Examination of Witnesses (Questions 240-259)
21 JULY 2004
MR ELLIOT
MORLEY AND
MS SUE
ELLIS
Q240 Chairman: It is. Good.
Mr Morley: Between ourselves and
the Department of transport. It is one of the issues that we are,
of course, dealing with in this strategy paper that we are producing
in relation to the recycling of ships in the UK.
Q241 Chairman: Before we get on to the
strategy paper, because that sounds very interesting, in fact
I want to come on to deal with some of those issues, you have
identified that Defra and the Department of Transport have policy
input, but is there therefore some mechanism for interlinking
you and the Department of Transport on this, because our previous
witnesses indicated that the Department of Transport made input
to the International Marine Organisation's deliberations in which,
in terms of trying to find global solutions, they are a key player?
Mr Morley: Yes.
Q242 Chairman: You, on the other hand,
have a finger in all the other pies?
Mr Morley: We do.
Q243 Chairman: But, given the interaction,
as again your opening remarks indicated, between the domestic
situation, the European situation and the international situation,
there does seem to be a need for some coordinatory mechanism.
If so, what is it?
Mr Morley: We do, of course, talk
to the Department of Transport on this. There is a joint working
group which is in the process of being set up with the IMO and
also involves the International Labour Organisation, I think.
Ms Ellis: The ILO?
Mr Morley: The IMO and the ILO,
and that will be the Department of Transport lead. Because it
is an international body, we have to be nominated as a country
onto the working group, although we are very optimistic there
is a very good chance that the UK will be nominated onto the working
group.
Q244 Chairman: Coming back to the fact
that all of the key environmental issues which are raised by this
subject come within the purview and expertise of your department
and, indeed, the Environment Agency, which is the creature of
your department—
Mr Morley: It is.
Q245 Chairman: —where does the
Department of Transport then draw its expertise in terms of input
to these international discussions and also in the determination
of the policy which you wish to follow: because, almost in a circular
way, what happens with IMO, ILO, Basel discussions feeds back,
from what we can see, to the European Union to the national situation?
Mr Morley: Sure.
Q246 Chairman: So how do you interact
with the Department of Transport?
Mr Morley: We obviously have regular
contact with the Department of Transport in relation to the formulation
of these policies.
Ms Ellis: The Department of Transport
is the government's representative at IMO. They draw on the expertise
of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency in much the same way as
we provide the representative for the Basel Convention. We draw
on the technical expertise and guidance of the Environment Agency.
We do work very closely with the Department of Transport and also
the MCA. We are in frequent informal and informal contact.
Q247 Chairman: If I were to turn up on
the doorstep of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and say to
them, "Please tell me what your policy is about the disposal
of ships and the substances that are in them and their handling
at an international level", would I get from them the same
statement as if I had come along to you and asked the same question?
For example, we talked about PCBs. Would I get the same message
from MCA as I would from you if I were to come and ask the question?
Ms Ellis: In so far as it is governed
by other international conventions, the UK Government has a consistent
line that it is developed between departments.
Q248 Chairman: What I am getting at is
that at this international level, in the discussions we have had,
it is clear that for example at the moment there is guidance issued
by the IMO about good practice in ship dismantling. From what
you have just told me, the input for determining that good practice
guidance must have come from information flowing up the transport
route.
Mr Morley: Yes.
Q249 Chairman: What I am interested to
know, given that part of that good practice relates to the sound
environmental disposal of dangerous substances commensurate with
the various conventions that have been agreed to, given that the
content of those conventions is of a strongly environmental nature
in terms of implications, is do you have any input as the key
environment part of government to shaping MCA policy before they
troop off to wherever to discuss these international matters?
Ms Ellis: Yes, we certainly discussed
with the Department of Transport and the MCA the environmental
aspects before they went off and represented the UK Government
view.
Mr Morley: As indeed we are now
as part of the formulation of the strategy on ship recycling.
Q250 Chairman: I come back to the question:
Who is in charge of determining the policy or do we still have
two distinct parts of government with different responsibilities?
Is anybody in charge?
Mr Morley: There are distinct
responsibilities with different departments but we are taking
the lead on pulling this together through the Strategy Paper which
is underway at the present time.
Q251 Chairman: Mr Ballard, I gather,
has retired from your Department now but he wrote a very helpful
report on many matters[9]In
paragraph eight, page 13, he says, "An early statement by
government of its policy for recycling ships will provide a valuable
backdrop against which regional and local plans can be developed
and individual regulators can consider specific proposals."
Would you like to make a statement on that?
http:/www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/topics/hazwaste/usnavalships-reviews/pdf/ballard-review.pdf
and covering letter:
http:/www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/topics/hazwaste/usnavalships-reviews/pdf/ballard-letter.pdf
Mr Morley: Yes. The situation
is that the last time I came before the Committee I did announce
that we were going to start a process of developing a strategy
in relation to recycling ships. That is underway at the present
time and the terms of reference will be published in September.
Those terms of reference are being drawn up between ourselves
and the Department of Transport so there is inter-government consultation
at the moment. Before we start the process, we will be clear amongst
ourselves about what the terms of reference will be in relation
to a government strategy.
Q252 Chairman: Mr Ballard in his summary
document of his report on page four, paragraph four, lists a whole
series of questions that should be addressed. Will they be addressed
by your strategy?
Mr Morley: They will be part of
it. I cannot remember every single question at the moment but
if I recall I think nearly all of those will be part of the strategy.
Q253 Chairman: One of the concerns we
have had before us in terms of where do ships end up is the appalling
conditions that some of them are dismantled in in places like
Bangladesh and India. Do you condone this kind of trans-frontier
movement of ships to be dismantled in wholly inadequate circumstances
and do you think there should be international action to prevent
that, possibly going as far as a ban if it were to be deemed that
people are at risk and environmental damage could be done because
of substandard dismantling procedures?
Mr Morley: I do not think that
anyone should have to work in substandard working conditions and
I do not think that any country should allow activities which
damage and pollute the environment. I do think that companies
have a responsibility generally in relation to where they place
contracts and what actions they take in terms of taking those
particular issues into consideration. One way of tackling this
is to have tighter international regulations. The body for that
is the IMO, though the EU may have a role in relation to the attitude
of Member States. I also think that we should be working with
developing countries, helping them in terms of the process of
governance in dealing with some of these environmental, social
and economic problems.
Q254 Chairman: Is the United Kingdom
involved in any bilateral discussions with either Bangladesh,
India or even possibly China on these matters outwith the international
bodies to which you have just referred?
Mr Morley: Most of the discussions
that we have are through the international organisations and bodies,
including the UN. There are regular bilateral discussions with
these countries but of course they are led by the Foreign Office.
Q255 Chairman: Do you ever ask the Foreign
Office to put on the agenda concerns about the dismantling of
ships? Do you feel Britain should be taking a lead in trying to
move this agenda forward because these international meetings
seem to go on for ever and ever.
Mr Morley: Sadly, it is a slow
process. However, it is worth what can be a frustrating process
in terms of time because in the end you get an international agreement
and that can be very effective. The UK is taking the lead in the
sense that we have put ourselves forward as a member of the IMO,
the joint working group, so that we can be part of shaping and
reforming the international rules in relation to recycling ships.
We are very keen to play our role internationally in this.
Q256 Chairman: Do you think that there
ought to be an international agreement that flag states effectively
should be self-sufficient in terms of ship dismantling capacity?
In other words, instead of the pass the parcel game around the
world according to where you can get the best price for the scrapped
vessel, there should be something which enables people to say,
"It is one of our ships; we have a responsibility. Therefore,
yes, we will have a dismantling operation in our country"
or, in the context of the European Union, within the Union's boundaries?
Mr Morley: In an ideal world,
the answer to that would be yes but we do not live in an ideal
world. One of the biggest merchant fleets is Liberian and I do
not think Liberia has very good facilities in relation to recycling
ships.
Q257 Chairman: You put your finger on
it: the ability of people to hop over almost any national boundary
restriction by virtue of the fact that a ship is a highly mobile
and valuable object whilst it is trading and indeed at the point
when it becomes scrap. What one thing would you like to put your
finger on to say, given your understanding and recognition of
this problem, what Britain is doing to try and move forward a
meaningful international conclusion to discussions to improve
the way in which ship dismantling is carried out?
Mr Morley: There is more than
one thing. There is a number of fronts that you have to advance
this on. We have mentioned the IMO and the joint working group
which we are very actively engaged in. As a Member State, as part
of our analysis of what we are working on in relation to ship
recycling, what is quite interesting is that the number of ships
which reach the end of their life under the UK flag are quite
limited because the tendency of the UK and a number of other G8
countries is that ships tend to be sold on to other countries
before they reach the end of their working life. The number of
ships which remain under the UK flag to the very end of their
working life is quite surprisingly limited. They tend to be state
owned, such as naval vessels or a range of research vessels or
fishing vessels. We do have to approach this on the basis of international
agreements and there are arguments about when a ship is waste
and when it is not. I fear we are only going to resolve that in
the international forum.
Chairman: We will come on to some of
those points, particularly in the light of the Secretary of State
for Defence's statement which might have created a rather bigger
market.
Q258 Alan Simpson: Both the Environment
Agency and Greenpeace have called for an international agreement
on dismantling of ships. Do you want to give us your reaction
to that?
Mr Morley: I think that would
be very desirable. We do have the OECD agreements. The OECD agreements,
which most industrial countries including the US are party to,
do lay down certain standards in relation to the disposal of ships
under the flag control of the parties. Of course, not all countries
are members of the OECD so an international agreement would clearly
be an advantage.
Q259 Alan Simpson: Through which body
would you expect such an agreement to be formulated and made to
stick?
Mr Morley: It would have to be
a UN body because it is the only body that covers internationally
the widest range of countries. The IMO itself is a UN body so
I think the UN would have to pursue this.
9 Full report: Back
| 
