Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Transport and the Environment Committee, 15 Mar 2000

Meeting date: Wednesday, March 15, 2000


Contents


European Documents

The Convener:

The sixth item on the agenda covers two documents referred to us by the European Committee. European document 649 is an amended proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the European Council to set up a Community framework for co-operation in the field of accidental marine pollution.

European document 697 is a Commission staff working paper, a report on the operation and use of the information system set up under Council decision 86/85/EEC of 6 March 1986, establishing a Community information system for the control and reduction of pollution caused by the spillage of hydrocarbons and other harmful substances at sea.

Together with those documents, members will have received a covering note from the Scottish Executive, a note from the DETR and a covering note from the clerk.

I remind members that we are not obliged to do anything with the documents beyond considering them at a committee meeting, as we are doing today. The European Committee requested that the Scottish Executive provide clarification on certain points. The response of the Executive has been circulated as committee paper TE/00/5/10. We are able to note the documents, and to consider the explanatory notes and so on, and we can consider what further action is required, if any.

Nora Radcliffe:

Many issues are related to the documents. It is a grey area between what is devolved and what is not. I think that there is merit in exploring responsibilities for who does what when oil reaches a beach. We should perhaps consider several of the issues surrounding that in a bit more depth, and ask the Executive for more information.

Robin Harper:

Referring to the news today, I think that it is a matter of urgency for the provisions to be brought into operation as soon as possible. It is clear that information on the tanker that sank off Brittany last year was not conveyed. People have been cleaning up the oil on that coastline, but the information about that oil being highly carcinogenic was not passed on.

Mr Tosh:

I discovered from reading the press a couple of weeks ago that there is a DETR consultation paper called "Identification of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas". I am sure that we have not heard of that yet. It is a bit like air passenger duty and the airport strategy. There seem to be a lot of such necessary and valuable consultation exercises going on at a UK level that we are not plugged into.

As well has reacting to stuff that comes from Europe—we do not have to do anything about the provisions before us other than welcome them—we should find out about consultation on the marine environment in general. We want to be involved in the loop to a degree in which we do not seem to be involved at the moment. I do not know whether it would be up to us to make a case to DETR, or whether it is up to the Scottish Executive to make the case for our being included, but we should at least know that such things are on-going. We might well have some input to these matters.

The Convener:

We have a commitment to discuss with the DETR matters such as this to ensure that we are in the loop, and that we stay there. I hope that we will promulgate that point in due course.

Are there any other comments on the actual documents? It seems not.

Nora Radcliffe has indicated a wish to write to the Executive for clarification of responsibilities.

Nora Radcliffe:

It is just to establish what guidelines there are. Who is responsible? Is it the local authority? Is it the landowner? Is there clear guidance on who should do what? What are the levels of responsibility? There are a lot of things that it would be better to sort out in advance of anything happening.

The Convener:

On that basis, we should certainly note the documents, and I am happy for the correspondence that we have discussed to take place, and that the committee gets a copy of the response received from the minister.

Do committee members wish to take any other action? If not, are we happy to proceed as discussed?

Members indicated agreement.