HC Deb 01 March 1971 vol 812 cc1220-5
Mr. Mason (by Private Notice)

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the shipping accident in the Channel.

The Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Anthony Grant)

The motor vessel "Niki", registered in Greece, founded off the mid Varne buoy on the evening of 27th February, apparently after collision with the wreck of the "Texaco Caribbean" or the "Brandenburg". Information was first received by the coast radio station at North Foreland at 8.16 p.m. G.M.T. from the motor tanker "Hebris", which reported seeing a ship sinking, and a few minutes later reported men in the sea. Searching for survivors started immediately, and continued throughout the night and into the following morning. Vessels in the area, R.N.L.I. life-boats from Dover and Dungeness, R.A.F. helicopters and a Shackleton were used to search the area thoroughly. No survivors were found, but 10 bodies were recovered. It is understood that the "Niki" carried a crew of 21, and the wife of the chief engineer on board when she left Dunkirk, and I fear that all have lost their lives. I should like to express profound sympathy with their relatives, and also express my thanks to the R.N.L.I. life-boatmen and others for their efforts to find survivors.

The wrecks of the "Texaco Caribbean" and "Brandenburg" were well marked by Trinity House with a wreck vessel and wreck buoys, and navigational warnings have been broadcast to shipping at regular intervals on radiotelegraphy and radiotelephony from coast radio stations at Niton and North Foreland every day since these vessels sank. This accident should therefore not have occurred. However I am examining urgently what further measures might be taken to ensure that no other ships collide with these wrecks.

Mr. Mason

First, may I associate my right hon. and hon. Friends with the Minister's expression of sympathy for the relatives of those who lost their lives? May I also express our appreciation of the R.N.L.I. and others who went on the rescue missions?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that last October the "Allegro" and the "Pacific Glory" collided in the Channel and 13 seamen lost their lives, that in January the "Texaco Caribbean" was in collision with another vessel when eight seamen died, and that the next day the "Brandenburg" was in collision in the same area when 21 more men died, and now we have the loss of the Greek vessel "Niki", which collided with one of the previous wrecks, with the loss of another 22 dead, a total of 64 deaths in 4½ months?

How many deaths will there be in the Channel before the Government give the matter the urgent consideration which it deserves? [Interruption.] If there is a British vessel with British lives involved, the wrath of the whole House will come down on the hon. Gentleman. Specifically, when does the hon. Gentleman intend to extend the present two-way flow system and to make the two-way flow system compulsory, as distinct from voluntary as it is at the moment? Why does he not obtain an agreement with Western Europe, especially France, as we urged, so that we can completely control the flow of traffic in the Channel, and especially establish compulsory pilotage? Now there are three wrecks, the "Texaco Caribbean", the "Brandenburg" and the "Niki", on top of each other, what is he doing about getting rid of those as well?

Mr. Grant

I deeply resent it if the right hon. Gentleman is suggesting that in some way the Government have not shown the greatest possible concern about these wrecks, which have involved foreign ships. We show great concern about them. We take the matter very seriously, and I sincerely hope that other Governments whose shipping uses these very busy waterways treat the matter with equal concern.

I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that we made proposals about the two-way traffic flow to I.M.C.O., first, to make the scheme mandatory and, secondly, to extend it further down the Channel. This will be discussed by I.M.C.O. on 15th of this month.

We can pursue getting an agreement with Western Europe, especially France, and compulsory pilotage. We do not rule it out, but it involves agreement with other parties, for ships other than French ships use the Channel and such a proposal involves a degree of international agreement.

I am having meetings about the immediate problem of the wrecks only this afternoon with Trinity House, the Navy and representatives of the Department of Environment to consider what other steps may be taken in this respect.

Sir A. V. Harvey

Will my hon. Friend repudiate in the strongest possible terms the disgraceful suggestion by the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason)? Is there nothing to which the Opposition will not stoop these days to create trouble? Have not the Government done everything they can, bearing in mind that these wrecks are outside territorial waters?

Mr. Grant

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend, who has expressed my sentiments completely.

Mr. Prescott

May I express my sympathy with those who have suffered loss and express my appreciation of the work done by the rescue services? Will the Minister now recognise that the problem is in international waterways and that the various bodies in this country can impose sanctions only within our territorial waters? The collisions and the deaths caused by them are occurring in the international waterways of the Channel. We have pressed the Minister constantly to call a conference of the regional countries, the countries of Western Europe, because ships, particularly as was the case last night, must have ignored warnings. We must have control, but this means international action. The Rochdale Report and the various authorities, including the Board of Trade, could have done something about this, and it is a responsibility of the Government to do something.

Mr. Grant

At least the hon. Gentleman recognises that this incident occurred in international waters, a point which seems to have escaped his right hon. Friend. I am not at all aware of what use the Rochdale Report would have been in preventing this accident. This is a situation in which Trinity House is responsible, but the incident occurred outside territorial waters. Trinity House had marked the wreck. It placed its buoys over the wreck and it placed its marking vessel over the wreck, and still there was a collision. Other ships appear to be disregarding these warnings. This is not a matter in which one can proceed by unilateral action, but we are vigorously pursuing discussions with other nations to see whether a suitable solution can be found to deal with this problem in the Channel.

Mr. Ridsdale

I congratulate my hon. Friend on what he is doing to try to get international co-operation. What steps are being taken to establish a maritime authority, as was advised in the Rochdale Report?

Mr. Grant

That is a subject of discussion with all aspects of the industry, and I hope to be able to say something further in due course.

Mr. Pardoe

I dissociate myself entirely from that rather disgraceful suggestion by the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason). Can the Minister say how many ships have passed through the area, which is clearly marked, within the last month, and can he suggest whether this is due to madness, blindness, or the fact that the area is not sufficiently marked?

Mr. Grant

I do not think that it is to do with the lack of marking. I am satisfied that Trinity House has done everything that it could do in that respect. I cannot tell the hon. Member the exact number which have passed through, but I have had reports of a number of vessels completely ignoring signals. As a result, some of my officials carried out a survey this weekend and I am awaiting the results, which will show how many vessels went through. It is fair to say that a number of vessels have totally disregarded the signals. It would be wrong for me to pontificate, but, as a general proposition, no matter how splendid the technological and marine aids, there is no substitute for keeping a good look out.

Mr. Costain

Is my hon. Friend aware that the statement made by the representative of the Opposition Front Bench was quite outrageous? Is he also aware that for three years I contacted and wrote to the Ministry when the Labour party was in office and initiated a private Member's debate in the House on the matter? How can the Opposition make political capital out of this sort of tragedy?

Mr. Mason

rose—

Mr. Grant

May I answer my hon. Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Costain)? I agree with him. I can only conclude that the Opposition are so hard up for material that they have to find ammunition in this way.

Mr. Mason

rose—

Hon. Members

Withdraw.

Mr. Mason

We can all express concern, but only the Government can take effective action. On the question of regional agreements, is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is within his province to take the initiative within the Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organisation and get an agreement to control the Channel? Secondly, supposing that the Government get I.M.C.O.'s acceptance at the meeting which the Minister is to have on the 15th of this month, how long will it be before he can effectively have any control over the Channel waterway?

Mr. Grant

I said earlier in the House that we do not rule out the possibility of a regional agreement. This is something which we shall pursue with I.M.C.O. But I do not want the House to imagine, as the right hon. Gentleman seems to imagine, that we can solve this very complex problem of the English Channel, which is full of ships from many countries, merely by a halfway house agreement with certain countries—for example, France—when so many other countries are involved.