Official Report 79KB pdf
Again, there seems to be a potential drafting problem with various parts of this order. Is it the intention of article 3 to disapply all the prohibitions in article 6 and, if so, what is the purpose of article 3(b)? Is it agreed that we should seek clarification of this?
We used to get maps apparently. One does not want to lose 6,000 square miles of the North sea.
Yes, we need maps.
I am happy to second that. It is an excellent point raised by the Liberal party. I am glad that it has come on board on the 6,000 square miles issue.
I had not focused on that but, given that this is going to people in a trade who operate from charts, it appears that the geographical description is important. Given that this is coming through Her Majesty's Stationery Office, the acquisition of Ordnance Survey maps is not of particular difficulty. In a purchase of a house, we would tack on a clear, defined description.
We may not need the map, but it should be available.
There is a precise definition in the schedule of the areas that are covered. I presume that fishermen would be able to use that information. The convener may want to get clarification on this issue, but if the information that is already supplied is sufficient for the people in the industry, that is what is crucial.
Perhaps we should raise with the Executive that we note that maps are not provided, which has been done historically. We should ask what the reasoning is behind that and whether it is satisfied that concerned individuals will have fair and accurate knowledge as to the geographical area referred to.