Merchant Shipping Pollution Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 6: "After Clause 1, insert the following new clause—"    ““SUPPLEMENTARY FUND PROTOCOL: ANNUAL REPORT ON RATIFICATION    The Secretary of State shall publish and present to Parliament not less than once a year a report on progress towards full ratification of the Supplementary Fund Protocol.”” The noble Lord said: I turn now to what I consider to be a crucial matter in the Bill; namely, the number of participating countries that have signed up to the new fund. This issue was considered at some length during our Second Reading debate and attracted the attention of a number of those noble Lords who participated in that discussion. The amendment would place on the Secretary of State a duty to report to Parliament every year on his or her actions taken to encourage other countries to sign up to the Supplementary Fund Protocol. Perhaps it is worth taking a moment to remind ourselves of the current position in which the supplementary fund finds itself. We have nine existing members, one which is due to join in August of this year, and the remaining countries of the European Union which are to join over the course of the next year or so—including ourselves. I have learnt from the department that both Canada and Australia are likely to join shortly. However, what about the large number of countries which have neither signed up nor have any plans to do so? We have a considerable number of flags of convenience—open register—countries, including those with a significant registered tonnage. They are party to the old fund regime, but not to the new one. With such notable absentees, surely the whole scheme is undermined. Indeed, the two countries with the largest registered tonnage, Panama and Liberia, are notable by their absence. For instance, what would happen if a major oil spill occurred either in the waters of a country which had not signed up to the fund or to a vessel registered in one of those absentee countries? On 22 June the noble Baroness wrote to me to explain that the UK’s ratification of the supplementary protocol will serve as an incentive to other states to join up. I admire the optimism of the noble Baroness, but I simply cannot believe that other states, including the likes of Panama and Liberia, are likely suddenly to decide on ratification simply because they have heard the glorious news that the UK has signed up. I am afraid that we are looking for something a little more substantive than that. Asking the Secretary of State to report on his efforts to Parliament once a year would, we believe, keep government efforts and energies focused on persuading other countries to join. Let me stress again that without full ratification, the supplementary fund would effectively become meaningless. If the Minister can provide us with information on what the UK does have in mind as a policy, or better still a programme designed to encourage other states to join up—or at least to consider the merits of such a proposal—I think that we would be happy to let the matter rest. I beg to move.