§ 7.1 p.m.
§ The Minister of State, Department of Transport (Lord Brabazon of Tara)rose to move, That the draft order laid before the house on 17th July be approved [25th Report from the Joint Committee].
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this order provides for the amendment of the Hovercraft (Application of Enactments) Order 1972 to take account of changes to the Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collision) Regulations and to the merchant shipping inquiries and investigations provisions which are applied to hovercraft.
I should perhaps begin by explaining that the 1968 Hovercraft Act recognises that hovercraft are vehicles in their own right—neither ships nor aircraft—and provides general enabling powers to make provisions for hovercraft. This includes the power to apply to hovercraft other enactments and instruments relating to other means of transport. Through the Hovercraft (Application of Enactments) Order 1972 a wide range of such legislation is applied to hovercraft. This includes Merchant Shipping Act provisions relating to the investigation of casualties.
The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collision) Regulations 1989, which came into force on 19th November 1989, apply directly to hovercraft by virtue of Article 4 of the Hovercraft (Application of Enactments) Order 1989. References to collision regulations and rules are no longer appropriate in the enactment order.
The casualty investigation provisions of Section 55 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1970 have been replaced by Section 33 of the 1988 Act. The order will apply, with appropriate modifications, legislative provisions giving powers to investigate hovercraft casualties which are not the responsibility of the Marine Accident Investigation Branch.
I am sure that the House will appreciate the need for this order to ensure that development in maritime safety regulations are applied, as appropriate, to hovercraft engaged in maritime operations.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 17th July be approved [25th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Lord Brabazon of Tara.)
§ Lord Graham of EdmontonMy Lords, the House would normally have expected my noble friend Lord Underhill to be here and to respond and make a useful contribution to the debate. Regrettably, he is not well and is unable to be here, but he has asked me to say that, having studied the matter, which is complex and complicated but easily understood by him, he is content
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, I should like to say how sorry we are on this side of the House that the noble Lord, Lord Underhill, is not able to be here tonight. We wish him a speedy recovery and return to the House.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.