§
Lords amendment: No. 26, in page 25, line 33, leave out subsection (6) and insert
(6) Where the commission by any person of an offence under this section is due to the act or default of some other person, that other person, as well as the first-mentioned person, shall be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
§ Mr. MellorI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Energy (Mr. John Moore)We come now to the important third part of the Bill, relating to safety.
The main amendment renders persons additional to the owner and master of an offending vessel liable to prosecution for infringements of safety zones. The amendments were put forward following a successful prosecution under section 2 of the 1964 Act, in which penalties were imposed on the owner and on the master, although at the time of the infringement the master was below decks. The mate in charge of the wheel had been given clear instructions as to his course, which would have taken the vessel well clear of the safety zone in question. The conviction of the master, therefore, was due to the act or default of the mate, against whom it was not possible to mount a prosecution.
494 These amendments widen the scope of the application of the offence so that, if the infringement of the safety zone is caused by someone other than the owner or master, that other person would be liable to prosecution also. It would then be a matter for the prosecuting authority, on the merits of individual cases, to decide which of the defendants should be prosecuted.
§ Mr. Merlyn ReesThe safety aspect is extremely important and we were critical about this at various stages of the Bill. We welcome Lords amendment No. 26. The fact that we say nothing further about it merely means that the Minister has explained it clearly and succinctly.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Lords amendments Nos. 27 to 29 agreed to.