A leading conservationist has urged as many people as possible to campaign for regulations that could prevent an oil disaster in the Firth of Forth.
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Scotland head of conservation policy, Lloyd Austin, said he was “at a loss” to understand why the UK Government was stalling on enforcing regulations that would control ship-to-ship oil transfers in the estuary, which supports seabird habitats of international importance.
He commended Dunfermline and West Fife MP Thomas Docherty for raising the issue during a parliamentary debate this week, adding. “We remain surprised and deeply frustrated at the latest delay in regulating ship-to-ship transfers.”
Ship-to-ship oil transfer regulations that would have helped safeguard the marine environment of the Forth were set to be introduced in October, but have been postponed for review until April next year by the department of transport “to ensure that all views are properly heard.”
The reason for the postponement has come under scrutiny, with Mr Docherty accusing the government of “caving in” to lobbying from politicians south of the border and the shipping industry.
Mr Austin added, “The new regulations seemed to us to be entirely fit for purpose and we are at a loss to understand why they should be reviewed. Nevertheless, we look forward to explaining yet again why regulations are needed to control this activity and protect the environment in places where it occurs.
Mr Docherty was scathing in his condemnation of the government after raising the matter with under-secretary of state for transport Mike Penning on Tuesday.
He said, “I think we have demonstrated that the government’s argument is a hollow shell and is based entirely on lobbying by Lib Dem and Tory MPs and the shipping industry, rather than what is best for the Scottish environment.Constituents’ concernsDuring the debate, he told Mr Penning, “As I have made clear, the subject concerns a great number of my constituents. It is rare indeed when the Scottish Government, the Lib Dem and SNP-run Fife and Edinburgh councils, Labour MPs, and Labour, SNP, Lib Dem and Conservative members of the Scottish Parliament all speak with one voice. That, I hope, demonstrates to the minister the level of anger felt by many people in Scotland.”
Describing the regulations as a “burden” on business, Mr Penning answered concerns about potential oil spills by stating, “There has not been a spillage from ship-to-ship transfer.”
He said, “The regulations are preventive and will put a burden on the shipping business. There is no argument about that, because that will happen. My scepticism is not based on my lack of willingness to protect the environment. Anyone looking at my track record will know my views on the environment.
“I am a fisherman and have fished in many of the coastal areas that the honourable gentleman represents. We have to consider the risk.”
Mr Penning warned many ships involved in transfers were Russian and “not of the best quality.” He added, “I hope that the Russians do not get upset about that, but it is a fact. If we can at least see the ships and control them to some degree within our territorial waters, we stand a chance. If they sit offshore, we will not be able to protect them at all.”
Claire Baker MSP, who represents Mid Scotland and Fife, said she would be writing to First Minister Alex Salmond.
She said, “The pictures we see from the Gulf of Mexico disaster should remind us of the incredible damage that oil spills can do to the environment and industries linked to it. These types of transfers need to be done in licensed and controlled ports to ensure that they are done properly at no risk to the environment.
“Labour’s regulations seek to do that and any attempt by the Tory-Lib Dem Government to reverse the progress we made would be a step in the wrong direction.”