§ 18. Mr. Adleyasked the Secretary of State for Trade how the French proposals for dealing with oil pollution at sea differ from those which his Department currently endorses; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Clinton DavisBoth the United Kingdom and the French contingency arrangements for dealing with oil spills at sea are based primarily on the use of dispersants sprayed from ships.
§ Mr. AdleyIs the Minister aware that the French have taken action in their Parliament which gives their Government far wider powers than anything proposed by the British Government, even in the Merchant Shipping Bill? Is he further aware that many people would prefer that example to be followed in this country even if, as I understand, the Minister believes that some of the French action may be hard to uphold in the international courts, rather than to have to argue about the pollution which may occur if strong parliamentary action in the form of preventive measures is not taken soon?
§ Mr. DavisIt is a question always of balancing the need to buttress the authority of IMCO, the United Nations agency which deals with these matters, with our requirements. I feel we shall achieve that as a 22 result of enacting the Merchant Shipping Bill, and as a result of the action that we are considering with our EEC colleagues. The hon. Member will bear in mind the increase in port state authority that has been conferred by the memorandum of understanding of the North Sea States.
§ Mr. EmeryHas the Minister's attention been drawn to Le Journal Officiel de la Republique Francaise of 4th August where it is shown that a ministerial committee for the sea has been created, reporting directly to the President, and composed of—so that I may get it correct I shall quote—
the Minister of the Interior "—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Quotations are not permitted in the course of Questions. Perhaps the hon. Member will quickly memorise it.
§ Mr. EmeryFor the convenience of the House, Mr. Speaker, I shall refer only to notes, and not quote. The committee is composed of the Minister of the Interior, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Defence, the Minister of Economics, the Minister of the Budget, the Minister of Trade, the Minister of the Environment and Ministers concerned with coastal matters. Would it not make a great deal of sense if the British Government took a leaf from the French book and set up a ministerial committee of this sort? The first action of the French committee was to impose a massive fine on the operators of the"Amoco Cadiz ". Is he aware that that is having a major effect on the way that oil companies operate their tankers?
§ Mr. DavisThe hon. Member should read more widely. He ought to recognise that the French judicial process is quite different from ours. It involves a different means of imposing fines. There is already a wide measure of coordination between Ministers in this Government. That was exemplified in the degree of co-ordination that existed between myself and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales and officials representing a wide variety of other Departments and interests in the"Christos Bitas"incident.
§ 26. Mr. Sainsburyasked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is satisfied 23 with the extent of the precautions to minimise the pollution that might occur following a major oil spillage in the Channel.
§ 31. Mr. Gowasked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he will make a statement about the Government's proposals to reduce the risk of oil pollution on shore from tankers operating near the coasts of the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. Clinton DavisExtensive preparations have been made to deal with oil spills in the Channel, as in the waters around the rest of our coastline. We announced the results of our review of those arrangements on 2nd August, and the appointment of Rear-Admiral Stacey as the first director of our new marine pollution control unit on 20th November. The follow-up work to that review is well advanced. The Government remain determined to develop arrangements that are as effective as possible in mitigating pollution.
§ Mr. Sainsbury.Is the Minister aware that there is a great deal of public concern about the apparent failure of the arrangements that have been undertaken so far? In an earlier answer he referred to concentrating on dispersants. Would it not be advisable to give more attention to the development of means of containing and recovering oil spilled at sea?
§ Mr. DavisIf the hon. Member catches your eye, Mr. Speaker, he will be able to develop his arguments in the debate which is to follow. I am aware of continuing public concern. We do our best to allay that concern. The Warren Spring laboratory devotes a considerable amount of its activities to investigating processes for recovery and containment. As yet no absolutely suitable method of recovery has been devised, but progress is being made.
§ Mr. MolloyIs the Minister aware that most people are concerned about what action is to be taken to prevent this kind of event from recurring? They also wish to know what sanctions will be incurred by those who could be guilty of negligence, because these disasters damage the coasts and wild life of our nation, and cause a great many people to contribute money to clear much of the filth which has been created around 24 our coasts. What measures will the Government take to prevent these incidents from arising rather than merely trying to minimise their effects?
§ Mr. DavisI suggest that my hon. Friend listens to the speech which is to be made very shortly on this subject by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales.
§ Several Hon. Members rose—
§ Mr. SpeakerI shall call the two hon. Gentlemen who have a constituency interest in this Question. I call first Mr. Adley.
§ Mr. AdleyDoes the Minister accept that the Warren Spring technology has been heavily based on dispersants, and that there is a need to concentrate more on other measures? Is he satisfied that the effort which Warren Spring is putting into its own technology is the best way of proceeding when it appears to be ignoring other similar technology which has the advantage of being able to be lifted into various places by helicopter, whereas the Warren Spring technology appears to depend entirely on fixed ship activity, which relies on the hope that the ship is in the right place at the right time?
§ Mr. DavisI do not regard that as a fair criticism of the activities of Warren Spring. There are severe limitations on the use of helicopters for carrying this kind of heavy equipment. No doubt the hon. Gentleman will be able to pursue these matters further in the debate that is to follow.
§ Mr. FellIs the Minister aware that the most important matter is the prevention of such accidents? Are there enough pilots to go round to make pilotage compulsory on tankers in most of the areas around the British coasts?
§ Mr. DavisThere is a problem about compulsory pilotage. In order to secure an adequate number of pilots, one would have to diminish the number of people serving on the bridge of our merchant vessels. That would not be a satisfactory arrangement. There are a number of other technical problems. I am not satisfied that deep sea pilotage represents a panacea, as a number of hon. Members, including the hon. Gentleman, seem to think.