HC Deb 23 February 1982 vol 18 cc750-2 3.31 pm
Mr. William Ross (Londonderry)

(by private notice) asked the Prime Minister what action she will take following the destruction of a vessel in British territorial waters namely Lough Foyle and if she will make a statement.

The Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr. Nicholas Scott)

I have been asked to reply.

I understand that the collier "St. Bedan" was boarded by armed men while at anchor in Lough Foyle on the night of 22 February and sunk by explosives at about 1 am this morning. The crew reached the shore in safety. The wreck does not present a navigational hazard.

It appears that the group which boarded the St. Bedan set out from and returned to the Republic of Ireland's shore. The RUC is in touch with the Garda Siochana. The Irish authorities are pursuing their inquiries into the incident.

It is, of course, open to the owners and other interested parties to seek compensation under the Criminal Damage (Compensation) (Northern Ireland) Order 1977. I am sure the whole House will join me in condemning this attack, which put the crew of the vessel in danger and which strikes at the livelihood of those living in the area.

Mr. Ross

Will the Under-Secretary assure us that there will be an increase in security forces activity in Lough Foyle? Will he agree that the owners of this vessel should have it brought to notice that the United Kingdom is responsible for compensation for any loss suffered? Will he assure the House that the United Kingdom will shoulder its responsibilities and ensure this time that it is members of Her Majesty's Forces who search and clear the wreck of any further explosives? Will he assure us that the United Kingdom will be responsible for keeping the shipping lane clear and safe? Finally, will he tell the House which RUC divisional commander is respondible for the investigation and that he will not rely on the police force of a foreign country?

Mr. Scott

The RUC, of course, is concerned about this incident. Compensation is a matter for the Department of Trade and the Northern Ireland Office. We will obviously bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman said. On jurisdiction, Lough Foyle is an integral part of County Londonderry, and thus of the United Kingdom. On future security, we are of course already in touch with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence whose responsibility this is.

Several Hon. Members

rose

Mr. Speaker

This is an extension of Question Time. I shall call those right hon. and hon. Members who have intimated that they wish to speak.

Sir John Biggs-Davison (Epping Forest)

Does not my hon. Friend recall that this is not the first time that a ship has been sunk in these waters? Is he then satisfied that surveillance is adequate? Is this not a matter for the RUC, the Royal Navy and possibly the Royal Air Force?

Mr. Scott

This is the second incident of this sort, and that underlines the importance of improved security in the future. That is why we are in touch with the Ministry of Defence about it.

Mr. J. Enoch Powell (Down, South)

Will the Government be sure that in this case, unlike the previous incident, no steps are taken or permitted which in any way prejudice the sovereignty of the United Kingdom over these waters, which the hon. Gentleman has just reaffirmed?

Mr. Scott

No such steps were taken on the last occasion and none will be taken on this occasion.

Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)

Since this ship was bringing coal from Northumberland to Northern Ireland, is it not another example of IRA tactics which harm ordinary people trying to live their ordinary lives in Northern Ireland?

Mr. Scott

We certainly entirely agree with that. It also underlines the need for the closest co-operation across the borders in countering these men. It is in the interests of both Northern Ireland and the Republic that they should not be allowed to carry on in this way.

Mr. James Kilfedder (Down, North)

Since a similar incident occurred a year ago, have not the authorities been culpably negligent in failing to prevent a recurrence of that incident? The IRA has described the sinking of the collier as an economic measure. However, in truth, is the IRA not seeking the maximum publicity for its campaign?

Mr. Scott

Of course, the IRA seeks maximum publicity for its campaign. It is in our interests to ensure that we respond appropriately to the action that it has taken. I am sure that, in co-operation with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, appropriate measures will be taken.

Mr. Michael English (Nottingham, West)

Is it not fortunate for the Provisional IRA that it committed this offence where it did and not a few miles away? Had it committed an act of violence on the high seas—outside territorial waters—it would have been piracy, for which the penalty is substantially greater than for any offence it may have committed.

Mr. Scott

I noted that, but it did not do so.

Mr. Clive Soley (Hammersmith, North)

I confirm to the Minister our opposition to all paramilitary activity of this sort, from wherever it comes. Given the nature of this and previous incidents, are there standard procedures for checking on the dangers? Above all, is there a standard procedure for co-operation with Southern Ireland?

Mr. Scott

The Department of Trade gives ordinary advice on security to vessels using all ports, including those in Northern Ireland. That procedure exists and there are continuing and effective arrangements between the RUC and the Garda Siochana for cross-border cooperation.