Merchant Shipping Pollution Bill [HL]

I thank noble Lords who have taken part in our short debate. I shall elucidate on this part of the Bill, as the noble Lord has asked. I thank my noble friend Lord Clinton-Davis for his contribution, given his extensive experience in this area. I have some sympathy with the first of these amendments and hope to show that we have already taken account of what it seeks to achieve. We agree that the UK should ratify and implement the Supplementary Fund Protocol as soon as possible so that our coastal communities have the best possible arrangements in place for economic protection in the event of a major oil spill. I do not need to remind noble Lords that the UK’s coast is particularly vulnerable; nor do I need to remind them that in the UK we have experienced three of the world’s biggest oil spills. A number of aspects of the Bill are designed to ensure that the Supplementary Fund Protocol is given effect to at the earliest opportunity—that is the thrust of the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield. The power to implement the protocol in Clause 1(2)(a) will come into force on Royal Assent and the secondary legislation made under that power will be subject to the negative resolution procedure. We have also made drafts of the legislation, which I have made available in the Libraries of both Houses. I hope that when noble Lords have had a chance to look at it, they will see that those drafts are also at an advanced stage. We hope to be in a position to ratify and implement the Supplementary Fund Protocol as soon as the Bill is passed, if that is the will of Parliament. However, I have less sympathy with the fact that the amendment would also commit the Government to give effect to any future instrument as soon as possible. As my noble friend says, as drafted the Bill provides for Parliament to give early consideration to any future instruments to the existing regime and for a speedy decision for the UK to become a party to such an instrument, if it in our best interests, without the need to await primary legislation. I am sure that this is not the noble Lord’s intention—as he has explained, these are probing amendments—but I do not think that we want effectively to commit the UK to ratification of any instrument without proper parliamentary consideration. Therefore I hope that he will withdraw Amendment No. 1. Would the noble Lord like me to respond to Amendment No. 2?