European Communities (Definition of Treaties) (Maritime Labour Convention) Order 2009

I thank the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, for his illustration of an area of concern, which we acknowledge. Regulation 2.7 of the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 states: ""Each Member shall require that all ships that fly its flag have a sufficient number of seafarers employed on board to ensure that ships are operated safely, efficiently and with due regard to security under all conditions, taking into account concerns about seafarer fatigue and the particular nature and conditions of the voyage"." The paragraph also states: ""When determining, approving or revising manning levels, the competent authority"—" in the UK this is the Maritime and Coastguard Agency—is obliged to, ""take into account the need to avoid or minimize excessive hours of work to ensure sufficient rest and to limit fatigue"." It is also required to take particular account of the principles set out in applicable international instruments, especially those of the International Maritime Organisation. UK legislation and procedures followed by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency already comply with the convention’s requirement in this regard and with the requirements of the other "applicable international instruments". The Maritime and Coastguard Agency is committed to reducing seafarer fatigue and, to this end, a three-year plan has been agreed, covering the following three main areas: placing greater emphasis on enforcement of hours and work regulations—which addresses one of the points made by the noble Earl—very importantly, securing recognition internationally of the problem of fatigue at sea and its link with seafarer manning levels; and seeking to achieve a cultural shift over the longer term, whereby excessive working hours are no longer acceptable, either to employers or to seafarers. The second of those principles is key to success in improving manning levels on ships. Until we achieve change internationally, forcing the issue of manning levels on UK ships risks losing ships from the register. A loss of ships from the UK register would undermine the MCA’s influence further, as there are fewer enforcement options against non-UK ships, even when they are operating in UK waters. I turn to the advantages and the question of states that do not ratify. Ships from non-ratifying states could potentially face delays and additional costs, as convention requirements will be applied by ratifying states to vessels from non-ratifying states on the basis of no more favourable treatment. Therefore, they will face having to meet the convention requirements even though their flag state has not ratified. This has been a useful discussion on a subject that naturally raises considerable interest in this country where almost all our international trade in goods comes and goes by sea. The convention has been described as a super-convention, which is as appropriate a description as any for a convention which consolidates and updates more than 60 disparate instruments, dating back almost 90 years, into a single set of standards which set a modern benchmark and which can henceforth be amended relatively easily to ensure that the standards are kept updated and relevant. The Government are proud of the leading role played by the United Kingdom. I hope that I have addressed the key issues raised today and that the order will be approved. I take note of the concerns, but this convention shows that the international community is able to come to a single agreement. When I was introduced to this subject today, I was extremely impressed by how far we have moved in six years but, equally, we must continue to move forward in this area of employment. Motion agreed.