§ 2. Mr. Hooleyasked the Secretary of State for Trade if, with reference to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in May, he will make a statement of Government policy on the phasing out of lags of convenience.
§ 8. Mr. Clinton Davisasked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government response to the report of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development secretariat entitled Action on the Question of Open Registries.
§ 22. Mr. Austin Mitchellasked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will make a statement on the Government's policy in connection with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in May on the phasing out of flags of convenience.
§ The Secretary of State for Trade (Mr. John Biffen)Our shipping policy is based on two requirements: the need to preserve safety at sea; and the need to preserve the British shipping industry and the jobs which depend on it. Neither of these objects would be served by an indiscriminate attack on countries operating open shipping registries. We wish to see the preservation of competitive international conditions for shipping in which each nation is free to set its own conditions for admission to its register, subject to the full observation of internationally agreed safety standards.
§ Mr. HooleyIs the Secretary of State aware that on present trends half the merchant fleets of the world will be registered with countries, such as Panama and Liberia, which have little concern for safety, pollution or the welfare of seamen, while the other half will be registered with the Communist world? Does the right hon. Gentleman regard that situation as ideal?
§ Mr. BiffenNo. I made it clear in my original answer that we believe that there should be full observation of internationally agreed safety standards.
§ Mr. DavisDoes not the Secretary of State realise that the issue of flags of convenience is not only about substandard shipping but the avoidance of taxation, obligations to train crews, proper certification and adopting a permissive attitude towards international legislation? Does he regard this as fair competition for our fleet? Is not his inertia in these matters a reflection, yet again, of the fact that he has lost the will to be even apathetic?
§ Mr. BiffenI congratulate the hon. Gentleman on a choice turn of phrase. However, I do not think that it applies to myself or to the present Administration. In a free world different standards will be applied nationally by shipping companies and shipping regimes, one from another. But, putting safety to one side, as I mentioned in my original reply, we have to acknowledge that there will be competition between national shipping fleets, and it is up to those in this country to ensure that we have a fleet which operates to the highest economic standards.
§ Mr. MitchellIs the dodging of international obligations, which is inherent in flags of convenience, compatible with genuine, free and fair competition? If he will not work towards international agreement to abolish this monstrosity, may I ask whether he has any proposals to increase inspection and enforcement at the ports to try to control flags of convenience?
§ Mr. BiffenI would not in any way support the disregarding of international obligations in this matter. The Government's policy is to work with other countries to secure the highest observation of international standards.
§ Mr. James JohnsonWill the Minister confirm or deny the suggestion that any—[Interruption.]—of our shipping lines are contemplating moving overseas? If so, will he condemn that as being a mean and despicable action?
§ Mr. BiffenI missed a good deal of what the hon. Gentleman said, through no fault of his. But, inasmuch as I heard what he said, I agree with him.
§ Mr. LeightonWhat does the Minister mean by the phrase "putting safety to one side"?
§ Mr. BiffenI stated in my original answer that the Government believed in the full observation of internationally agreed safety standards. But many competition matters between shipping fleets legititimately concern other areas.