UK Parliament / Open data

Antarctic Bill

Proceeding contribution from Neil Carmichael (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Friday, 18 January 2013. It occurred during Debate on bills on Antarctic Bill.

That is something I shall have to consult on. I personally did not have to do an environmental assessment, but I shall come to an aspect of that in connection with clause 5.

It is slightly ironic that my constituency, Stroud, is covered in snow, as other constituencies will be, and here we are, discussing the Antarctic.

I shall comment briefly on each amendment and put on record my own views. I tend to think that cost-benefit analyses are unnecessarily bureaucratic at the best of times, but the Bill is financially neutral anyway. That is the first point to make. Secondly, the thrust of the Bill is to encourage operators to behave properly, especially in planning for their activities. The idea is therefore to avoid problems, rather than counter them. The Bill’s overall direction of travel is to encourage that additional responsibility. I know that many operators are already responsible, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (Mr Nuttall) noted, there have been some accidents, when ships collided with one another or sank completely.

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
556 c1161 
Session
2012-13
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top