MASTERS OF OFFSHORE INSTALLATIONS, FURTHER PROVISIONS (Hansard, 14 July 1971)

§ Mr. Ridley
I beg to move Amendment No. 17, in page 5, line 10, after second 'or', insert 'where connected with safety, health or welfare'. This Amendment, too, is designed to meet the views of the Opposition who considered that it was not entirely clear whether the powers in the Bill were concerned only with safety, health and welfare or with discipline of an industrial nature. We have found it possible to clarify the Bill, although the intention was always that which the Opposition understood and shared with the Government. Both this Amendment and Amendment No. 34 to the Schedule are intended to clarify what was always our intention, namely, that the provisions of the Bill should relate only to matters dealing with safety, health and welfare. I hope that these Amendments will meet with the approval of the Opposition and that I need not argue the case further.

§ Mr. John Prescott (Kingston upon Hull, East)
We welcome the Amendment, as we pressed for this point in Committee. We wish to make it absolutely clear that where responsibility is to be placed upon a certain person, now to be known as the installation manager, that responsibility and authority vested in him shall be concerned solely with the safety of the installation itself. The Amendment now makes that clear.
However, it is fair to point out, even at this late stage, that there are certain circumstances which must be taken into consideration with the Amendment. We feel that the Amendment now makes it clear that where the Clause refers to maintenance of order and discipline, it refers particularly to those matters which threaten the safety, health or welfare of people on board installations. However, it cannot be entirely divorced from other parts of the Clause—for example, 670 subsection (3). The Under-Secretary will be aware of our very strong objection to the Clause, which makes it a statutory offence to disobey a lawful command with a fine of up to £50. This is ominous and very much reminiscent of the Captain Bligh kind of situation.

§ Mr. Ridley
With leave of the House, I would not wish to enter into an argument about merchant shipping matters, 672 but I must point out that the hon. Member's interpretation of subsection (3) is wrong. The words "that authority" refer to subsection (2), which is limited to matters of safety, health and welfare. So subsection (3) is similarly limited, and does not take the matters wider than the issues on which we are all agreed—that the installation manager has every right to exercise authority and, therefore. ultimately, discipline.
There is no difference of intention between us, but the hon. Members interpretation is wrong : the subsection does not smack of Captain Bligh. It is limited to the purpose on which both sides are agreed.