Ms Attracta U? Bhroin:

I thank the Deputy very much for the question. In respect of head 6(4) and the targets, I will ask colleagues to expand on the matter. We concur on, and very much welcome the sessions to date that have highlighted the weakness of the language, particularly "up to 30%" and "aim to designate". These phrases are all very weak in the context of particular targets on which my colleagues will expand.

It is not so much a case of width or quality; it is an issue of what is actually being designated. Ten percent of the areas that do not need to be designated is of very little value, as is 45%t. The fundamental objective of the marine strategy framework directive is good environmental status. That is what we need to be delivering on to facilitate the achievement of the objective. We also need to deliver on the fundamental requirement for an ecologically coherent network that is representative, to echo not merely a target and number but also the nature of the network. That is what is significantly missing in a target-based approach and in the absence of the legal architecture of the directives underpinning these requirements. I will touch on the consultation periods. It has been recognised that there are concerns. Could the Deputy remind me which head he was concerned about in respect of consultation?