| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Dalyell: Does the Minister recall that, in Committee on what became the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, we inserted into the Bill, with the agreement of hon. Members on both sides of the Committee, the concept of marine nature reserves? Progress has been abysmally slow. Eventually, a decision was made on Lundy and Scilly, but little progress has been made on Skomer--my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Ainger) will correct me if I am wrong. Nothing has been done about some places in the Outer Hebrides and Loch Sween. Why is it so difficult to make progress?
Mr. Bowis: The best thing would be to discuss that further at a later stage. We are hastening to try to reach agreement with the statutory advisers so that we can bring forward proposals for regulation.
Tugs have been mentioned. It was decided that emergency towing vessels should be stationed on a trial basis at the three locations highlighted by the Donaldson report and the Belton report as having a significantly higher risk factor than other areas--the Dover straits, the Minches and the south-west approaches. The problem of the seasons has been referred to. Weather conditions in the winter can, of course, generally be expected to be the worst. When the trial ends at the end of March, we will consider carefully the long-term future of those vessels.
I hope that I can put the mind of the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) at rest when I say that it is the Government's intention to introduce the mandatory aspects of the waste management plans. Following the passage of the Bill we will bring forward regulations for consultation to achieve just that. There may be some confusion, because we are also seeking to lead internationally and to encourage wider agreement within the IMO. The European Commission is also interested in supporting such measures.
Mr. Dalyell:
If I have understood it right, it would be churlish not to thank the Minister for doing that. Can we take it that Government amendments will be tabled to introduce mandatory provisions on port waste facilities?
Mr. Bowis:
I think that that is not necessary, because the Bill enables regulations to be laid. The intention is to consult following the passage of the Bill on the regulations that would achieve that aim. We can pursue that point further in Committee.
The detection of polluters at sea, which was mentioned by several hon. Members, and the issue of plastics, which was raised by the hon. Member for Linlithgow, are important matters. The maximum fine was also mentioned: £25,000 in respect of non-oil pollution--chemicals, gases and so on--is, of course, relevant only to magistrates courts. Spillages of that nature, given their rarity, might be referred to the Crown court which has no limitation on the fines it can impose.
Some of the measures in the Bill are sufficiently up to date to be relevant to the most recent spillage, which was of oil. We are taking the lead internationally in developing
a workable system of automatic ship identification transponders, which would remove ships' anonymity and allow a polluting ship to be identified even at night or in fog. We have some interesting times ahead in Committee and, for the time being, I commend the Bill to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a Second time, and committed to a Standing Committee, pursuant to Standing Order No. 61 (Committal of Bills).
Queen's recommendation having been signified--
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 50A(1)(a),
Question agreed to.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 50A(1)(a),
Order for Second Reading read.
The Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. William Hague):
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.
I wish to set out the purpose of the Bill; to refer to the success of the agency in its use of the existing financial limit; and to set out my priorities for expenditure within the limit proposed by the Bill.
The purpose of the Bill, as set out in clause 1, is to increase the statutory financial limit for the Welsh Development Agency from the present level of £950 million to £1,350 million. The limit was last raised by the Welsh Development Agency Act 1991. On the basis of current estimates, the present limit will be reached during the 1998-99 financial year. It is necessary to raise the limit to permit continued public expenditure to finance the agency's activities so that it can continue its excellent work for the benefit of Wales and the Welsh economy.
Mr. Alex Carlile (Montgomery)
rose--
Mr. Hague:
The hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. Carlile) already wishes to intervene, so I shall give way.
Mr. Carlile:
Can the Secretary of State confirm that the proposed increase in funding for the Welsh Development Agency does not contain within it a hidden agenda to abolish the Development Board for Rural Wales? Will he confirm that the Development Board for Rural Wales is still considered to be a valuable part of Welsh economic development and that it would be viewed as a serious mistake if anyone were to propose its abolition, either now or in the near future?
Mr. Hague:
I can assure the hon. and learned Gentleman that I see a continuing and important role for the Development Board for Rural Wales. He will be reassured that the Bill has nothing to do with that, but I know that Labour Members--who have designs to abolish the Development Board for Rural Wales--will have taken note of his pertinent point.
Mr. Ron Davies (Caerphilly):
It never takes long for the Secretary of State to start discussing Labour policies; it would make a pleasant change if he started defending his own record. As it has been suggested that I have designs to abolish the Development Board for Rural Wales, let me make it clear that I have no such designs.
Mr. Hague:
The discussion precipitated by the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery has turned out to be most useful because, after all that we have heard about super-quangos and so on, it turns out that it is not Labour's intention to abolish the board after all. No doubt, as the debate continues, we shall be able to enlighten ourselves about many other aspects of Labour policy as well as about the purpose of the Bill, to which subject I return.
Under section 18 of the Welsh Development Agency Act 1975, the financial limit to which I have referred applies to the total cumulative amount of the sums granted
to the agency by the Government. The limit includes: the total of all grant in aid and public dividend capital, less repayments by the agency and excluding administrative expenses; the agency's outstanding borrowings; the third party loans guaranteed by the agency; and any sums issued by the Treasury in consequence of its guaranteeing agency borrowings that have not been repaid to the Treasury.
Mr. Matthew Taylor (Truro):
The Secretary of State is outlining the considerable sums that pass to the agency from the Treasury. Today's Western Morning News confirms that several businesses in Cornwall have been approached by organisations using Welsh Development Agency money to encourage them to relocate in Wales. Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that it is not Government policy to allow such development agencies to poach--especially from poor areas such as mine--and will he personally seek to ensure that such poaching is not repeated?
That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Merchant Shipping and Maritime Security Bill [Lords] it is expedient to authorise--
(1) the payment out of money provided by Parliament of--
(a) any sums required by the Secretary of State for making any payment in respect of an indemnity given by virtue of the Act to a person taking measures with respect to marine pollution;
(b) any other expenses of a Minister of the Crown attributable to the provisions of the Act; and
(c) any increase attributable to the Act in the sums which under any other enactment are payable out of money so provided; and
(2) the making of payments out of money provided by Parliament into the General Lighthouse Fund.--[Mr. Wells.]
That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Merchant Shipping and Maritime Security Bill [Lords] it is expedient to authorise--
(1) the imposition in accordance with the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea 1996 (or any revision of that Convention) of obligations to contribute to the International Hazardous and Noxious Substances Fund established under the Convention;
(2) the imposition of charges for the purposes of recovering costs incurred--
(a) by the Secretary of State, in connection with his maritime functions, or
(b) by general lighthouse authorities, within the meaning of Part VIII of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, in respect of their functions under that Part;
(3) the payment into the Consolidated Fund of sums which would otherwise be payable into the General Lighthouse Fund; and
(4) the payment of other sums into the Consolidated Fund.--[Mr. Wells.]
7.1 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |