§ Mr. MillanI beg to move Amendment No. 155, in page 6, line 4, at end insert:
'(d) the protection of fishing in any such area;'.
The Temporary ChairmanWith this amendment, we are to discuss Amendment No. 64, in page 6, line 5, at end insert:
'(e) the preservation of marine and wildlife in any such area'.
§ Mr. MillanI need not say much more about this matter, because we have already discussed fishing. By putting it specifically in Clause 6, which is the regulation-making clause, we indicate our considerable interest in protecting fishing, and it will be possible in the regulations themselves to make provisions about underwater obstructions, the prevention of the encroachment of operations into spawning grounds and a number of other 388 matters of considerable interest to the protection of fishing interests.
§ Mr. SproatWhat are the Government's intentions with regard to a situation where fishing vessels seek shelter in coastal waters in bad weather in sea areas which might be designated? It would be wrong on safety grounds to interfere with the safety rights of vessels in such cases. May we be assured that safety rights in emergencies will not be at risk?
§ Mr. MillanWithout notice, I could not give a categorical assurance. If I did, I might go beyond what the hon. Gentleman is asking. But there must be provision whereby, in emergency, a vessel can seek shelter in such waters. One cannot stick to the letter of the law when danger to human life is involved. I shall see that what the hon. Gentleman has raised is taken into account, and I am sure that there must be provision for emergencies, but I cannot now be categorical. I would not wish to be taken as giving a pledge which could not, in the event, be fulfilled.
§ Mr. CorrieWe thank the Minister for dealing with the protection of fishing in such areas. I am sure that the fishermen will welcome the amendment wholeheartedly as well. We hope that marine and wild life can also be protected. We have been asked many questions about these aspects in the last week or so. We hope that marine life will not be too much disturbed by dredging or blasting in any of the sea areas being taken over for development.
Perhaps because my name is linked with the conservation cause, I have had an extra heavy post on these aspects. Many people and societies have written. May we have an assurance that wild life will not be disrupted too much in these areas? Many people outside the House are passionately involved with these matters, and the areas which may be taken away for such development are likely to be remote and unspoilt and have an abundance of wild life.
For example, I trust that seal colonies will not be destroyed out of hand because they happen to be on a site chosen for development. I hope, too, that bird sanctuaries will not be too much disturbed by development. Many people are desperately interested in these matters and would like an assurance from the Government.
§ Mr. MillanI do not think I could give an assurance which would extend to writing this aspect into the Bill as a purpose of the regulations, but obviously in none of these matters would we unnecessarily disturb or interfere with marine or wild life of any sort. It must be protected as much as possible. But there is already specific legislation, such as the Protection of Birds Act, and we certainly have no wish to cause disturbance to anything other than is absolutely indispensable for the making of an order.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. RifkindI beg to move Amendment No. 65, in page 6, line 8, leave out paragraph (f).
The Temporary ChairmanWith this amendment we shall take Amendment No. 66, in page 6, line 10, at end insert:
'Provided that—
- (i) no charge shall be levied on any vessel unconnected with said relevant operations; and
- (ii) that all such charges shall in such proportion as the Secretary of State shall determine be paid to said harbour authority or said local authorities mentioned in section 4(4) of this Act'.
§ Mr. RifkindThis is what the Minisster will be happy to call a probing amendment. Why is it felt necessary to impose charges under the terms of subsection (1)(f)? In what circumstances will it be found necessary to impose charges? Are these powers, which at the moment are merely permissive powers enabling the Secretary of State to make these charges if he so wishes, likely to be applied by the Government? If so, on what sort of vessels or platforms will the charges be levied? We shall be grateful to receive any other information which the Minister can give to the House as we are somewhat in the dark on the Government's thinking on this proposal.
§ 11.0 p.m.
§ Mr. John SmithI propose to deal with Amendment No. 66 at the same time as Amendment No. 65. I am glad to hear that this is merely a probing amendment. I wondered whether it was being suggested that the Secretary of State should not levy charges in these circumstances. There are limits to the taxpayers' bounty. I am glad to hear that the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Pent- 390 lands (Mr. Rifkind) is merely seeking information.
The aim of these provisions is that the companies whose operations necessitate the creation and policing of designated sea areas should make a reasonable contribution towards the costs incurred by the Secretary of State or by a harbour authority or local authority acting as his agent. The author of the amendment clearly believe that taxpayers' money should be spent as an act of charity towards the platform construction firms.
It is not intended that charges should be levied on shipping or fishing vessels unconnected with the operations in the designated sea area. They are meant to apply to supply vessels attending the assembly or testing operations and to the operations themselves in some circumstances where charging on an item-by-item basis would be fairer than charging an all-in licence fee. Perhaps that goes some way towards explaining what we have in mind.
§ Mr. Donald StewartWill the Minister give an assurance that fishing vessels will be exempted? Will the charges apply to mail steamers, ferries and ships of that kind?
§ Mr. John SmithSuch ships will not be charged because they will not take part in the operations with which we are concerned.
§ Mr. RifkindOn this occasion, I am happy with the information supplied by the Minister. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. RifkindI beg to move Amendment No. 67, in page 6, line 11, leave out paragraph (g).
On this occasion I shall have to disappoint the Minister. Unlike the previous amendment, this is not meant to be a probing amendment. In its present form the clause is one of the most disturbing aspects of the Bill. The power which it seeks to enable the Secretary of State to regulate is put forward without any details being given as to the manner in which the activities of the persons concerned will be regulated. This smacks more of the KGB than of the normal, practice of British Government.
391 There are listed all the various grounds for regulation which the Secretary of State may seek. In the debate on Second Reading the Minister said:
In addition, activities within the area would be governed by regulations. These would cover such matters as the control and protection of navigation, the safety of the public, and the control of pollution."— [OFFICIAL REPORT, 19th November 1974; Vol. 881, c. 1118.]Those were the only matters to which reference was made on Second Reading. We do not object to them, but we have had no information on the matters which are outlined in paragraphs (a) to (e). We have had no information as to why there should be this blanket provision to enable the Secretary of State to regulate a whole range of unspecified and unknown matters on which the Government have not thought fit to inform the House. Unless the Minister can satisfy us that these powers are justified and that they will not be abused we shall have to consider seriously what steps to take to try to prevent the subsection appearing on the statute book.
§ Mr. MillanThese are perfectly innocent provisions. If they are removed it will mean that the rest of the regulations will be unenforceable except through the courts. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would welcome that situation, but I would not.
Paragraph (g) merely allows the Secretary of State's officers, servants or appointed agents—which may include the local authority or the harbour authority —to give specific directions, for example, to the masters of vessels and to people controlling relevant operations in designated sea areas. Unless they are able to do that they will not be able to control events except by action through the courts. Without the paragraph the regulations would be made so weak as to be hardly worth having and the advantages of the regulations would largely disappear.
§ There is no question of the Secretary of State's going in and ordering people about unnecessarily, telling them that they may only do certain things with our approval and acting in a cavalier and sinister way. I am advised that we need the paragraph to enable the regulations to be enforced.
§ Mr. RifkindI am sorry, but I must press the Minister further. He has given examples where the regulations might apply, but he has given very few. He has not said why, if it is possible to stipulate specific purposes in paragraphs (a) to (e), these additional powers are necessary and why they cannot be stipulated in paragraph (g). In the Bill the Secretary of State seeks power to regulate the activities of persons, but he has not given specific examples. He has not said why the Bill should be framed in such a wide and uncontrolled fashion.
§ Mr. MillanWe are not here talking about what might actually appear in the regulations. In the clause we are following the fairly standard practice of taking regulation-making powers, and we have outlined briefly the sort of matters which might be covered by those regulations.
This is very much the common form, and I am assured that not only is there nothing sinister in it but that unless the regulations, when they are produced, actually contain powers of direction of this sort it will leave us with unenforceable regulations.
I suspect that if we took the paragraph out we could still cover the point with the regulations, but why the hon. Member should consider that to be of some advantage I cannot imagine.
§ Question put, That the amendment be made:—
§ The Committee divided: Ayes 107, Noes 178.
395| Division No. 28.] | AYES | [11.5 p.m. |
| Adley, Robert | Brotherton, Michael | Cormack, Patrick |
| Aitken, J. W. P. | Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) | Corrie, John |
| Atkins, Rt Hon H. (Spelthorne) | Buchanan-Smith, Alick | Costain, A. P. |
| Banks, Robert | Bulmer, Esmond | Dodsworth, Geoffrey |
| Benyon, W. R. | Chalker, Mrs Lynda | Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James |
| Biffen, John | Clark, Alan (Plymouth, S) | Durant, Tony |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | Edwards, Nicholas (Pembroke) |
| Boscawen, Hon Robert | Cockcroft, John | Emery, Peter |
| Bowden, Andrew (Brighton) | Cooke, Robert (Bristol W) | Eyre, Reginald |
| Braine, Sir Bernard | Cope, John | Fairbairn, Nicholas |
| Fairgrieve, Russell | MacGregor, John | Silvester, Fred |
| Farr, John | Marshall, Michael (Arundel) | Sims, Roger |
| Fletcher, Alex (Edinburgh N.) | Mates, Michael | Smith, Dudley (Warwick) |
| Gardner, Edward (S. Fyide) | Mather, Carol | Speed, Keith |
| Gilmour, Sir John (East Fife) | Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin | Spence, John |
| Gray, Hamish | Mayhew, Patrick | Spicer, James (W. Dorset) |
| Grieve, Percy | Meyer, Sir Anthony | Spicer, Michael (S. Worcester) |
| Grist, Ian | Miller, Hal (Bromsgrove) | Sproat, lain |
| Hampson, Dr Keith | Miscampbell, Norman | Stainton, Keith |
| Harrison, Sir Harwood (Eye) | Monro, Hector | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Harvie Anderson, Rt Hon Miss | Morrison, Peter (Chester) | Stewart, Ian (Hitchin) |
| Hayhoe, Barney | Nelson, Anthony | Stokes, John |
| Hicks, Robert | Neubert, Michael | Taylor, Teddy (Glasgow C.) |
| Holland, Philip | Newton, Tony | Tebbit, Norman |
| Hunt, John | Osborn, John | Temple-Morris, P. |
| Hutchison, Michael Clark | Page, John (Harrow West) | Townsend, Cyril D. |
| Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) | Parkinson, Cecil | Tugendhat, Christopher |
| James, David | Pattie, Geoffrey | Vaughan, Dr Gerard |
| Kellett-Bowman, Mrs Elaine | Percival, Ian | Viggers, P. J. |
| King, Evelyn (South Dorset) | Rees, Peter (Dover & Deal) | Warren, Kenneth |
| Kitson, Sir Timothy | Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon | Weatherlll, Bernard |
| Knight, Mrs Jill | Rifkind, Malcolm | Young, Sir George (Ealing) |
| Lawrence, Ivan | Roberts, Michael (Cardiff N.W.) | Younger, Hon George |
| Lester, Jim (Beeston) | Roberts, Wyn (Conway) | |
| Lloyd, Ian (Havant) | Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
| Luce, Richard | Shelton, William (Lambeth St.) | Mr. John Stradling Thomas and |
| Macfarlane, Neil | Shepherd, Colin | Mr. Spencer Le Marchant. |
| NOES | ||
| Anderson, Donald | Flannery, Martin | Mendelson, John |
| Archer, Peter | Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) | Millan, Bruce |
| Armstrong, Ernest | Ford, Ben T. | Moonman, Eric |
| Ashton, Jop | Forrester, John | Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe) |
| Atkinson, Norman | Fowler, Gerald (The Wrekin) | Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw) |
| Bain, Mrs Margaret | George, Bruce | Murray, Ronald King |
| Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) | Gilbert, Dr John | Noble, Mike |
| Bates, Alf | Golding, John | Oakes, Gordon |
| Bean, Robert E. | Gourlay, Harry | O'Halloran, Michael |
| Bennett, Andrew (Stockport N) | Grant, John (Islington C.) | Orbach, Maurice |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Grimond, Rt Hon J. | Ovenden, John |
| Blenkinsop, Arthur | Hamling, William | Parker, John |
| Boardman, H. | Hardy, Peter | Parry, Robert |
| Booth, Albert | Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) | Pavitt, Laurie |
| Boothroyd, Miss Betty | Hatton, Frank | Pendry, Tom |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Glasgow Pr.) | Hayman, Mrs Helene | Penhaligon, David |
| Buchan, Norman | Heffer, Eric S. | Prescott, John |
| Buchanan, Richard | Henderson, Douglas | Radice, Giles |
| Callaghan, Jim (Middleton & P.) | Hooloy, Frank | Reid, George |
| Campbell, Ian | Hooson, Emlyn | Richardson, Miss Jo |
| Cartwright, John | Horam, John | Roberts, Albert (Normanton) |
| Clemitson, I. M. | Howells, Geraint (Cardigan) | Roberts, Gwllym (Cannock) |
| Cocks, Michael (Bristol S.) | Hoyle, Douglas (Nelson) | Rodgers, George (Chorley) |
| Coleman, Donald | Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N.) | Rodgers, William (Teesside) |
| Concannon, J. D. | Jackson, Miss Margaret (Lincoln) | Rooker, J. W. |
| Conlan, Bernard | Jay, Rt Hon Douglas | Roper, John |
| Cook, Robin F. (Edin C) | John, Brynmor | Rose, Paul B. |
| Corbett, Robin | Johnson, James (Kingston, W.) | Ross, Rt Hon W. (Kilm'nock) |
| Cox, Thomas (Wands, Toot) | Jones, Alec (Rhondda) | Rowlands, Ted |
| Craigen, J. M. (Glasgow M.) | Jones, Barry (East Flint) | Sedgemore, B. |
| Crawford, Douglas | Jones, Dan (Burnley) | Selby, Harry |
| Cryer, Bob | Kaufman, Gerald | Short, Rt Hon Edward (Newcastle C) |
| Cunningham, Dr J. (Whiteh.) | Kelley, Richard | Sillars, James |
| Dalyell, Tarn | Kilroy-Silk, Robert | Skinner, Dennis |
| Davidson, Arthur | Kinnock, Neil | Small, William |
| Davies, Denzil (Llanelli) | Lamond, James | Smith, Cyril (Rochdale) |
| Davies, Ifor (Gower) | Latham, Arthur (Paddington) | Smith, John (N. Lanarkshire) |
| Deakins, Eric | Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) | Snape, Peter |
| Dean, Joseph (Leeds West) | Loyden, Eddie | Spearing, Nigel |
| de Freitas, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey | Lyon, Alexander (York) | Stallard, A. W. |
| Dempsey, James | Lyons, Edward (Bradford W) | Stewart, Donald (Western Isles) |
| Doig, Peter | Mabon, Dr J. Dickson | Stewart, Rt Hn Michael (H'smith, F) |
| Dormand, Jack | McCartney, Hugh | Stoddart, David |
| Douglas-Mann, Bruce | MacCormick, lain | Stott, Roger |
| Duffy, A. E. P. | McElhone, Frank | Strang, Gavin |
| Dunn, James A. | Mackintosh, John P. | Taylor, Mrs Ann (Bolton W) |
| Dunnett, Jack | McNamara, Kevin | Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery) |
| Dunwoody, Mrs. Gwyneth | Madden, Max | Thomas, Ron (Bristol NW) |
| Edge, Geoffrey | Magee, Bryan | Thompson, George |
| Ellis, John (Brigg & Scun) | Mahon, Simon | Thorne, Stan (Preston) |
| Ellis, Tom (Wrexham) | Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) | Thorpe, Rt Hon Jeremy (Devon) |
| English, Michael | Maynard, Miss Joan | Tierney, Sydney |
| Ewing, Harry (Stirling) | Meacher, Michael | Tomlinson, John |
| Fernyhough, Rt Hon E. | Mellish, Rt Hon Robert | Urwin, T. W. |
| Varley, Rt Hon Eric G. | White, James (Glasgow, P) | Wrigglesworth, Ian |
| Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne V.) | Wilson, Alexander (Hamilton) | Young, David (Bolton E.) |
| Wainwright, Richard (Colne V) | Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E.) | |
| Walker, Terry (Kingswood) | Wilson, William (Coventry S.E.) | |
| Ward, Michael | Wise, Mrs Audrey | TELLERS FOR THE NOES: |
| Welsh, Andrew | Woodall, Alec | Mr. James Hamilton and |
| White, Frank R. (Bury) | Woof, Robert | Mr. Joseph Harper. |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ 11.15 p.m.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithI beg to move Amendment No. 68, in page 6, line 26, at end insert:
'(4) Regulations made under this section shall be published in respect of each designated sea area'.This amendment is an attempt to clarify the method by which the regulations are published and made known. Lines 14–16 of Clause 6 say:and such regulations may apply to one or more designated sea areas and may make different provision in respect of different designated sea areas or parts thereof.I understand the reasons for that. One set of regulations could be common to a lot of areas, while some regulations may be specific. All I ask for is that even though there may be overlapping of regulations, the regulations in relation to each area should be published so that those operating in the areas can see precisely which regulations apply, even though they may also apply elsewhere.
§ Mr. MillanI can give the assurance that without the amendment the regulations will be by statutory instrument, and will be published by the Stationery Office. They will be available to all concerned.
§ Mr. Buchanan-SmithIn the light of that assurance, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. GrayI beg to move Amendment No. 69, in page 6, line 26, at end insert:
'(4) The Schedule (Making, varying and revocation of regulations with respect to sea designation areas) shall have effect as respects the making, varying and revocation of regulations under this section'.
The Temporary ChairmanWith this amendment we can also discuss the new schedule—Making, Varying and Revocation of Regulation with Respect to Sea Designation Areas.
§ Mr. GrayThis is a request that the maximum publicity should be given to the designation. We believe that each 396 area should be separately advertised in the local papers. We have laid down in the new schedule certain categories which we think are relevant and certain steps that the Secretary of State should follow. I shall not deal with this in detail now, but I hope that the Minister will agree to them.
§ Mr. MillanI do not think I can recommend the acceptance of the amendment. Schedule 3 deals with the making of sea designation orders and contains provisions about advertising, taking account of representations, and so on. Adding a schedule such as the hon. Gentleman is proposing would produce a cumbersome procedure.
I do not think there will be any difficulty in ensuring that those likely to be affected are either consulted or are made aware of what is likely to be involved in the making of an order. I therefore think that the amendment and the proposed schedule are unnecessary and might hold up matters without producing any result that would be for the benefit of anybody at the end of the day.
In those circumstances, I suggest that the hon. Gentleman may care to withdraw the amendment. If there are particular points that he wants to write into the Bill later, about representations, and so on, I shall be prepared to consider them, but I cannot recommend the procedure that he is suggesting here.
§ Mr. GrayBearing in mind that the lives of everybody in these areas will be affected in some way or other I shall consider what the Minister has said and perhaps table an amendment on Report. In the meantime, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. MillanWith respect, Mr. Crawshaw, I thought we had agreed earlier to accept Amendment No. 70 in the names of the hon. Member for Western 397 Isles (Mr. Stewart) and his hon. Friends, in page 6, line 30, leave out "£400" and insert "£5,000". My hon. Friend gave an undertaking when I was not in the Chamber—there is no significance in that —and I hope the Committee will accept the amendment.
§ Mr. GrimondIf the amendment were accepted it would mean that if a fishing boat transgressed the regulations and strayed into an area by mistake the person concerned would be liable to a fine of £5,000.
§ Mr. John SmithThis is an upper limit. The court will have to take account of the circumstances of the case. In any event, whether or not the amendment is accepted, the person concerned could be subjected to an unlimited fine if he were prosecuted on indictment.
When the amendment was discussed earlier I accepted what I judged to be the view of the Committee. Unfortunately, that might not have been the view of the whole Committee because of the absence of the right hon. Gentleman, but I cannot do anything about that.
§ Amendment made: No. 70, in page 6, line 30, leave out '£400' and insert '£5,000'. —[Mr. Donald Stewart.]
§ Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.