HL Deb 08 December 1981 vol 425 cc1268-73

3.23 p.m.

The Minister of State, Scottish Office (The Earl of Mansfield)

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill now be read a second time. The Harbours (Scotland) Bill gives powers to establish harbour trusts to hold, manage and maintain harbours in Scotland and to transfer to such trusts any harbours held or maintained for the time being by the Secretary of State for Scotland. The immediate purpose of the Bill is to enable the Secretary of State to disengage from Peterhead Bay harbour and to set up an independent harbour trust to take over this responsibility. The Secretary of State is harbour authority for Peterhead Bay harbour, which we took over from the Admiralty in 1960.

It was the Admiralty who in 1888 began to construct a "Harbour of Refuge" at Peterhead to provide shelter during the storms for the sail-driven herring fleet. This was done under powers given in the Peterhead (Harbour of Refuge) Act 1886 and two massive breakwaters were built to enclose the bay of Peterhead to provide a large area of sheltered water. The breakwaters were completed in 1956, though little use had been made of the harbour up to that time.

With the discovery of oil and gas in the North Sea the development potential of this strategically placed harbour became obvious. However, the Secretary of State did not have adequate powers under the Harbour of Refuge Act either to develop the harbour himself or to allow other people to do so. Further powers were therefore taken in the Harbours Development (Scotland) Act 1972. Some of your Lordships may remember that measure when it was before this House; others may have a better recollection of the Bill in another place where the Opposition co-operated with the Government of the day to put through that urgently needed legislation in less than seven weeks.

The Harbours Development (Scotland) Act 1972 was a Public Bill covering harbours in Scotland for which the Secretary of State was harbour authority but, like the Bill before the House today, it was promoted principally to deal with Peterhead Bay harbour. Under these powers the Secretary of State has, over the last eight years, reclaimed land and constructed upon it a large oil service base and has leased land for another North Sea service base. A tanker jetty able to receive oil tankers of up to 40,000 tons has also been built. The arrangements under which the Secretary of State developed this harbour were intended, from the outset, to be transitional. They were to last only until a new port authority could be set up. Consultations were undertaken in 1976 to determine whether there was a wish to bring the bay harbour and the adjacent fishery harbour under one management, but there was no local enthusiasm for the unification. The Government have therefore decided that separate arrangements must be made for Peterhead Bay itself. Earlier this year the Scottish Office consulted extensively with bodies with an interest in the harbour about the proposal to form a new authority. All have accepted the Secretary of State's reasons for wishing to disengage from the harbour in favour of an independent trust.

Under Clause 1 of the Bill an order will be made to set up a trust for Peterhead Bay harbour. This will define the constitution of a new authority and pass to them the powers the Secretary of State holds as harbour authority; such as, for example, the power to levy vessel and cargo dues and develop the harbour. Membership of the authority will have a strong local base through local authority and fishing members and it is intended that the Secretary of State should appoint other members who have commercial and harbour management expertise, including knowledge of the oil industry. A new authority would also accept the liability to maintain and repair the harbour and keep it properly dredged.

The authority will also have responsibilities unique to Peterhead. For example, the new authority will have to ensure that access to and from the fishery harbour of Peterhead is protected. The fishery harbour is the foremost white fish landing port in the country and it is essential that fishing boats, which need to cross Peterhead Bay to reach the sea, should be able to go to their fishing grounds without hindrance. We will also protect the "Lido Beach". This is a recreational area of Peterhead which lies within the harbour itself. During the passage of the 1972 Act Parliament was concerned that this amenity should be safeguarded as far as possible during development of the harbour and this has been done. The new authority will be required to exercise the same care.

I have set out the administrative arrangements proposed for the future. What then of the financial position of the new authority? There need be no fear on this aspect. The harbour is a profitable commercial operation, and has over the last four years made a healthy surplus. The capital position is equally good and expenditure incurred at the harbour has already, within eight years, been cleared. These are good results. The Government will hand over to the new authority a viable operation which is well placed to continue to give vital support to our North Sea oil industry. The Government have been good and faithful stewards of Peterhead Bay harbour for 95 years. We can take pride in the achievement. Nevertheless, the time has come to pass this responsibility to a new authority. The Harbours (Scotland) Bill is a necessary measure to provide powers for this to be done. My Lords, I beg to move.

Moved, That the Bill he now read 2a—(The Earl of Mansfield.)

3.28 p.m.

Lord Ross of Marnock

My Lords, we are very grateful to the Minister for his full explanation of the content of the Bill. Behind his rather cold words there is quite a story, going right back to the Peterhead (Harbour of Refuge) Act 1886 when powers were given to the Lord High Admiral to get on with the business; indeed, he was empowered to use convict labour for the building of that harbour. The Minister, of course, spoke about the 1972 Act and about the co-operation there was at that time from the Opposition. He will know, of course, and will have in mind, that the person who led the Opposition at that time as regards Scotland was myself, and I remember the Bill very well. There was much concern—and I am very glad that it was covered in what the Minister said—by people in the Peterhead area about the Lido Beach. They were very concerned about its future, and I am glad that that has been said.

I have another interest in this matter, in that opened the new part of the harbour when last I was Secretary of State. I am glad that it has certainly been a success. I think everyone realised that it would be. Can the Minister tell us who, in the interim, has been looking after it for the Scottish Office? I should not be at all surprised if the noble Lord on the Liberal Benches may have a relative interest in this.

I want to come to its future. We are told that it is being handed over as a going concern, as a profitable concern; that it has no capital liabilities; that in the short time it has been in existence it has done very well. So nationalisation works. Is there any profit? What monies are there, because I notice in Clause 1(3) that the transfer will be made, either with or without any valuable consideration". Secondly, where does it stand now in relation to getting grants? Will they be grants from the Scottish Office, or from what we used to call the Ministry of Transport? As the noble Earl knows, in Scotland most of the smaller harbours right around the coast got grants from the Scottish Office under the Congested Districts (Scotland) Act 1897. I have never yet known the Scottish Office turn out an appeal for a grant for any such harbour. It is important from the point of view of the fishing industry.

I want to know just exactly how the new harbour authority will be in relation to, say, capital expenditure. Will it raise the money by loan? Will it have to apply to the Scottish Office for authority to do so? Or is it going to be in a better position than local authorities, and be able to do it on its own? Obviously, in view of the history, there should be no difficulty about getting that money for development.

The noble Earl spoke about this one harbour. The power under Section 1 of the 1972 Act was, to develop, maintain and manage (harbours] as he thinks fit, or authorise other persons so to develop, maintain and manage, harbours made or maintained by him…"; in other words, from a strict reading of that, is this Bill necessary, because under Section 1 the Secretary of State could have authorised other persons to manage the harbour which he has made and maintained? Will the authority have the same power as the Secretary of State had under the 1972 Act? Subsection (2) gave him the power to, acquire land by agreement or compulsorily for the purposes …". Will the authority have that power, or will that power lapse with the Secretary of State having transferred the harbour itself?

Lastly, is this the only harbour affected? As I recollect the arguments at that time, the question arose—and it may well be that the noble Earl, Lord Cromartie, may help us here—as to other harbours. It was brought out that the harbour of Uig in Skye was owned and maintained by the Secretary of State, and there was a question which could not quite be solved at the time about the position of invergordon. I think there was referrence to a Ross and Cromarty Confirmation Order of about 1972, but there was some concern on the part of the Ministry of Defence. Is Peterhead Bay the only harbour that is concerned here? It may be the only one in which presently the Secretary of State is going to take action of transfer, but is it the only one that could be transferred?

I think that the Explanatory Memorandum is a bit misleading. It says: This Bill makes provision for establishing harbour trusts to hold, manage and maintain harbours in Scotland…". Stopping there, there are dozens of harbour trusts all over Scotland. It does not require a Bill in Parliament to set them up. What they are really being set up for is as a harbour trust to receive nationalised harbours. That is the whole point about it, where the, Secretary of State may by order transfer to a harbour trust having so been set up for the purpose, which is held and maintained by him…". I think we all welcome the success of the Peterhead Bay harbour. We certainly want to see it continuing to be successful, that the protection will be there for the interests of the local inhabitants, and, above all, that the same protection will be given to the access and passage through that bay to the fishery harbour for the fishery fleet. I think it is true to say that, since we made the change in Peterhead and built the new harbour, because of the demands for oil quite a portion of the fishery fleet has moved out of Aberdeen to Peterhead, so it is even more important now than it was then to ensure continued passage and protection of the access of the fishery fleet to and from their own harbour. I should be grateful if the Minister could answer these few points on this relatively small but important Bill.

3.36 p.m.

Lord Mackie of Benshie

My Lords, as usual, the noble Lord, Lord Ross, has covered practically every point necessary, and probably some unnecessary ones as well, but it is always easy to follow him. I would simply repeat what he has said: I should like to know whether the new body, the independent body, the trust, will have access to grants, and will have facilities to keep developing the harbour. A harbour must be an ongoing concern. If it is not developing it is probably going back, as have so many of our harbours.

The other point which I think is important is that the Minister should assure us that this is not going to be a device for abandoning small harbours in the Highlands of which we know not, perhaps, which cost the Scottish Office money to keep up, and probably cost an amount far greater than the foreseeable benefit to the inhabitants but which are nevertheless entirely necessary for the life of the community. Apart from that, I hope that this action will not lead to a great deal of unemployment of chairmen of harbour trusts.

3.38 p.m.

The Earl of Mansfield

My Lords, I thank the two noble Lords for their welcome, albeit cautiously expressed, for this little Bill. Of course it was the noble Lord, Lord Ross, who in another place and in another guise speeded the Bill of 1972 on its way. I have been asked a number of questions. First of all, asks the noble Lord, Lord Ross, in effect who has been looking after the harbour for the Scottish Office under the Scottish Economic Planning Department. The noble Lord will probably recollect that the Secretary of State of the day has been assisted in his development of the harbour by the Peterhead Bay Management Company Limited, and I am sure everybody, including the noble Lord, Lord Mackie, will agree that it has done a throroughly good job, not least because the chairman of the company is a certain Dr. Maitland Mackie. Therefore, that answers that question. The noble Lord, Lord Ross, mentioned, and the noble Lord, Lord Mackie, echoed first, the position about finance.

When the harbour, in effect, was set up in its present character in 1972, all the money which was needed and spent on capital works within the harbour came from, and was authorised by way of, parliamentary Votes. All that will have been repaid from surpluses of income over expenditure on harbour operations and from certain sales of land and leases which have taken place. When the Bill becomes law, the responsibilities of the harbour authority will pass from the Secretary of State to a trust board at Peterhead Bay. The noble Lord, Lord Ross, asked why the Bill was necessary at all if one looked at Section 1(1) of the 1972 Act. The answer is that, but for the Bill, the Secretary of State would remain owner and harbour authority, and primary legislation is required to vest a new body, a trust, as harbour authority. It could not be done under the 1972 Act.

The assets will be transferred to the trust board at their present value as assessed by the district valuer, and that will create a debt on the new authority of about £650,000. In addition to that initial debt arising from the transfer of the assets, it is intended that the authority should be given a temporary advance of about £200,000 to tide them over for such a period, which will probably be about six months, until income begins to flow. On the present figures, the debt will be quite quickly repaid. So far as future finance and grants are concerned, like other harbours in Scotland, the harbour trust in future will be looked after, if that is the right phrase, by the Department of Transport and not the Scottish Office, and therefore the Department of Transport will take over responsibility for loans, both present and future, under the Harbours Act 1964.

The noble Lord, Lord Ross, then asked in effect: What about all the other little harbours, piers, jetties and whatnot which may become interesting, to use that word, because they happen to form part of the estates which are presently held by the Secretary of State? The noble Lord quoted the example of Uig Pier, which was one such but has been sold lock, stock and barrel as the whole estate of Uig was sold off and no longer is the property of the Secretary of State for Scotland. That is the reason why we are having this Bill in its present form and why, for instance, we have not chosen to have a Peterhead Bay Bill or some other Bill which would be restricted to Peterhead Bay.

As the noble Lord will well recollect, the way in which Peterhead Bay harbour came under the aegis of the Secretary of State for Scotland was quite fortuitous; it happened because of oil exploration, by and large, and it was in those circumstances that the recent history of the harbour has come about. Oil is being discovered in all sorts of places, both in the North Sea and to the west of Scotland, and therefore it might come about that exactly the same thing will happen to other harbours, jetties or piers which at the moment perhaps are not very important and which would scarcely he seen to be likely to exercise the mind of the Secretary of State in the future, but might well.

Lord Ross of Marnock

Are there any other such harbours on estates owned by the Secretary of State, my Lords?

The Earl of Mansfield

There are masses of estates; the Secretary of State is one of the largest landowners in Scotland and a great many of these estates, particularly on the western seaboard, have these facilities for landing. In exactly the same way as happened with Peterhead, it could come about that the same process might be gone through again, and that could be done under this Bill in a way which would mean that we did not in future need to have this same form of primary legislation. I think that disposes of the various questions which were put to me, and I commend the Bill to your Lordships.

On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.