Merchant Shipping (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Order 1990 (Hansard, 29 November 1990)

§ Lord Clinton-Davis

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the manner in which he introduced the order. I welcome the order very much, although one notes with some concern the dilatory process of the entry into force of so many international agreements in this field. Usually such agreements are motivated by a disaster. How much preferable it would be if the international community began to anticipate environmental problems rather than simply react to them in a costly way later on.

It has, of course, been through the International Maritime Organisation that substantial progress has been made in developing international efforts to prevent pollution of the sea from oil. But marine casualties like the "Torrey Canyon", the "Argo Merchant" and the "Amoco Cadiz" have played a major role in improving international regimes to control oil pollution. More recently the "Exxon Valdez" catastrophe on 24th March 1989, with its resultant disastrous oil spill, focused worldwide 1116 attention on the massive resources required to combat a large spill, particularly in a sensitive and sometimes hostile environment.

We are talking in a sense of a package that arises under the MARPOL convention. An exception to the delays has occurred this very day. I understand that the plenary session of the International Conference on Oil Preparedness and Response at the International Maritime Organisation adopted a convention which, when it comes into operation, will fill a major gap in the international framework of treaties dealing with marine pollution. That in itself is one of the annexes to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships. By IMO standards it is something of a record that some 90 governments participated in the conference leading to the adoption of the convention. It was only in October 1989 that the IMO assembly adopted a resolution directing the IMO to convene an international conference on the issue. It is remarkable that the convention has emerged in just over a year. It would be a great example to others as well as being in the best interests of the United Kingdom if the Minister could indicate today that the Government propose to ratify the convention as rapidly as possible, so helping to facilitate its swift implementation.

Having said that, the customary situation is to wait for years to see conventions of this kind secure the necessary number of signatures and ratifications to bring them into effect. And having hailed the fact that today there seems to be something quite different, one has to remember that it was in 1973 that MARPOL was hailed as a signal achievement, regulating as it did for the very first time all aspects of ship generated pollution. Notwithstanding that, some of the five annexes, including Annexes II and III on which this order is based, are not yet in force internationally. That is a matter for great regret. Consequently, I wish to take this opportunity to stress that the United Kingdom and our European Community partners need to continue to exercise considerable diplomatic pressure on other countries to ratify IMO conventions far more expeditiously. I wonder whether the Minister would like to say a word or two about that.

As a result of the slowness in preparing for diplomatic conferences which are designed to adopt international law, and with the further delay which always follows in relation to their entry into force, the international community should not blind itself to the principal causes of marine pollution. These are much less ship based and much more land based. We support wholeheartedly the powerful efforts that have been made by the IMO over so many years to regulate various aspects of vessel-source pollution. Indeed, as a Minister, I was a great admirer of the IMO and have continued to be so since. We need to recognise that worldwide pollution from that source accounts for only about 10 per cent. of maritime pollution. The figure comes from a report by the Group of Experts on Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution, which brings together scientists from the United Nations and various United Nations agencies.

1117 The fact remains that there is little in international law that attempts to redress the problem of land based sources of pollution. The report asserts that a wide range of land activities, either directly or via rivers and the atmosphere, contribute far more than sea-borne activities. Pollution is not confined to the Continental Shelf. Coastal waters are most at risk from the destruction of habitats, microbial contamination of seafood and beaches and, indeed, from fouling in general. That makes it clear that we need to try to encourage much greater respect for quick action by the IMO and by other environmental organisations. We can only proceed on the basis of international co-operation in facing so many of these problems.

I hope that the Government will put full force behind securing such objectives. Important through the order is—and it is important—it must be viewed against the wider perspectives which I have raised. It is to be hoped that the Government will use their best endeavours. I join the Minister in commending the order to the House.

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, for welcoming the order. I too welcome the conclusions of the oil pollution preparedness and response conference. We shall of course have to study and consult on the convention and naturally we shall ratify it as soon as possible if it is seen as desirable to do so. As I said in my opening remarks, we have a very good record in ratifying IMO conventions.

In talking about this particular MARPOL convention, I believe that the noble Lord said that Annex II is not yet in force. If my assumption is correct, I must point out to him that he is mistaken. That annex came into force in 1987. Annex III which is also dealt with by the order is, however, not yet in force. We hope that it soon will be. It has at present been ratified by 40 states but has not yet achieved the 50 per cent. tonnage which is required. I understand that legislative time is being urgently sought in the United States and that if that is successful it would be sufficient to overcome the impediment of ratification. I hope, therefore, that we shall see the annex coming into force before very long. I agree with the noble Lord that we need to make further progress. We shall of course continue to do so.