§ 2.46 p.m.
§ Lord Monkswellasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will set up an independent inquiry into the efficacy of the Marine Safety Agency in the light of the permission granted to the QEII to sail from Southampton to New York on 17th December 1994.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Viscount Goschen)My Lords, no. While the Marine Safety Agency has confirmed that standard procedures were followed, the Secretary of State for Transport has asked the chief executive to consider the case as part of his review of the agency's survey and inspection instructions.
§ Lord MonkswellMy Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. But is he aware that not only were passengers inconvenienced during the voyage and the image of Britain overseas heavily tarnished, but furthermore, given the decline of the merchant navy over the past 10 to 15 years by more than 50 per cent., surely we have a right to question the fitness for purpose of the merchant marine as demonstrated by this incident? What action are the Government taking to make sure that shipowners ensure that their ships are fit for the purpose when they sail from UK ports?
§ Viscount GoschenMy Lords, clearly it is in the shipowners' and operators' own commercial interest to ensure that their vessels are in the best possible condition. The Government's role in this matter is to ensure that safety standards are adhered to.
§ Lord Clinton-DavisMy Lords, can the Minister say when he expects to receive the report? Is the noble Viscount aware—he does not seem to have shown the awareness that the situation demands—that the incident concerning Britain's most prestigious liner certainly raised questionmarks about the efficacy of our surveying procedures, as well as causing grave concern to the international maritime world? Does the Minister believe that that ship should have been allowed to sail? If he does, is it not time that the international standards to which he referred were revised? Therefore, would he be prepared for the International Maritime Organisation to take the appropriate procedures to remedy a situation of this kind?
§ Viscount GoschenMy Lords, I agree with the noble Lord about the prestige of the vessel concerned and the influence of such events on our country's international reputation. Again, however, the Marine Safety Agency, which was the agency responsible for surveying the vessel, has a worldwide reputation of the highest order for both integrity and expertise. Special considerations were taken into account at the time. The ship had undergone a thorough survey by the MSA during its refit period and was inspected before it left 1253 Southampton. Additional work was required, and the MSA issued only a limited passenger certificate to cover that number of passengers.
§ Lord GreenwayMy Lords, while it may have been a case of poor commercial judgment rather than any breach of safety regulations, are Her Majesty's Government aware that, as a result of publicity surrounding such occurrences, there now exists a breed of person who, armed with a camcorder, makes a point of recording any breach of regulations (safety or otherwise) with a view to selling that information to newspapers for gain or to suing the company concerned? Is not that a process that is to be wholly deprecated?
§ Viscount GoschenMy Lords, the noble Lord is essentially right, but the Government are of course interested in any evidence or information of wrongdoing in the operation of ships, so in that sense the practice is not wholly to be condemned.
§ Lord Dean of BeswickMy Lords, bearing in mind that no one would condone some of the conditions on that ship and the inconvenience they caused to the passengers in view of the price charged these days for such a passage or holiday, have the Government any reason to believe that the passengers on the QEII were in any more peril than they are on the car ferries that sail to the Continent which are given full approval for every trip they make?
§ Viscount GoschenMy Lords, one cannot draw an exact parallel. We make ro-ro ferries as safe as we can. The noble Lord will be aware of the inspection the MSA undertook of all bow doors and sealing arrangements of all ferries operating to and from the UK. So far as concerns the QEII and its voyage to New York, the vessel was given a limited passenger certificate for approximately half of her complement. We are satisfied that safety was at no point compromised.
§ Lord Clinton-DavisMy Lords, how does the Minister reconcile that response with the fact that the US coast guard detained the vessel because it was not satisfied as to the safety conditions under which it was sailing?
§ Viscount GoschenMy Lords, the MSA and the US coast guard were working extremely closely on this matter. They were applying the same international standards. I agree that there was a small difference of interpretation between the two agencies. At the end of the episode, the US coast guard chose to endorse its certificate, but the MSA was satisfied that the ship met the required safety standards and issued a full certificate. That was on leaving New York.
§ Lord Harris of GreenwichMy Lords, the Minister has said that there was a small difference between the British and American authorities. Does he agree that the small difference meant that the ship was allowed to leave Southampton, and it was not allowed to leave New York?
§ Viscount GoschenMy Lords, no, that is not true. The ship was allowed to leave Southampton with a restricted certificate; that is, for approximately half the 1254 number of passengers that it would normally carry. In addition, other specific security and safety measures were put in place. Various parts of the ship were closed. There were increased fire patrols and so forth. The difference in interpretation occurred in New York. It concerned one of the vessel's vertical fire sections.
§ Lord MonkswellMy Lords, is the Minister aware that at the height of the Falklands conflict my noble friend Lord Callaghan, who was then a Member of the other place, advised the nation that an early landing on the Falkland Islands was to be expected because it was impossible to keep troops sailing around in circles for long periods while still maintaining their fighting effectiveness? Does he recognise that troops using the QEII in this condition would have been rendered less fit for active service at the end of their voyage? Therefore it is something that the Government should take seriously into account.
§ Viscount GoschenMy Lords, the noble Lord asked a question that I did not expect him to ask. I am not sure that the condition of the aft swimming pool was of major consequence to fully armed troops about to embark upon an expedition to the South Atlantic. The condition of the vessel is a serious point. I have made it clear that extra safety requirements were put in place and insisted upon by the MSA before the vessel was allowed to sail to New York.