House of Commons Hansard Debates for 22 Feb 1990

Column 1067

Beach Pollution (Sussex)

3.31 pm

Mrs. Ann Taylor (Dewsbury) (by private notice) : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the problem of drums of potassium cyanide washed up on Sussex beaches.

The Minister for Aviation and Shipping (Mr. Patrick McLoughlin) : The first canister of potassium cyanide on Brighton beaches was reported to the Sussex police at 11.5 am on 21 February. The coastguard was informed immediately and, together with the police, they instituted a full-scale search, which located a second canister on the beach an hour later. The police then called in the fire brigade to deal with the chemicals and the beach was promptly closed off to the public by the council. The beach remains closed. Thanks to the prompt action of the police, the fire brigade and the local authority officers, a total of six canisters of potassium cyanide and several canisters of other dangerous chemicals are now in safe storage in Newhaven. The council is arranging for their disposal.

Local officials are searching the coastline in case further canisters are washed up. We still do not know from which ship the chemicals came or how they came to be in the sea, but our inquiries are under way.

Mrs. Taylor : Will the Minister confirm that potassium cyanide is a deadly human poison and that, potentially, this is a highly dangerous situation for those in the vicinity of those containers? Does he agree that such incidents are causing increasing concern and that the plain fact is that the waters around our coast are in an appalling state, made worse by such problems as this, but also because the Government continue to allow the dumping of industrial waste at sea? Can the Minister tell the House whether the containers were labelled in line with international regulations for dangerous goods? What action is taken after the sinking of any ship known to be carrying hazardous materials? Recently there have been several incidents when the Government have been aware of hazardous materials on ships that have sunk. What action have the Government taken in those cases to trace chemicals, such as those that we are discussing today?

Surely this incident proves that the Government are wrong to reject proposals for a European Community directive on vessels carrying dangerous goods entering or leaving Community ports. Will the Government think again about tightening such controls before a major catastrophe occurs?

Mr. McLoughlin : This is undoubtedly a very serious situation. Indeed, as the hon. Lady says, the chemicals washed ashore are of the most serious kind and are particularly dangerous. I hope that everybody will urge those who today, tomorrow and over the coming weekend make their way on to beaches to keep a close watch for any chemicals that may appear.

It is wholly wrong of the Opposition to try to make this issue part of the dirty water syndrome, about which we have heard so much from Labour Members. It is absolute and total rubbish. Between 200 and 300 ships a day use the Dover straits. It is imperative that the masters of those

Column 1068

vessels operate under the international agreements. If any such cargoes are lost, they should report the fact immediately. That is the requirement.

A major conference of states bordering the North sea will take place in two weeks' time. The question of the carriage of dangerous goods of this kind will be discussed, and we shall see whether anything further can be done to ensure that the IMO rules are fully enforced.

My answer to the hon. Lady's question about the EC directive is that had she read the Official Report of the debate on 25 January of this year, she would be aware that serious concerns were expressed about whether what was proposed by the EC was practicable. It would require setting the standards for more than 4,000 ships, and we were not sure whether what was proposed was the best way forward. I assure the hon. Lady that, as in the past, Her Majesty's Government will take whatever action is necessary, through our marine pollution control unit, to deal with problems of this kind when they arise. I would point out to her, for example, the action that was taken by the Secretary of State when the Perintis was sunk and chemicals were recovered.

Mr. Andrew Bowden (Brighton, Kemptown) : Is my hon. Friend aware that, according to information that I have received, the total number of canisters recovered has now reached 12? Is there not some evidence to show that these canisters were washed off a ship at sea in recent bad weather? They have clear markings on them and I understand that the labels and batch numbers have now been identified.

Will the Minister give careful consideration to ensuring that the regulations requiring ships' masters to report immediately the loss of any dangerous canisters are enforced and that any ship's master who fails to report such a loss is subject to very severe penalties? Is he satisfied that the liaison between his Department, local authorities and the marine pollution control unit is working effectively?

Mr. McLoughlin : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making those points, because I appreciate that this problem is of great concern to him and his constituents. Anybody who is convicted of not reporting incidents of this kind, and should be subject to the most severe penalties available under the law. This is a very serious matter ; that is certainly the view of the Government, and the penalties are there for the courts to enforce.

There has been very good liaison between the local authorities and the marine pollution control unit. I hope that that reassures my hon. Friend, who is right to say that more canisters have been washed ashore. As I said, dangerous chemicals other than potassium are involved.

Mr. Malcolm Bruce (Gordon) : Is the Minister aware that there is concern about the way in which incidents of this kind are handled and about which Department is responsible? Will he confirm that initially, the local authorities were left to tackle it and that subsequently the Department of Transport was called in? When and under what circumstances is his Department responsible, and when does it become the responsibility of the Department of the Environment?

Does the Minister accept that we need clear international regulations to identify all toxic cargos of this

Column 1069

kind and that the trade in toxic materials must be restricted much more rigidly, particularly the trade in toxic waste, which should be limited to the absolute minimum?

Mr. McLoughlin : This incident has nothing to do with toxic waste. The chemicals involved are in canister sizes suitable for laboratory use. As my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Mr. Bowden) pointed out, they are fully labelled, in accordance with international regulations. That is an important point.

There is no confusion over the question of responsibility. The responsibility for beaches is clearly that of the local authorities. But the Department of Transport and its marine pollution control unit stands ready to help any local authorities that may experience particular problems in this area. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Department is only too willing to give any help that it can, through the coastguard or the marine pollution control unit.

Mr. Kenneth Warren (Hastings and Rye) : While I appreciate the action that is being taken, about which my hon. Friend has told the House, has he consulted his right hon. Friend the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food about the potential danger of pollution of the valuable fish stocks on the Sussex coast? Rather than just relying on people walking up and down the seashores looking for canisters, would it not be possible to call in the many Army helicopters that are available and are based quite close to the coast?

Mr. McLoughlin : There has been helicopter assistance and, as I said, if local authorities were to ask for extra help for the coastguard, the Department of Transport would be only too happy to oblige. I assure my hon. Friend that the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has been fully informed about the situation. We shall take, and I am sure that it will take, any necessary action. Several Hon. Members rose --

Mr. Speaker : Order. I propose to give priority to those Members who have direct constituency interests in this matter.

Mr. Ian Gow (Eastbourne) : As the containers are clearly labelled and this highly dangerous chemical is not widely used, would not it be easy to trace from which ship the containers have escaped? Is my hon. Friend satisfied that the penalties for not notifying a loss of highly dangerous chemicals at sea are sufficient? Is he aware that it is possible in the courts of some nations to prosecute for a dereliction of duty of the kind that has taken place?

Mr. McLoughlin : I hope that my hon. Friend is correct and, bearing in mind the clearness with which this consignment was marked, that it will be easy to find out its origins. I am convinced that penalties are quite tight. It will be up to the court to make a decision when the case comes to court. Over the past few weeks there have been violent storms in this part of the country and it may be that in some cases ships' masters may not know that cargo has been lost.

Mr. Barry Field (Isle of Wight) : Will my hon. Friend confirm that, despite the fact that the Perintis was not loaded or destined for a port in this country, my hon. Friend's Department received the manifest of that ship within a matter of hours? Is it not a fact that my hon.

Column 1070

Friend has implemented every suggestion that has been put forward by hon. Members from both sides of the House to try to control the incident? Does he believe that there is a case for co- operation between us and the French so that we know the manifest of every ship that goes through the Dover straits?

Mr. McLoughlin : My hon. Friend makes an important point : the Dover straits is an exceptionally busy piece of waterway. Therefore, it is vital to have total co-operation with the French authorities, and I am satisfied that we do. We work closely with them when such an incident occurs. As regards the Perintis, I agree that we took the necessary action in recovering those canisters.

Mr. Tim Rathbone (Lewes) : Does my hon. Friend share with me an appreciation of the job done by the local police, fire services, his Department and the local authority? Will he reassure the House that any additional costs that the local authority may have to bear, which could lead to an increased community charge, will not lead to the local authority being capped for raising the community charge? That point is extremely important to my constituents. While he may have doubts about whether the European Community directive is the best way to control shipping and cargoes in the crowded Channel, will the Government swiftly bring forward counter-proposals for consultation with the EC partners?

Mr. McLoughlin : As I said, there is to be a major conference attended by states bordering the North sea in two weeks' time when this incident will be discussed. I join my hon. Friend in congratulating the local authorities and the local people involved. I understand that the cost of mounting these operations for the local authorities will be minimal, but I am sure that my hon. Friend will understand that that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

Mr. Peter Hardy (Wentworth) : The Minister is right to pay tribute to the public services and to commend the thousands of people who are prepared to be vigilant in this matter, and he may be right to refer to the next international conference, but is he aware that, during the past few years, there has been international conference after international conference, one of which I chaired last year in which Conservative Members were involved, and it is about time that we had far less concern for attending conferences and more for ensuring that there are proper regulations? Are not the regulations governing the movement of toxic waste in Britain, around our coasts and in our waters utterly and deplorably inadequate?

Mr. McLoughlin : I am not prepared to put the British shipping industry at a disadvantage, and I am constantly urged not to do so by Opposition Members. Therefore, it is no good Opposition Members asking us to ignore international agreements and we have no intention of doing so. The best way to proceed is by international agreement and I know of no more immediate action that we could take than the conference that is due to be held in two weeks' time.

Mr. Robert Adley (Christchurch) : Is my hon. Friend aware that the Standing Committee considering the Environmental Protection Bill which is sitting upstairs seems finally to have reached the conclusion that the direction of wind at sea is the determinant factor in

Column 1071

deciding which of the Government Departments in which some of these problems are dealt with has ultimate responsibility? Does he agree that that is not entirely satisfactory, and will he consider, in consultation with Ministers at the Department of the Environment, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Ministry of Defence, and anybody else who is necessary, the proposition that ultimately the owners rather than the carriers of these products should be held responsible, which would ensure that they did not put some of their products on ships that do not know where they are going or what they are carrying, and lose their cargo?

Mr. McLoughlin : My hon. Friend is jumping to a number of conclusions, which at the moment it would be wrong to draw. There is strong co-operation between all Departments when an incident of this seriousness takes place.

Mr. Eddie Loyden (Liverpool, Garston) : Does the Minister recognise that the present regulations are grossly inadequate and that there is plenty of evidence to support that point of view? Is he aware that, in several incidents around British coasts, and one in particular on Merseyside, containers of hazardous substances were eventually driven ashore, but there was no co-ordination between the emergency services because they were not informed? Is not it time that the Government recognised that such materials should be monitored while they are on board and that the emergency services should be kept informed when something happens, so that it can be dealt with? To rely on local people around the coast to look for each lost cargo is nonsense.

Mr. McLoughlin : There are strong regulations in force, but they cannot encompass every situation that might arise. We have taken strong action in a number of cases where ships have gone down or have lost their cargo and their cargoes have been recovered as a result of the efficient operation of the Department's marine pollution control unit. That is important, and it is the best way to proceed.

Column 1072

Mr. Henry Bellingham (Norfolk, North-West) : Will my hon. Friend the Minister--who has put up a very good performance in replying to the private notice question--reiterate that it was not a matter of dumping toxic chemicals at sea but a maritime accident? In the light of that, is not it opportunistic and cynical of the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) to exploit that accident and to attack the Government's excellent environmental record?

Mr. McLoughlin : I wholly agree with my hon. Friend. It is not a matter of dumping chemicals at sea. Anyone who dumped such chemicals at sea would be guilty of a very serious crime and would deserve the full weight of the law coming down upon them.

Mr. Alan W. Williams (Carmarthen) : The Minister described the canisters as containing potassium cyanide. The police have warned that a whiff of the fumes could kill, but potassium cyanide is a solid and gives off no vapour. Did the canisters contain only potassium cyanide or a combination of chemicals? What are the quantities involved? How many containers are there? Is one talking about tonnes or only of kilograms of what is a very toxic chemical?

Mr. McLoughlin : We are talking about canisters of the particular chemicals concerned. One is talking of sizes of 1 kg or 500 ml--that kind of size. It is important to stress that we are not talking about large drums, and I am glad that the hon. Gentleman gave me an opportunity to clarify that point.

A number of different chemicals have been washed up. Potasium cyanide is one, but there are others. The British public, and the people living in the particular areas concerned, are well advised to take the advice of the police not to touch or tamper with any of the chemicals but, if they come across them, to report them immediately to the relevant authorities.

Several Hon. Members rose --

Mr. Speaker : Order. I am sorry for not being able to call all the right hon. and hon. Members who wish to speak.

Column 1073

Business of the House

3.51 pm

Dr. John Cunningham (Copeland) : May I ask the Leader of the House to tell us the business for next week?

The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Geoffrey Howe) : The business for next week will be as follows :

Monday 26 February----Remaining stages of the Landlord and Tenant (Licensed Premises) Bill.

Motions on the Industrial Training Levy (Engineering Board) and (Construction Board) Orders.

The Chairman of Ways and Means has named opposed private business for Consideration at seven o'clock.

Tuesday 27 February----Second Reading of the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Bill [ Lords ].

Motion to take note of the annual report of the European Court of Auditors for 1988 and related EC document on action against fraud. Details will be given in the Official Report.

The Chairman of Ways and Means has named opposed private business for consideration at seven o'clock.

Wednesday 28 February----There will be a debate on the Royal Air Force on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Thursday 1 March----St. David's day--There will be a debate on Welsh affairs on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.

Friday 2 March----Private Members' Bills

Monday 5 March----Opposition day (10th Allotted Day). There will be a debate on an Opposition motion, subject for debate to be announced.

[Tuesday 27 February

Relevant European Community documents

(a) Unnumbered Court of Auditors report for 1988

(b) 4582/90 Fight against Fraud

Relevant Reports of the European Legislation Committee

(a) HC 11-ix (1989-90), para 1

(b) HC 11-x(1989-90), para 2

Dr. Cunningham : I am sure that the debate on Welsh affairs that is to take place on St. David's day will be warmly welcomed. Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House what proposals he has for allowing the House to debate and deal with the recent report of the Select Committee on Members' Interests? Has he had a chance to consider how we may deal with that matter? Is he in a position to say anything about it today?

Has the Leader of the House noticed that yesterday the Minister for Social Security was once again found guilty by the High Court of acting unlawfully in respect of the social fund? May we be given next week either an oral statement or time for a debate on the High Court's decision? Are we to be told the Government's intentions, given that, as of now, Ministers persist with an unlawful activity and are denying many thousands of people facing severe financial hardship their legal entitlement to benefit? May we have an assurance from the Leader of the House that the Government will not, as they have done in the past, introduce retrospective legislation to render lawful their hitherto unlawful actions?

Has the Leader of the House had a chance to consider

Column 1074

the events yesterday involving the Under- Secretary of State for the Environment who said, referring to an hon. Member :

"he has registered there for the standard community charge"--[ Official Report, 21 February 1990 ; Vol. 167, c. 916.]

The hon. Gentleman made a definitive statement. The regulations approved by the House on confidentiality for the administration and enforcement of the community charge--the Community Charges (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1989--stipulate in paragraph 11(5)(c) on page 7 that the extracts of the poll tax register available for public inspection

"shall not identify whether the community charge which arises by virtue of any residence, property or dwelling is a personal, standard or collective community charge."

Therefore, it is abundantly clear that the Minister came to the House yesterday with confidential information on a Member of the House which he was not entitled to have. There can be no doubt about it. He made a definitive statement saying that he had that information, and it is beyond doubt that he must have had it to make a statement.

On the same day, one Minister has been found to be acting unlawfully in the High Court, and another Minister has breached regulations laid down by Parliament. Should not both Ministers come to the House as soon as possible to answer for their activities?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : The first and substantial part of the hon. Gentleman's remarks was a question about the recent report of the Select Committee on Members' Interests. As the House fully appreciates, that is an important matter for the hon. Member for Winchester (Mr. Browne) as well as for the House in general. I hope to be in a position to make a reasonably early announcement about my proposals for a debate on that subject, but, in the meantime, I am obviously consulting widely within the House about the appropraiate form of motion to be tabled for debate. I shall advise the House of my conclusions as soon as I sensibly can.

The hon. Member made a point about the social fund. Obviously, I shall give consideration to his request for a statement, but I see no need for one. There was nothing in the recent court judgment on the social fund that called into question the basic aims and operations of the fund. As I understand it, the court recognised the clear intention of Parliament that the scheme should be subject to strict monetary limits. The court found that the strong form of wording was not appropriate to guidance. Since the basic legal framework is not in question, the Government do not anticipate any sudden change in the pattern of awards.

On the subject of the hon. Member for Coventry, South-East (Mr. Nellist), it will be within the recollection of the House that he has made much of his residence in Coventry. The community charge register is a matter of public record-- [Interruption.] Allow me to finish, please. It is a matter of public record and it is manifest from the public record that the hon. Gentleman is registered for the community charge in Wandsworth. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment inferred that it was his second home-- [Interruption.] It is not an unreasonable inference. Moreover, my hon. Friend has written a letter in reply to the letter which he received from the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould) setting out the foundations for that inference. If it is incorrect, of course it can be corrected ; but so far nothing has been said to suggest that it is incorrect.

Column 1075

Mr. Richard Tracey (Surbiton) : Will my right hon. and learned Friend ask the Secretary of State for the Environment to make a statement to the House clarifying the law relating to

councillors--including Labour councillors in London--who have said that they will not register for the community charge, or will not pay it, and then proceed to vote on council motions relating to the settlement of the charge? Is that lawful?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I cannot answer that question, but I will bring it to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. I hope that all hon. Members, as well as all councillors in all parties, will take every action that they should take to pay the community charge for which they are liable.

Sir David Steel (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) : The Leader of the House will have heard the answer given a few minutes ago to my hon. Friend the Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) by the Prime Minister about the steel industry in Scotland. Does he accept that, in view of the temporary closures already suffered by Ravenscraig since privatisation, considerable concern is felt by Scottish Members on both sides of the House? They fear that British Steel has no interest in keeping the plant going at a high level if it is likely to be declared redundant and taken over by a competitor. For that reason, we consider that there is an urgent need to debate the alternative proposition--the creation of a Scottish steel company in the near future.

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I understand the right hon. Gentleman's point, which fortifies that made by his hon. Friend. It goes a long way to support what was said by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister--that the privatisation of the steel industry has played an important part in offering better prospects for it. Commercial decisions are a matter for British Steel and not for the Government.

Mr. Allan Stewart (Eastwood) : Has my right hon. and learned Friend had an opportunity to study early-day motion 545?

[That this House congratulates the Paisley Central Labour Party for their condemnation of the roof tax ; notes that the roof tax has been rejected by all shades of responsible Scottish opinion ; that the Labour Party's proposals for England and Wales are radically different from those for Scotland ; that the roof tax has all the unfair and unjust features of the wholly discredited domestic rating system with many additional injustices and anomalies ; and calls upon the Labour Party to accept the views of Paisley Central and drop those unwelcome proposals.]

Is he aware of today's press reports that a senior and distinguished figure in the Labour movement, the hon. Member for Dunfermline, West (Mr. Douglas), is to make a speech describing the Labour party's roof tax proposals as "a charade" and "a dreadful mess"? Is he also aware that those proposals appear to differ radically north and south of the border, and can he offer any prospect of an early debate so that the Labour party can withdraw its unjust, unfair and unwanted plans?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : My hon. Friend has made an important point. If the reports are correct, it is significant that the hon. Member for Dunfermline, West (Mr. Douglas) is to join the wisdom of the Paisley, Central Labour party in recognising the disastrous effect that the

Column 1076

introduction of a roof tax would have on people in Scotland. I do not know whether it is possible for us to debate the subject ; perhaps the Opposition will give us an opportunity to do so.

Mr. Dave Nellist (Coventry, South-East) : Following the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham), may I press the Leader of the House for a statement or a debate on the Data Protection Act 1984 and the poll tax--particularly practice notes 4 and 6 and section 8 of note 3?

Is the Leader of the House aware that, when the Secretary of State for the Environment said yesterday that my poll tax details in Wandsworth were in the public domain, he spoke far truer than the thought? When the BBC telephoned Wandsworth council this morning, it was told that anyone could check the details of the poll tax register by telephone ; yet, 40 minutes ago, the Department of the Environment told me that the only way in which people could check the register was to go physically to the finance reception department at Wandsworth town hall.

This is not about me ; it is a matter of principle. It could as easily apply to a battered wife seeking refuge in Wandsworth from a violent husband. It is not just a case of confidential information being given out : Wandsworth is giving out such information willy-nilly on the telephone.

Sir Geoffrey Howe : The hon. Gentleman is excited about a wide range of matters, but the central point at issue is whether my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment could reasonably infer, in order to make it known to the House, that the hon. Gentleman's Wandsworth home was his second home. The fact of his having a Wandsworth home is legitimately a matter of public knowledge. My hon. Friend has written a letter to the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould), saying that, if any of the inferences were incorrect, he would naturally wish for them to be corrected at the earliest possible opportunity. The only question remaining is whether my hon. Friend was right to infer that the hon. Gentleman's home in Wandsworth was a second home.

Mr. John Biffen (Shropshire, North) : Earlier this afternoon my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister--under the Svengalian, mesmerising influence of the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner)--seemed to rule out any possible changes in the methods of financing education before the next general election. Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that many Conservative Members would like to share the status of the hon. Member for Bolsover and to seek the ear of the Prime Minister in an attempt to persuade her that there is a good case for the financing of education by the Exchequer? Could he arrange a debate on the subject in the near future?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I understand my right hon. Friend's interest in the matter, but I cannot undertake to arrange a debate upon it merely in response to his request. However, I can assure him that he will never need to emulate the style or the personality of the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) in order to secure the attention of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

Mr. Jack Ashley (Stoke-on-Trent, South) : Is the Leader of the House aware that the case of Sub-Lieutenant Simon Rowland, who suffered brain damage after heat stroke that went unnoticed by his instructor, is not an isolated

Column 1077

case? During the last 10 years, 663 service men have been injured and 12 have been killed by heat stroke, but there has not been a single prosecution. May we have a debate, therefore, next week on the need for the automatic courts martial of officers involved in training when service men are seriously injured or killed? Could there be an independent scrutiny of the cases during the past 10 years where there have been no prosecutions? May we also debate the need for the dismissal from the Royal Navy of Sub-Lieutenant Rowland's instructor?

Sir Geoffrey Howe : I cannot immediately offer the prospect of a debate on that topic, as requested by the right hon. Gentleman. However, I can assure him that the recommendations of the board of inquiry into the Rowland case are being implemented. Instructors in survival training are being given more first-aid training, and staff are being issued with portable phones in order to improve reaction times. Course syllabuses and casualty evacuation procedures are being reviewed, and medical advice is given to all personnel on the prevention of heat stress.

Next Section

Home Page