Maritime Safety (Hansard, 2 February 1993)

§ Mr. Eric Clarke (Midlothian)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make further provision regarding maritime safety; to regulate shipping flying flags of convenience; and for connected purposes. As you will be aware, Madam Speaker, I am an ex-miner, not an ex-mariner, but I make no apology for introducing the Bill because we both fight mother nature to earn a living—or we did in the past.

The case for tighter safety standards at sea is overwhelming; the motor vessel Braer disaster brought that home to us all in this country, especially those in Scotland and Shetland. Ferries, cargo ships and other ships with hazardous cargoes are all covered in the Bill. We must demand a commitment to safety from the Government to be enshrined in legislation. We should not have to wait for disasters before action is taken.

Lives have been lost. European documents show that since 1986, on average 230 ships, or 1.1 million gross tonnes, are lost every year involving a loss of more than 1,000 lives. The highest percentage—46 per cent.—of accidents involves general cargo ships, 26 per cent. fishing vessels, 6 per cent. bulk carriers and 5 per cent. tankers. All the indicators are that the situation will deteriorate in the near future.

Approximately 35 per cent. of all bulk carriers sunk in the past 15 years have been lost in the previous two months. Seventy-four per cent. of all tonnage lost in 1991 was more than 15 years old, and the world fleet is growing and aging rapidly.

Many flags with good safety records are losing vessels to flags with poorer safety records. Statistics derived from port state controls show a ratio of deficiencies over inspections of almost 79 per cent. of the worst flags compared with 12 per cent. for the best. The average age of flag of convenience ships is 17 years.

The people of Britain, especially those of Shetland and Scotland, are looking for immediate action to protect them. I suggest an amendment to the memorandum on port state control and the public right to know. My proposals are: first, the explicit concentration of inspections of ships flying flags of convenience and, secondly, full publication of all inspections, including those requested by the crew or maritime trade unions.

At present, inspections are carried out at random and few are undertaken. The results of such inspections are secret. The captain of the ship and the flag of convenience country get a copy of the results. The Minister of Transport keeps a copy, but it is confidential. No one else knows the results of such inspections. Australia has a black list of ships of that nature, and the system is working. That is one aspect which I should like to envisage in my Bill.

Thirdly, there should be an extension of inspections to operations in piloted waters with specific emphasis on the competence and efficiency of the officers and crew and the ability to understand and converse with each other. That proposal comes from a recommendation in a House of Lords inquiry in the past. Fourthly, the restrictions to reinspect within six months should be removed; and, fifthly, all foreign flag ships entering a Paris memorandum port for the first time should be inspected. Through the 154 European Community and the International Maritime Organisation, there would be a similar extension of port state inspections to all other countries.

I understand the complexities of maritime law. I see no reason why the Government should disagree with my Bill. I cannot possibly include in my Bill the proposal to route tankers and ships from critical zones in and around, for example, the Minch and other ports of Scotland such as St. Kilda because of a restriction of time and space.

The Minister and the Government have had 13 years. The Minister of Transport was president of the Transport Committee in Europe for a year. I shall quote a statement made by the Minister in the House on 11 January on the MV Braer: The hon. Gentleman asked about the salvage operations convention. We hope to be able to ratify it as soon as we can find a legislative opportunity; it requires primary legislation."—[Official Report, 11 January 1993; Vol. 216, c. 613.] My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms. Walley) wrote asking that the international convention on salvage operations be incorporated in my ten-minute Bill and has had no reply. The offer still stands.

Part of the agreement of the international convention is a proposal that, if a ship is in trouble at sea and a tug appears to give assistance, the line must be taken aboard immediately. At present, the skipper must confer with the owners and valuable time is wasted. He may even refuse to take the line on board. If we endorsed the convention, such ships could be saved, lives could be saved and both the salvage and rescue workers could be protected. Other nations have endorsed such an arrangement. We should endorse the convention immediately, and I am willing once again to allow the Government to use my Bill to ratify and adhere to the principles and directives contained in the document entitled "International Convention on Salvage 1989".

The proposal is common sense. A new ship can break down and drift helplessly in a stormy sea. Delays in notifying the territorial maritime authorities and refusals of help must be stopped. If ships are in our territorial waters, the captains and owners must adhere to the directive. The quicker the Bill is accepted, the better.

If the result of my Bill means clearing the seas of potential disasters called ships of covenience, so be it. If it means that freight rates increase, so be it. If it means a scrap and build policy giving orders to British shipyards, so be it. If more ship owners continue to fly the red ensign, so be it. If we save the lives of seamen, sea women and, obviously, passengers, flora and fauna and seals and otters and the livelihood of the fishing communities in Scotland and elsewhere, so be it. If the Bill gives the people of this nation access to information about what is going on at sea, so be it.

Above all, if the Bill brings benefits out of disaster and leaves my grandson and others like him with a sea and seashore environment that is guaranteed safer, it will have all been worth while. I hope that the House will support my Bill.