salter speaks in Parliament, fishing again

It looks like wonderboy Marty hs been watching the movie ‘End of the line’, I can see several qotes from it in his lenthy speech. So much for his being an expert on fishing, and on his being responsible for New Labour helping to eradicate fish from the sea. He pretends he is in opposition. He wont have long to wait fortunately. salter fish

 

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?s=speaker:10526+section:debate&o=d

Oral Answers to Questions — Home Department: New Clause 8 — MCZs: duty to manage and mitigate impacts upon existing activities (26 Oct 2009)
Martin Salter: As my hon. Friend bears the scars of the Bill Committee and we shared many hours on this subject together, I certainly commend her remarks to the Minister. This is an excellent Bill that is good for fisheries and good for conservation. It needs us to be big people and take on vested interests, and to be prepared to make the arguments for the next generation.

Oral Answers to Questions — Home Department: New Clause 8 — MCZs: duty to manage and mitigate impacts upon existing activities (26 Oct 2009)
Martin Salter: Does the Minister accept that although there might be short-term pain, it could be for long-term gain? That long term might not be too far away. Evidence from St. Lucia in South Africa, where marine protected zones were introduced in 1995, showed that in just three years the biomass of that reserve tripled, making a strong economic argument for those who would have opposed it in the first place.

(Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c106) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
I congratulate Mr. Mitchell on lightening our proceedings. I think that most of us wondered whether we would achieve such levels of excitement.

Let me begin by identifying an absurdity that has featured in a number of statements made today. Members have said that it is not possible to create a patchwork quilt of marine conservation zones—that they will not work. Every Member has been lauding the achievements of Lundy as a no-take zone. That is the first patch in the patchwork quilt that we need to establish around these shores, if there are to be any fish left for the people of Great Grimsby and elsewhere to fish for.

I oppose new clause 8, and I oppose amendment 24, which seeks to enhance the sea fisheries defence. I support Government amendment 5, which seeks to minimise that defence in the context of the reform of the common fisheries policy, as outlined by Mr. Benyon. By way of a change, I support Government amendments 13 and 14, which seek important reforms to the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975.

It is a pleasure to follow a number of speeches, particularly those of my hon. Friend Rob Marris and Mr. Walker. However, I must take issue with what the hon. Member for Broxbourne said about accidental damage. There is nothing accidental about beam trawling. Beam trawling is an environmental disaster. If we were to translate it to the agricultural field—pardon the pun—it would mean a farmer ploughing the same field seven times in a single growing season. Beam trawling does long-term environmental damage and cannot exist alongside conservation and sustainable fisheries. They are completely opposed, and such damage is not done accidentally.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c107) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Charles Walker (Broxbourne, Conservative)
I hope the hon. Gentleman will recognise that I was expressing concern that accidental damage might be a universal get-out clause for the fishing industry.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c107) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
I welcome that clarification.

There need not be a conflict between fishing—whether commercial or recreational—and conservation, provided that the fishermen decide to come down in favour of conservation. Turning to my own sport, I have lost count of the number of arguments I have had with salmon anglers who opposed the bringing in of the rule of returning spring salmon before 16 June. It has finally got into the psyche of Britain’s game anglers that we cannot continually remove spawning fish from the food chain and expect a run of salmon in subsequent years. Fishermen can be conservationists, but the choice is theirs, and fishermen or their public representatives who choose to oppose the single most important piece of environmental legislation affecting the coastline and seas of this nation have clearly not opted to come down on the side of conservation.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c107) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Angus MacNeil (Spokesperson (Transport; Rural Affairs; Scotland Office); Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Scottish National Party)
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
No, I will not.

I have huge affection and respect for my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby. He is a doughty champion for his constituency and for the commercial fishing interest, but I say to him that he will do them no favours in the long term if he encourages people to set their faces against the very conservation measures that are designed to protect the existence of the fish that his constituents wish to catch.

I get tired of listening to the argument that people have had a traditional right to pursue their quarry in this way. The same argument was made about the white rhino in Africa until it was hunted to extinction, and the Spanish and the Portuguese are making the same argument about the bluefin tuna fishery. Bluefin tuna have got probably months, and certainly no more than two or three years, left to exist as a species that can be sustainably harvested. Sadly, a couple of years ago in Luxembourg the European Fisheries Council recommended quotas that were twice as generous as those that should have been introduced in order to secure sustainability.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Angus MacNeil (Spokesperson (Transport; Rural Affairs; Scotland Office); Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Scottish National Party)
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
No, because there is very little time.

The commercial sector broke those quotas by a factor of 100 per cent. Unless we change the terms of this debate, and unless we in this House come down forthrightly on the side of conservation, there is no hope for the commercial fishing industry or recreational fishing.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Austin Mitchell (Great Grimsby, Labour)
Will my hon. Friend give way?

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
I shall give way to my hon. Friend.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Austin Mitchell (Great Grimsby, Labour)
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his moving tribute to me, but, as far as I know, we are talking about white herring, not white rhino. It is not true that the fishing industry is opposed to conservation measures; it supports them, but it wants its position to be made clear within them. As my hon. Friend is such a passionate supporter of marine conservation zones, will he tell us whether he wants them to become no-fishing zones?

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
I certainly support the power in the Bill to have, on the basis of good scientific evidence, MCZs that are no-take zones where appropriate. They could be established for a host of reasons, but particularly in nursery areas for recovery species. We have already witnessed commercial fishermen in the south-west praising the fact that their catch has risen as a result of the Lundy no-take zone. I offer a potential golden future to my hon. Friend’s constituents through having no-take zones.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c108) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Angus MacNeil (Spokesperson (Transport; Rural Affairs; Scotland Office); Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Scottish National Party)
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c109) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
No.

The Marine Conservation Society wrote the following to the Minister back on 3 July:

“The true value in marine reserves lies not in their ability to protect the most fragile species as is often put forwards. Instead marine reserves, where no extraction or disturbance takes place, allow the sea to fully recover for species diversity and productivity.”

There is a common interest between conservationists and the commercial sector to ensure a more productive sea.

I turn briefly to the Government amendments that seek to amend and improve the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975. The Environment Agency has just concluded a consultation on the removal of freshwater fish that the Bill allows for. The consultation overwhelmingly came down in favour of a catch-and-release regime for our freshwater fisheries. Henceforth, the archaic, anachronistic system of regional byelaws is to be replaced with a national catch-and-release regime for coarse fish, which is long overdue. Yes, there will be some exceptions for fishery management, predator fishing or conservation purposes, but in their response to the Environment Agency consultation as part of this Bill, freshwater anglers overwhelmingly came down on the side of conservation, and it is to their credit that they did so.

I take issue with the argument that somehow, only Members with coastal constituencies have the right to argue about the condition of our sea. Actually, some of the finest contributions came from my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West and the hon. Members for Broxbourne and for Newbury—constituencies that are a considerable distance from the sea. The sea is a common heritage that we all share.

Given that time is of the essence and that we have other groups of amendments to move on to, I would like the last word in my contribution to go to a trawlerman. Mr. Dave Murphy was a trawler captain for Interfish until two years ago, when he became the outreach officer for the Finding Sanctuary project. He says:

“Protecting habitats has got to do fish stocks good in the end. I’ve had the opportunity to make my life fishing. I’d like my two boys to have the same chance.”

That is what the Bill is about: ensuring that the fish stocks that we value, and that we want to see protected and enhanced and flourish, are there for future generations.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c109) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)
9:00 pm

Linda Gilroy (Plymouth, Sutton, Labour)
I am pleased that my hon. Friend has heard from Mr. David Murphy, who is doing excellent work in developing “Fishermap” for Finding Sanctuary. However, will he urge the Minister, as I should like to do, to issue the ecological guidance necessary for that project to do its work?

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c109) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Martin Salter (Reading West, Labour)
As my hon. Friend bears the scars of the Bill Committee and we shared many hours on this subject together, I certainly commend her remarks to the Minister.

This is an excellent Bill that is good for fisheries and good for conservation. It needs us to be big people and take on vested interests, and to be prepared to make the arguments for the next generation.

Link to this Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 October 2009, c109) Video match this
Add an annotation (e.g. more info, blog post or wikipedia article)

Advertisements
Published in: on October 28, 2009 at 10:22 am  Comments (4)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://martinsnottheone.wordpress.com/2009/10/28/salter-speaks-in-parliament-fishing-again/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

4 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. yeah,The true value in marine reserves lies not in their ability to protect the most fragile species as is often put forwards

  2. Very nice site!

  3. Great Article , I considered it grand

    I look ahead to more innovative postings like this one. Do you have a newsletter I can subscribe to for new postings?

  4. That makes you my number 1 fan. Actually my only fan.
    I am a luddite so dont have a newsletter. I could carve it onto a lump of wood though.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: