I am delighted to hear that.
In recent years, huge strides have been made in reducing oil pollution. I said a moment ago that the latest available figures showed that a fall of just over 90 per cent. had been achieved, but I remind the Government that that success is partly due to the support shown by the industry and individual members of the merchant navy. They are the ones who have had to amend many practices to achieve that dramatic fall.
I am worried that a new European directive might criminalise accidental discharges that are due not to reckless disregard, but to accidents involving a small amount of negligence. The directive comes from a section of the European Commission that used to be led by Spain but is now led by France—the two countries in Europe that have suffered most from oil pollution. As so often with measures from Brussels, the intention is good but the consequences may be counter-productive. First, there is a real chance that the directive may contravene international law. That would lead to the absurdity that European law could pull in one direction and international law in the other. Secondly, whatever the legal position, I share the industry’s concern that young people could be deterred from joining the merchant marine.
The Government rightly can take some credit for the large expansion in British-registered tonnage as a result of the tonnage tax. I was very pleased that the Minister recently reiterated his determination to defend the Red Duster, now that the Government have acknowledged that it is under threat from Brussels. However, the recovery in tonnage has not been matched by any great increase in the numbers of British crew members. The directive means that merchant navy crew members could be sent to prison for a very long time as a result of genuine accidents in which there was no reckless disregard, but merely an element of negligence. That could have a significant effect on the recruitment of talented young people into our merchant navy.
Considerable concern was expressed in another place about vessels flying flags of convenience of countries that have not signed up to the protocol. When I asked the Minister about that earlier, his answer was very much the same as the one given by Baroness Crawley. Both said that there is a compulsory requirement to have insurance, but both must know that that insurance does not cover the really large spills. Ships from Panama, Liberia and other countries that have not signed up to the protocol are the metaphorical stowaways on the great vessel that is the international merchant fleet. They weigh the rest of us down, while using everyone else’s resources.
Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Julian Brazier
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 25 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Bill [HL] 2005-06.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
441 c1456-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-26 18:37:33 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294375
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294375
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_294375