Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Forth oil plan may prompt new legislation

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 16 March 2007
MINISTERS are considering changing the law to make sure the Scottish Parliament's views are taken into account over the controversial ship-to-ship oil transfer scheme for the Forth.
Cathy Jamieson, the justice minister, revealed during the final Scotsman 300 debate in Edinburgh last night that the Scottish Executive was considering legislation to stop Forth Ports from having the sole decision-making role on the issue.

The de
bate, featuring party leaders and deputy leaders from all the main parties, was the culmination of a two-month series of events around the country to stimulate discussion on the issues facing Scotland today.

Shipping company SPT wants to start transferring oil from carriers into tankers in the Forth, a plan which has aroused fierce opposition on both sides of the firth amid fears of environmental damage. The decision rests with Forth Ports, a private company, not with the Scottish Parliament - something which has angered MSPs on all sides.

Forth Ports also stands to benefit financially from the deal, leading to demands that the rules be changed to give the Scottish Parliament and the Executive a say on whether it goes ahead.

Ms Jamieson said that ministers were considering this option but warned that, with parliament rising in less than a month, it would be difficult to do anything before the election.

She said that a solution would have to be worked out with Westminster.

Ms Jamieson said: "You can only intervene when you have the appropriate legislative powers."

And she added: "Ministers have already accepted that this issue has thrown up a number of grey areas in devolved and reserved matters for the Scottish Parliament and some of those areas potentially need to be looked at."

Ms Jamieson said emergency legislation would be difficult because of the proximity of the election.

In a letter to the Scottish Parliament, SPT insisted that its transfer plans were safe - despite a serious oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 1995.

Holyrood's environment committee wrote to SPT after learning the company had been involved in the 35,000 gallon spillage - more than 800 barrels - and had neglected to tell the committee about it.

But Dermot Loughnane, the president and chief executive officer of SPT replied saying there had been no deliberate intention to conceal the spill.

He said that other than the Gulf of Mexico incident, in the past 26 years there had been only two other spills, amounting to four barrels worth, out of the six billion barrels transferred during that period.

However Linden Jarvis, a campaigner against the ship-to-ship transfer plans, said he did not believe the process was as safe as SPT claimed. He added: "It only takes a small spillage to do tremendous damage."



The full article contains 462 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Daibhidh,

16/03/2007 01:47:45

THis just goes to show why the Scottish Parliament is a toothless tiger and without independence, we can't actually legislate on anything meaningful....independence now...

2

Guga,

Rockall 16/03/2007 08:31:59

#1 You're dead right. You'll also notice that that waste of space, Cathy Jamieson, said that they are only "considering" legislation.

3

Ted,

16/03/2007 08:51:42

Ah, hello to the usual prisoners of the nationalist echo chamber!

I don't mind who fixes this, but politicians either in Edinburgh, London or Brussels must prevent this disaster-in-the-making.

4

Jack the lad,

16/03/2007 09:20:52

Absolutely no benefit to the people of Scotland.

We don’t need it.

We don’t want it.

Get lost!

5

Andy Th,

16/03/2007 10:05:48

We don't need independence to solve this one - just for the Scot Exec to hurry up and pass a law to reverse the ridiculous Thatcherite privatisation of the sea.

WWF and others have been lobbying for this for ages, long before this business came along. It's not like they didnt know about this years ago.

6

Sufers against slicks,

North Berwick & Portobello 16/03/2007 10:09:42

Surfers Against Sewage and the Green Party have got together to do two big demos down on Saturday March 24th at

North Berwick East beach 11-12am
Portobello beach by amusments 3-4pm

Both demos are a chance for surfers and the general public to say no to the proposed ship to ship oil transfers happening in the Forth.

Please come along and participate to show that WE REALLY DO CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO OUR BEACHES

7

Paul Ventaire,

16/03/2007 11:12:11

If something unpleasant washes up in Granton, who will notice?

8

PeterPete,

16/03/2007 11:28:23

"If something unpleasant washes up in Granton, who will notice?"

Maybe the people who live there?

And the seals in the harbour.

And the knots, the puffins, the starfish, the mackarel......

And the fishermen.

And yachters

And kayackers

9

Paul Ventaire,

16/03/2007 11:41:25

#8. Thank you for pointing out the blindingly obvious. My question was purely rhetorical, to make a snide remark about Granton. But don't let that bother you.

10

AndyPandy,

16/03/2007 11:43:57

Why make a snide remark about Granton? Not an especially clever thing to do.

11

Paul Ventaire,

16/03/2007 11:59:11

#10. You may not have noticed, but I'm not an especially clever person.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.