Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Bill [Lords]

On behalf of the Liberal Democrats, I am pleased to support the Bill. I commend the work of the Minister in Committee and on the Floor of the House. Although the Bill is short, it will have an important and wide-reaching effect because it ratifies two important treaties and agreements on oil pollution and controls on air pollution by ships, which are being introduced for the first time. The catalyst for the first aspect of the Bill was the Prestige disaster, and we heard in Committee about its catastrophic effect. Some 64,000 tonnes of oil were spilled and there was a bill of more than $1 billion. Our one worry about the supplementary allowance is that it would not have paid 100 per cent. of the cost of the Prestige disaster, but nevertheless we realise that we have come a long way since the Torrey Canyon disaster in 1967. Remarkable improvements have been made on both the amount of oil spilled each year in international waters and the way in which we have dealt with it. I remember my geology professor, Lord Energlyn, who advised Harold Wilson on how to deal with the Torrey Canyon disaster, talking about the technology used at the time, which included the use of Buccaneer bombers to disperse the oil. The way in which we deal with such disasters and the compensation arrangements available have come a long way since then. We support the provisions of the Bill that will help people much more than was the case in the past. There are still legitimate worries about flags of convenience and the state of such fleets. It is estimated that at least one in 12 vessels that visit British ports are unseaworthy and that the figures for other ports are much higher. Nevertheless, with continuing pressure, more states will ratify the agreement. It is to be hoped that that will reduce some of the consequences that we had with the Prestige disaster. I move on to the MARPOL index. It is a start in dealing for the first time with air pollution. It is limited, and the number of signatures to the convention is low. Like the hon. Member for Canterbury (Mr. Brazier), we look forward to hearing what the Government will do with regard to the ports Bill. We would have liked to see an opportunity to tackle air pollution of ships while in port. That is called cold ironing, and it already operates in Los Angeles and Vancouver. When the Bill is introduced, we hope to have an opportunity to consider that process as going one stage further in dealing with pollution, not only on the high seas but within UK ports. I commend the Bill to the House in recognition of the work that will be done under its provisions.