| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Lucas: My Lords, no; nor do I think it was entirely generated by government-funded research. I believe that a great deal of commercial work, particularly on plant breeding, has been paid for consistently by farmers in the price that they pay for their seed beyond anything else. It is also reflected in the effort that farmers these days put into getting proper advice on their planting and farming practices. We believe that privatisation will benefit the nation as a whole. ADAS has the potential to grow substantially at home and abroad. Privatisation will enable it to do so. Privatisation is the right option for ADAS.
There was no presumption that this would be the case and neither is there a presumption in any other prior option review of public sector research establishments. Of the first 10 reviews of establishments over all sectors, seven will remain in the public sector and three will be privatised. The Directorate of Fisheries Research is to stay in the public sector as an executive agency because it provides a significant amount of policy advice to MAFF and performs many statutory functions which could not readily be supplied by any other body.
A further 19 agricultural research establishments are currently being reviewed in the prior options programme. One of those is an establishment in which I have a small interest, the Silsoe Research Institute, which occupies a house which marked the beginning and the end of my family's fortunes when it was built. How they deal with that liability, should it be privatised, I wait to see.
Lord Chapple's daughter-in-law continues to work at Horticulture Research International so he has an added interest in the subject. The noble Lord, Lord Chapple,
indulged in a paeon of well deserved praise for HRI. It is an excellent organisation. Our interest is to safeguard and enhance its future.The noble Lord stated that the industry was made up of small businesses. That is true but so is farming, and farmers get together when they need advice and so should horticultural businesses if for no other reason than that there is a substantial source of extra funds coming their way under the European Union fruit and vegetable regime. Those funds will be available through trade associations and getting together will be very profitable.
There are many programmes in which HRI is involved which are for the public good and those we will continue to fund whether HRI is privatised. That is not something which comes into the equation as far as privatisation is concerned. If we want that work done, it has to be done whether the body is private or public.
All these agricultural research establishments are being considered on a case by case basis. Decisions on some of them have been made and some decisions are imminent. It is important that we get the answer right for each establishment for the sake of the establishment concerned and of the national agricultural scientific base.
We realise that any review process raises uncertainty, but we believe that all establishments will emerge from the review process, whatever the decision on future management and ownership, stronger and better able to respond to the needs of their customers.
Lord Carter: My Lords, when the Minister has read Hansard, will he please pick up the point about sell-on by the first buyer? I understand that the Government will take all necessary precautions in relation to the first sale, but there could be a later sale to someone that the Government regard as unsuitable.
Lord Lucas: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Carter, asked a number of questions which I have only touched on and I will ensure that he is given proper and full answers to all the questions he has asked.
Lord Chapple: My Lords, can the Minister say who carried out the prior options review? It is important to know what their status is in the industry if the people do not work for MAFF.
Lord Lucas: My Lords, I do not have an immediate answer. I shall write to the noble Lord with the answer and comment as fully as I can on why we think they are suitable people to have undertaken the review. The decision will be one for Ministers.
- House adjourned at twenty-one minutes before ten o'clock.
Official Report of the Committee on the Merchant Shipping and Maritime Security Bill [H.L.]
Monday, 25th November 1996.
The Committee met at half-past three of the clock.
[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Ampthill) in the Chair.]
Clause 1 [Temporary exclusion zones]:
Lord Clinton-Davis moved Amendment No. 2:
After Clause 1, insert the following new clause--
(".--(1) The Secretary of State may by regulations make such provision as appropriate in relation to--
(a) the identification of marine environmental high risk areas in the territorial seas and pollution zone of the United Kingdom; and
(b) the introduction of necessary measures to safeguard--
(I) maritime safety, and
(ii) the marine environment in marine environmental high risk areas from pollution by matter from ships, offshore installations or submarine pipelines,.
whilst respecting rights of transit passage in international straits and freedom of navigation.
(2) In making the regulations and subsequent identification of marine environmental high risk areas, the Secretary of State shall inform the International Maritime Organisation of--
(a) the identity of such sites;
(b) the significance of such sites for recognised ecological, sociological or scientific reasons and the vulnerability to damage by shipping activities; and
(c) the necessary measures to safeguard maritime safety and the marine environment.").
The noble Lord said: I beg to move Amendment No. 2 standing in my name and in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley. As with many of the debates we shall be having, noble Lords will wish to probe the Government. Certainly there may be areas for improvement as far as the Bill is concerned, but essentially I have put down amendments, and I think others have been put down in a similar light, to test the situation as far as the Government see it. We cannot divide the Committee in any event, but I would not have wished to do so even if we had had that right in the Moses Room. With the concept that we are considering here, this amendment will enable the Government to identify with greater clarity what they are proposing and how they intend to bring this extremely useful idea to fruition.
The idea which was set out in the Donaldson report is one which the Government were very wise to act on in principle. I am not sure whether the idea was totally
In the report, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Donaldson, identified the need for a new type of area, and so we have the marine environmental high risk area to be protected from shipping because of sensitivity to pollution and the likelihood of damage occurring in consequence. As I understand it, the way in which this would operate would be that owners, masters, insurers and charterers would be informed of these significant areas. It is hoped that highlighting them should lead to a change in behaviour so that vessels would, where appropriate, take a wide berth. Clearly, if experience shows through monitoring that further action would be required in the future, we would have to consider other ways of protecting identified sites.
In the summary of recommendations that were made by the noble and learned Lord, he said that as far as the information which was to be given to these particular parties is concerned, it was important that there should not be too many such areas because that might lead to confusion, and that is surely something which we need to avoid.
The noble and learned Lord went on to talk about enforcement. He said at paragraph 14.140 that:
Perhaps the Minister could identify the sort of action that the Government propose to take with regard to monitoring itself. Perhaps he can give further and better particulars about that particular and important issue.
Then we have the difficult issue about how we go about dealing with this matter, bearing in mind that shipping is part of an international community and there is the important role of the International Maritime Organisation to be considered in this connection.
It is going to be difficult, I suspect, to get agreement in the IMO on this matter. Therefore, pending a consensus, what are the Government proposing to do? Is it a matter where the Government feel they can take unilateral action? Certainly, within our own territorial waters, the Government are in a position to enforce
It is right to say that the noble and learned Lord--I hope I am not misquoting him in any way--did recommend that the Government should not wait for international agreement before promulgating MEHRAs, and I would invite the Minister to say something about that too.
This is an important debate, because in effect it is the first one we shall have had about this new concept of MEHRAs, and I am sure the Minister will accept from me that we are in no way challenging the concept. We want, if anything, to improve it, to make sure that it can be enforced and, indeed, we wish the project well.
"Assuming that MEHRAs are widely and effectively publicised, we believe that enforcement of any new rules on routeing will arise only in the context of a tiny minority of 'rogue' ships".
I am sure that that assumption is right. He went on:
"There is no doubt that enforcement will be difficult, but we believe that sooner or later, any rogue ship will be identified and reported ... She should then be subjected to a special entry reporting condition along the lines of the reporting conditions recommended in Chapter 11".
Perhaps the noble Viscount will be able to give us some further ideas as to the proposed government action in this regard, because that is important. Indeed, perhaps he could also comment specifically on the points made by the noble and learned Lord regarding enforcement, because clearly he is right in saying that enforcement will be extremely difficult. It has been more successful perhaps than some had hoped but nevertheless that is a much easier task than the one that can be envisaged here.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page