A. GENERAL POLICY QUESTIONS
18. AMENDED PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE ON THE REGISTRATION
OF PERSONS SAILING ON BOARD PASSENGER SHIPS (10253/97)
Letter from Lord Tordoff, Chairman of the Committee,
to Glenda Jackson CBE, MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State,
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
The above proposal, which was sifted to Sub-Committee B for
scrutiny, was considered at their meeting this morning.
The original proposal had been considered by the Sub-Committee
in February 1997 when written evidence was received, and I subsequently
wrote to the Minister, lifting the scrutiny reserve, but expressing
concerns on several matters (re-printed in Correspondence with
Ministers, 12th Report, 1996-7, HL Paper 69). Surprisingly,
your latest EM carries no record of this correspondence.
In your latest EM, dated 30 September 1997, you state that
the amended proposal would still require ships sailing on voyages
of 20 miles or more to compile detailed passenger lists within
30 minutes of sailing and that this provision would apply to the
UK's main international ferry routes, particularly to cross-channel
routes. Since this was the requirement in relation to which both
the previous Government and the Committee expressed particular
concern, we are doubtful that substantial improvements to the
proposal have been made. For this reason, the Committee remain
unconvinced by the Government's explanation (outlined in Gavin
Strang's letter of 3 July) of why they now welcome the amended
proposal.
The Committee was originally advised the proposal was scheduled
for 3 November Consumer Council but has become aware in the past
week that the timetable has been brought forward, such that the
proposal could now go to Council at any time. The Committee would
appreciate clarification of the Government's position before the
scrutiny reserve is lifted. This letter, therefore, maintains
the scrutiny reserve.
30 October 1997
Letter from Glenda Jackson CBE MP, Parliamentary Under
Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and
the Regions, to Lord Tordoff, Chairman of the Committee
Thank you for your letter of 30 October which reported on
the outcome of discussions at Sub-Committee B on the above proposal.
First let me apologise that our latest EM, by omission, did
not adequately describe the scrutiny history in the House of Lords.
This was a simple error and one which we shall endeavour not to
repeat.
You asked for clarification of the Government's position.
In working group discussions, the UK maintained the position outlined
in our original EM and argued strongly against the requirements
in the draft Directive which went beyond those agreed internationally.
However this approach was not supported by other member states.
We subsequently agreed to the Directive at the June Transport
Council because we judged that the safety aspects of the measure
as a whole outweighed our earlier reservations about the practical
issues raised. In reaching this judgement we took into account
the fact that no other member states would support the UK, in
continued opposition. By agreeing to the measure overall, we were
able to negotiate a number of concessions by the Commission; most
notably, the later implementation date for the recording of passenger
details than that originally proposed.
We are now working very closely with the industry to try
to find the least burdensome method of implementing the proposed
Directive. This will include exempting as many routes as it is
possible to justify under the terms of the Directive, and seeking
derogations from the European Commission for routes which satisfy
the derogation criteria in the Directive. We are also discussing
the practical difficulties which could be faced at ports securing
the remaining routes and are attempting, with the industry, to
reach workable solutions.
In light of this explanation, I would urge your Committee
to lift its scrutiny reserve. We gave our agreement to this Directive
at the Transport Council in June. Because of this, we obtained
a number of concessions which would not have been available had
we maintained our previous line. Withdrawing support for the Directive
at this stage would send the wrong signal to other member States,
confuse the industry with which we are working on sensible implementation
and could compromise future dealings with the Commission.
10 November 1997
Letter from Lord Tordoff, Chairman of the Committee,
to Glenda Jackson, CBE MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State,
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
The above proposal, sifted to Sub-Committee B, was considered
at their meeting on 21 November. The Sub-Committee had previously
considered the proposal on 30 October. My letter of 30 October,
arising from that meeting, maintained the scrutiny reserve and
sought clarification of the Government's position on the document,
in particular why the Government now welcome the amended proposal.
At their 21 November meeting, the Sub-Committee considered your
10 November reply.
The Sub-Committee remain unconvinced by your explanation
of why the Government now support the amended proposal. In particular,
the Sub-Committee is not satisfied with the amended proposal which
continues to require detailed passenger lists for cross-channel
voyages. This was the issue on which the Government had previously
opposed the proposal.
However, given that Member States have reached an advanced
stage of agreement on the amended proposal and that your Department
are working with the industry on its implementation, the Sub-Committee
consider that there would be little benefit in pursuing the matter
further under scrutiny.
This letter, therefore, reluctantly lifts the scrutiny reserve.
26 November 1997
Letter from Glenda Jackson, CBE MP, Parliamentary Under
Secretary of State, Department of the Environment, Transport and
the Regions, to Lord Tordoff, Chairman of the Committee
Thank you for your letter of 26 November which lifts the
scrutiny reserve on this proposal. I am grateful for the Sub-Committee's
decision, however reluctantly taken, as it permits us to conclude
the legal basis for this measure and so complete our discussions
with the industries concerned on its transposition into UK law
and implementation.
3 December 1997
|
