Ms Attracta U? Bhroin:

I believe that is definitely an issue because there could be multiple proposals at the same time, affecting the ability not only to consider each one but also to consider their cumulative impact. Considering that it generally takes four weeks to get a response to an access-to-information request on the environment, those timelines are very inadequate. Timelines for public participation generally are of concern throughout, particularly regarding the ocean environment policy statement. Perhaps we will get a chance to revisit that, in particular, because there are many pertinent points to be made on the consultation on it.

With respect to head 14(5), the issues are very complex legally because a marine protected area can incorporate not only a marine protected area designation but also sub-designations – for example, a proposed special protection area – because we have outstanding designations. I am referring to a candidate special area of conservation, a special area of conservation and, indeed, other protections. We could have a conference on how the provision applies legally, or the jurisprudence. Therefore, there is an awful lot of teasing out to be done, particularly depending on when the provisions come forward and the status of outstanding designations in the marine environment. The Deputy's point on who is to be consulted, and the bodies involved, is key. The vagueness on consultation and associated decision-making in the head give rise to extreme concern. Very much related this is head 14(2), which I hope we will have a chance to revisit in respect of the intersection of existing authorisations.

On timelines generally, there is vagueness. There are quite prescriptive timelines in respect of participation. There are one or two timelines in respect of the ocean environment policy statement. The Minister has to bring it forward within a year of enactment.

Apart from that, once something goes back to the Minister or where he or she is required to set up expert bodies, there is a significant amount of discretion, which is compounded by 113 uses of the word "may" throughout the document.