without proper thought to the issues around marine parks.

Not surprisingly, a number of reservations about section 29 were expressed to the Rural Affairs Committee. In particular, the Scottish Fishermen's Federation felt that insufficient information had been provided to allow an informed debate on marine national parks at this stage. The federation felt that it was difficult adequately to address fundamental issues such as the purpose of marine national parks, the areas in which it is appropriate to establish marine national parks and whether there is a need for them in Scotland. Evidence overseas suggests that marine parks are usually established to protect areas of outstanding marine species diversity, a good example being the barrier reef. Further clarification is required to allay the concerns of fishermen about a further tier of regulation on top of the complexities of existing marine legislation.

Many organisations envisage marine national parks with a strong terrestrial connection. Some concern was expressed that the phrase "wholly or mainly" might preclude the flexibility of applying section 29 to areas that are mainly land, but have a component of sea. While the SNP believes that the concept of marine national parks is important and that some coastal communities might wish eventually to explore it, at this stage public debate has focused on terrestrial parks and it is vital that there is equitable application of any benefits of national park designation.

We strongly recommend further consultation with the likely users and competent authorities and much more detailed consideration of the network of existing legislation and the complexities of designating and managing a marine national park so that appropriate amendments that more adequately include marine interests can be lodged at stage 2.

The Rural Affairs Committee also considered local representation in some detail. That was appropriate since in the responses to the first consultation that was the area that was most commented on. Sixty-four per cent of respondents called either for direct elections or for more local representation. Serious problems have been encountered in national parks elsewhere as a consequence of failure to involve local people. A sense of local ownership must be created and nurtured and local communities in designated national park areas must be given the opportunity to play a major role in planning and managing their park at strategic and local levels.

The SNP advocates a firmer commitment to including community representatives on park authorities rather than leaving that to chance through local authority nomination or appointment by ministers. In evidence to committees there was overwhelming agreement that local interests must be adequately represented on national park authorities. The means by which that is to be achieved is open to further discussion and amendment, but community involvement must be guaranteed and we urge the Minister for Transport and the Environment to give that serious consideration.

Search Hansard contributions

Plenary, 24 May 2000

In the same item of business