I understand that the term "ship or its cargo" is not meant to cover an oil rig or platform. Because of the recent blow out in the North Sea which caused such trouble and worry, it is important to be clear that they are not covered here. This section refers to a ship or its cargo. Could a platform or oil rig not be described as a ship? After all, it has to be towed out to sea like any other vessel. From the Minister's reply on Second Stage it would seem that the 1969 convention was not meant to cover such an eventuality. This is 1977. It seems a long time to wait for a Bill to come before the House. I am not saying the Minister or his Department are to blame for this but is a further Bill to be brought before the House which will cover such an eventuality? The blow out in the North Sea and also off the west coast of America have proved that a danger exists.
The Minister said that this matter came under the jurisdiction of the Minister for Industry and Commerce and that it would be his job to introduce a Bill. It is time for us to examine the structure of the two Departments with regard to issues such as this. The Minister for Transport and Power should have the responsibility for all these matters rather than two Departments being responsible. It would be more businesslike and more workable to have it under the responsibility of the Minister for Transport and Power. I realise that this would involve a reorganisation of the duties and responsibilities of that Ministry. I presume that when the Ministry for Transport and Power was set up nobody visualised we would have such threats facing us.
I understand that there is a convention covering a blow out such as that which occurred in the North Sea but that legislation is needed. How soon can we expect such legislation? The Minister might give us some idea of this even though it is the responsibility of the Minister for Industry and Commerce at the moment.