Fishing grounds

The perils of a litigous society coupled with bureaucracy are being highlighted to the inshore fishing industry at the moment.

 

A couple of environmental charities have claimed the Government wasn't doing enough to control certain types of inshore fishing which could damage some types of sea bed; whether fair or not, the Government has decided to create a blanket ban on some activities unless they are sure that the sea bed is of a type that wouldn't be affected. Being sure means having evidence based on a survey.

 

The trouble is that instead of doing it effectively, they are doing it quickly: the first stage has to be complete by Christmas. Not just the survey: the implementation of the rules. Given the time it takes to write and introduce by-laws which have been approved there are only a few weeks to carry out a proper survey of the sea bed. This increases the chance that much of the sea bed will not be surveyed and fishing will be prohibited where it need not be.

 

So: although there is no evidence of harm, the desire to avoid litigation and the length of time needed to prepare and deal with legislation (in this case by-laws) means there will be an unnecessary risk to fishing, an improtant part of the local economy. Could it have been done better? Yes, if the Government had gripped the issue earlier, there'd be less urgency. Yes, if there was more flexibility on by-law production. And yes, if environmental legislation balanced the overall management of the environment with protection. The danger is we look at the short term rather than the long term.

 

I have joined the board of NIFCA (Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority) which has to juggle this.problem. They had a useful meeting - appropriately over-looking Seahouses harbour - with local fishermen to explain the position, to identify the commonly fished areas to identify the priority areas to be surveyed; it looks as though we'll get the necessary co-operation.

Maiden Speech

My first speech in the Council Chamber earlier this week. A bit nerve-racking, but it was on an important subject so I felt I should stand up and speak.

Glen Sanderson proposed a motion to ask the Council to gather evidence about the impact of wind farms on tourism. Belford is likely to face two applications for wind farms on the ridge above it just in front of St Oswald's and St Cuthbert's Way so the topic was very relevant. Almost a quarter of private sector employment in this division is related to tourism, and there can be few people in Northumberland who have not enjoyed Bamburgh, Lindisfarne, Budle Bay or the walks noted above.

I said we owed it to good planning decision making, to the visitirs and to our residents to find out the facts.

The motion was, after a couple of amendments, agreed and the job of doing the investigating passed to the Regeneration working group (on which I sit, which  is good).

It's good the motion was passed with relatively little party back-biting: but it's a bit sad it's necessary: it should have been a no-brainer for the Council to want to know this. The trouble is that over the last few years they seem to have been seduced by wind farms, hence the growing proliferation across the county.

AONB

It was a warm gentle afternoon in a busy Alnmouth. I eventually found a parking space, at the front overlooking the golf course, one of England's oldest links courses, with lovely - some might say outstanding - natural beauty. I walked appropriately in front of  the course, past the dunes and back up the street to my first meeting of the Northumberland Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Partnership Board...

 

 



...where they elected me chair. Nobody else wanted to do it, which was one reason; another was that previously the chair was one of the Councillors appointed to the partnership board; I'm one of four such councillors and the only one who lives in the area and wasn't already chair of something.

It's good thing to be involved in; it doesn't actually have any powers but it has influence.

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty were formed after the Second World War, at the same time as National Parks, to ensure their preservation for the nation's benefit. As a generalisation, National Parks were more isolated and had more protections than AONBs but the primary purpose is still to conserve and enhance the natural beauty.

There are over 30 AONBs in England and Wales; the nearest one to ours is the N Penines. The Northumberland Coast AONB runs from Cocklawburn to Amble. The County Council has the legal authority over the AONB and has to provide support and staffing and has a legal duty to pursue the AONB's objectives.

The main area most people come across the AONB is on planning and access issues where it is one of the statutory consultees. The national planning framework gives the highest level of support to protecting the AONB from excessive development (that is hard to see from some of the developments that have taken place in the area in the last few years, but hopefully recent successes can strengthen the AONB's authority in this field).

But the AONB does more than this: it gives advice and assistance to the community to improve the management of the area and to assist the development of the local economy. It works through a partnership Board where a number of special interest groups and relevant bodies - eg farmers, parish councils, tourist businesses, Natural England - are repesented. An important function (mandated on the Council) is to prepare a Management Plan every five years setting out what makes the Area special and the action plan to conserve and improve it.

The next management plan is due to run from 2014 to 2019 so I've become involved at an interesting time. Whatever the plan says, however, the beauty of the area will remain.

 

One Region

We (all councillors) had a briefing about the creation of a North East Combined Authority, which was then approved by the seven councils involved* and announced this week.

In a region which overwhelmingly rejected regional government this must raise questions.

The answer is that the plan is not to create another tier of government but instead the seven councils are combining their economic and transport roles. The reason for doing this is to benefit from scale, to avoid teh adjacent councils wasting money and effort competing against each oother for resources and most importantly to benefit from the Government's intention to proviude funding at a regional level to promote growth. Other parts of the country have either formed such a Combined Authority - Manchester - or are planning to - Leeds and Sheffield.

The Authority will not (at least initially) have a central staff or process. It will be run by the Chief Executives and Leaders of the seven councils and they will focus on the detailed Independent Economic Review of the NE chaired by Lord Adonis, which contained some relevant and helpful ideas. The economic and transport agenda will work in partnership with the Local Enterprise Partnership, a group largely run by business.

This is one of those things that everyone thinks is A Good Thing: all parties supported it. Northumberland and Durham have an effective opt out from local transport issues - transport funding will continue to be largely detrimined by the County, but we will have input into strategic issues which should help given the importance of the Newcastle hub. But I think there are two problems with the structure:
- can you think of another sensible, small scale group set up by Governments to benefit from economies of scale? And yet which over the years developed its own infrastructure and grew beyond the ability of the individual entities to control it? Yes, the EU. It would be easy for this to develop into something beyond democratic control.
- and this risk is made by the fact that there's no ability to leave the authority without the whole thing being wound up. It's always a mistake to start soemthing without thinking about how it can be stopped.

So overall, I think in the short to medium term this will be a good thing that will improve economic growth, But I suspect in the long term we'll regret it.


* Northumberland, Durham, Newcastle, Gateshead, S Tyneside, N Tyneside and Sunderland