Merchant Shipping (Marine Equipment) (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 — House of Lords, 2019-02-20
Topic: Mixed Topics
Richard Rosser (Labour, Centre-left): The Explanatory Notes say that: "The purpose of these Regulations is to ensure that the UK can continue to comply with its international obligations by applying international standards to marine equipment placed on UK ships and enforce those standards" As I understand it—and as has already been said—the kind of marine equipment covered includes life-saving appliances, crew accommodation, navigation, fire protection and maritime pollution prevention. Despite that, the Explanatory Memorandum states in paragraph 7.9 that: "These Regulations are unlikely to draw attention from the general public but will be of interest to UK manufacturers, UK conformity assessment bodies for marine equipment and UK ship operators" Apart from the general public, who appear to have been excluded, another rather important group does not appear to have been consulted if the wording of the Explanatory Memorandum is to be taken at face value: those who work on ships—the officers, crew and their representative organisations. I say do not appear to have been consulted or involved because paragraph 10.1 of the Explanatory Memorandum states that, "informal engagement has included regular meetings at long established forums with key industry stakeholders" What were the dates of these regular meetings and were the trade unions there as "key industry stakeholders" The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee—as has already been said—recommended that this instrument should be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure because of the impact it may have on industry. At present, organisations known as EU-notified bodies assess and approve the conformity of marine equipment, with 10 such bodies based in the UK. These UK-based bodies will become UK-approved bodies on exit day and if any wish to retain their notified-body status in the EU they will need to seek notification from an EU member state. According to the Government, to do this they will need to relocate to the EU. Apparently, the Government are aware that some of the larger notified bodies have started this process already where they are relocating to one of their EU-based offices. What will be the difference between a UK-approved body based in the UK and a notified body based in the UK which has relocated to one of its EU-based offices as regards its powers, role and regulation, and what will be the difference between the two as far as the industry, including seafarers, is concerned Paragraph 7.2 of the EM states: "Under these Regulations, UK ships will have the choice of two types of approved marine equipment: (i) equipment which has EU approval … or (ii) equipment which has been approved under the UK system which these Regulations establish" What do the Government believe are the advantages and disadvantages of the two types of approval from the point of view of ship owners and the seafarers who crew the ships? That is not clear from the Explanatory Memorandum The Government’s position is that, while on exit day the UK will facilitate continued acceptance of EU-approved products, this provision will at some stage be time-limited. What considerations will the Government take into account in determining when to time-limit this provision, and what will be the impact on the industry? Marine manufacturers have expressed concerns that they will have to pay twice for conformity assessment in the future when this happens. What is the Government’s response to that On the point about paying twice, the Government say in the Explanatory Memorandum that this instrument, "will not require manufacturers … to pay twice", and that this would or could apply only following further secondary legislation, "should the Government decide to time limit the continued acceptance of EU approved marine equipment" That is in paragraph 3.4 of the EM, but in paragraph 3.3 it says that it is government policy, "eventually to time limit this provision", of continued acceptance of EU-approved marine equipment. Which is correct: paragraph 3.3, which states that the Government have already made a policy decision to time-limit this provision, or paragraph 3.4, which says "should the Government decide" to time-limit this provision—that is, that no such policy decision has been made Paragraph 6.2 of the Explanatory Memorandum refers to the current Merchant Shipping Notice being, "updated to reflect the changes necessary as a consequence of the UK leaving the EU", and says that a draft of this revised Merchant Shipping Notice accompanies the Explanatory Memorandum. Can the Minister confirm that the MSN amendment 3 attached to my copy of the Explanatory Memorandum is the draft revised MSN referred to in paragraph 6.2? If it is, could she spell out the nature of the revisions that are being made to the current MSN by this draft revised MSN now in front of us Paragraph 7.3 of the EM states: "The design and performance standards to which the approved prototype(s) was constructed form the ‘benchmark’ against which all subsequent production of the equipment is measured" Who will carry out that measurement after we leave the EU? Will they have to be bodies based in the UK or could they also be bodies that have been designated as an EU-notified body Paragraph 12.3 of the EM refers to the impact on businesses and the public sector being limited to "minor familiarisation costs". What exactly are those costs, and where and how will they be incurred Lastly, can the Government explain the impact of this SI on new IMO regulations covering marine equipment, which are to be introduced after this SI comes into effect and before any future trade deals between the UK and the EU are agreed and implemented? Since this—I hope—will be the last occasion this evening on which I will speak—