Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Bill [HL]

My Lords, we too support the Bill as far as it goes. It is probably a rather timid Bill dealing rather slowly with events which have been creeping up on us as the amount of shipping using our waters, and of international shipping, increases. As I understand it, it deals only with serious oil leaks and some air pollution from some ships. But, like the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, I am concerned about what happens to oil which is leaked from ships belonging to countries—or flying the flags of countries—which are not party to the protocol and convention. Have the Government any idea whether such ships should be detained in port or in the ports of signatories to the protocol and convention if incidents take place? Will they be detained until such time as they meet the   compensation which is their liability? I would be interested to know whereabouts ships could be detained and whether the people who do not sign up to the convention and protocol are going to be obliged to provide compensation. If not, they are trading goods but making other people pay part of the costs of doing it. There is a great temptation for people not only to sell ships to countries which do not apply these protocols and conventions, but to flag out to such regimes. It would be sensible for the countries which sign up to deny access to their waters and ports to ships from countries that do not sign the convention by some date. If not, we have trading on two separate levels and obviously there are always people who will take advantage of lower levels. Although the Minister touched on this question, the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, referred to the fact that, in the case of the ““Prestige”” disaster, after three years only 15 per cent of the compensation has been paid out. I will gladly admit that many people will make claims which cannot be—