18 JUNE 2003  

MR DAVID JAMIESON MP, MR STEPHEN REEVES AND MR ANDREW BURR

  Q520  Mr Donohoe: How aware are you of the proposal to develop Hunterston and the Shetland Isles.

  Mr Reeves: Yes, we are aware of that. The Orkneys I think, Scapa Flow, not Shetland. We are certainly aware of those. I believe the Orkney proposal is essentially a hub for transhipment of containers. We are aware of those and watch those developments with interest.

  Q521  Mr Donohoe: How do they impact on the planning applications from the four south of the border?

  Mr Reeves: In so far as it impacts at all, it would be a matter for the promoters of those projects to consider and for the inquiries into those projects also to consider if it were relevant.

  Q522  Mr Donohoe: As the Minister, you must have concerns, if there were to be a development of ports—and there is a potential for two. It just so happens that the Enterprise Minister north of the border is a Liberal and he happens to have Orkney in his constituency. There is a potential for some pressure to be brought to bear on the alternative, which happens to be five miles from my constituency. Have you had any input into that particular proposal as it stands at the moment? Have you asked what the potential impact on the rest of the ports programme might be?

  Mr Reeves: We are aware of those proposals. We have not been asked to have any input to them, as far as I am aware, by officials of the Scottish Executive or others in Scotland. We are aware in the case of the Scapa Flow proposals from one of the parties who is linked with the developers.

  Q523  Mr Donohoe: You are not under any circumstances going to put any alternatives, you are not going to have any meetings.

  Mr Reeves: No, I did not say that. I think we could say that we have not been invited to make any direct input.

  Q524  Mr Donohoe: Did you say you had not been invited? What stage have these proposals reached?

  Mr Reeves: I am not aware that either of them are actually formal applications for planning development, but I may be wrong on that. As far as we are concerned, when ministers come to decisions on the major container port proposals in the South-East and East of England, in the context of the Habitats Directive, there is a test of overriding public interest and the consideration of alternatives. In that context, we will look to consider all relevant factors. If there is evidence that these proposals for port development in Scotland are substantive and likely to be realised and therefore real alternatives, that is something we would probably want to look at.

  Q525  Mr Donohoe: Are you aware of any public money going to be used for either of these two proposals?

  Mr Reeves: That is not a question for us. It certainly would not be public money from the Department for Transport.

  Mr Jamieson: There would not be money from this department and any funding which was found would have to come from the Scottish Executive. It would certainly not be coming from our department.

  Q526  Mr Donohoe: May I take you to another part of the same theme and in this instance I hope it is a UK question. Have the department done anything about what was a proposal some years ago to look at the whole question of there being co-ordination between road, rail, air and sea? What input, if any, has there been by the department into looking at what would become a co-ordinated situation?

  Mr Jamieson: In terms of access to ports?

  Q527  Mr Donohoe: Freight.

  Mr Jamieson: That is certainly an issue to which we have given consideration; some of the issues we covered earlier on in some of the earlier questioning. This is why we now have the Strategic Rail Authority looking at some of these issues, which are strategic issues of how we move freight from one place to another, including from ports. In some instances it is up to the Scottish Executive in the case of Scotland, the regional development agencies are also coming up with thoughts as to how we can move freight and other goods from ports in their areas. Sometimes, in the case of England, that links in with local transport plans. It may be putting pressure on the Highways Agency to make improvements or to the SRA to provide funds for increased rail links.

  Q528  Mr Donohoe: When did you last meet the Scottish Executive equivalent minister and when do you expect to meet the equivalent minister about this subject?

  Mr Jamieson: I have not met the Scottish minister, except on the subject of air services; that is the only time I have met the Scottish minister.

  Q529  Mr Donohoe: You have no plans to meet again, do you?

  Mr Jamieson: It would only be on matters where there was an interest between the Scottish Executive and my department and most of the issues to do with ports and the access to them would be issues for the Scottish Executive.

  Q530  Chairman: If you were asked to do a guestimate of the amount of container traffic in this country and the shortage of container capacity, would you or would you not include a project like Scapa Flow?

  Mr Reeves: On page 14 of the document I mentioned earlier we in fact mention the Scapa Flow proposal. It is on our radar, though little is known about it so far.

  Q531  Mr Stringer: Can you tell us when you expect the research you have commissioned on light dues will be available?

  Mr Jamieson: We had our consultation on light dues and I have to say the views expressed were very polarised indeed. It has made our deliberation very difficult. It is still our view that the dues should be paid by the users. People put forward ideas that a larger number of the users, particularly leisure users, should pay. We have looked at that with some care, but there would be enormous difficulties in collecting such dues and the logistics of it and the bureaucracy would be enormous. We are analysing this matter now and taking a decision.

  Mr Reeves: In fact we announced in March a programme of work. You are aware of it, I think.

  Q532  Mr Stringer: That is right. I have the statement in front of me.

  Mr Reeves: We were going to do an economic study in five key areas. We have drawn up some terms of reference to appoint consultants to do an economic study on the effect of light dues.

  Q533  Mr Stringer: When are we going to get the results?

  Mr Reeves: We are going to get the study completed by the end of this year.

  Q534  Mr Stringer: Why did you not commission the research earlier?

  Mr Reeves: I do not think we had before us earlier the paper from the Independent Light Dues Forum (ILDF) which was submitted as part of the response to our consultation, which argued that light dues could be causing some of our shipping trade to divert to mainland Europe.

  Q535  Mr Stringer: It was a point brought to your attention last time you were before this Committee just about a year ago, was it not?

  Mr Reeves: Yes and I remember distinctly saying that there was no evidence and that we had asked the industry to put some forward. When the industry came forward with responses to the consultation I have to say there was precious little evidence. There was, however, a paper from the independent light dues forum and in the spirit of partnership we had meetings with them and agreed with them and the chamber of shipping a way forward to examine this and to try to get to the bottom of whether it does have any effect on commercial operating costs and trading patterns.

  Q536  Mr Stringer: How much money do you raise?

  Mr Reeves: We raise about £70 million a year from light dues.

  Q537  Mr Stringer: It would be surprising, would it not, prima facie, if you are taking £70 million, which the ILDF estimates to be 35 per cent of their costs, starting from first principles, if this did not have a competitive effect?

  Mr Reeves: It might have a competitive effect, we have not ruled out the possibility. All we are saying is that they have not produced any evidence. In fact the evidence in some respects is the other way.

  Q538  Mr Stringer: The point I am making is that £70 million is a great chunk of evidence that money is being taken out of the industry which is likely to have an effect.

  Mr Jamieson: It is balanced to some extent by costs in other countries which may be greater. Some other countries do not charge any light dues, they are paid for by the state. Over hundreds of years it has been the case that the user has paid here. For example, pilotage charges in some other countries are very much higher than they are here and to some extent that may balance out the costs of light dues. We have seen no evidence that it is leading to a lack of competitiveness.

  Q539  Mr Stringer: The ILDF do suggest in the paper they have submitted, that it is 35% of their costs, do they not?

  Mr Reeves: I am not sure what the 35% is measured against. I am sorry, I do not have the paper in front of me.

  Mr Jamieson: I would be interested to see it. I am not sure what it is 35% of.

  Mr Burr: It cannot possibly be their operating costs; maybe their port costs.