Item 6

AT A MEETING of the RIVER HAMBLE HARBOUR MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE held at the Warsash Sailing Club on Wednesday 3 May 2006.

Also present

Councillor T.G. Knight, Chairman of River Hamble Harbour Board.

61. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Woodward, Councillor Blampied, Councillor Hockley, Councillor Cartwright and Mr Young.

62. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Members were mindful that, where they believed they had a personal or personal prejudicial interest in any matter to be considered at the meeting, they should normally at the time of the debate declare their interest and, having regard to the circumstances described in paragraphs 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the County Council's Code of Conduct, consider whether to leave the meeting whilst the matter was discussed.

Mr Alexander declared a personal interest as a mooring holder and member of Warsash Sailing Club.

Councillor Mrs Sutton declared a personal interest as a mooring holder and member of Royal Southern Yacht Club.

Councillor Mrs Bailey declared a personal interest as a mooring holder and as having a boat in the dinghy pound in Hamble.

Mr Bourne declared a personal interest as a member of Royal Southern Yacht Club.

Mr Greensmith declared a personal interest as a member of Royal Southern Yacht Club.

Councillor Rice declared a personal interest in the report on the Marine Bill (minute 67) as a member of the Southern Sea Fisheries District Committee.

63. MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 January 2006 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Matters Arising

Planning and Consents - Minute 53 - It was confirmed that the Harbour Master would give specific permission for the hydraulic bridge to remain in a `closed' position only in exceptional circumstances for such cases as maintenance.

64. CHAIRMAN'S COMMUNICATIONS

The Chairman advised the Committee that he had withdrawn two items from the agenda: the Marine Director's Current Issues and the Notes from the River Hamble Forum. This was in order to give the public opportunity to view the notes of the meeting and the proposed answers to the questions posed at the Forum before they were considered by the Committee. These papers would therefore be considered at the following meeting in July. The Committee gave its support to this decision.

65. DEPUTATIONS

There were no deputations received.

66. HARBOUR MASTER'S REPORT

The Committee considered and noted the report of the Director of Environment (Item 6 in the minute book) summarising activities on the river since the last meeting and providing details of the six monthly Port Marine Safety Code (PMSC) audit. A supplementary annex (Item 6x in the minute book) was circulated to give details of the most recent events on the River. It was highlighted that the removal and disposal of the barge `Tim' was a successful example of co-ordinated work between different agencies. Many lessons had been learned which would then be used to deal with similar situations in the future. It was confirmed that the removal of the barge had been paid for by the owners of the vessel.

Normal procedures were being followed regarding the recent discovery of a small fuel spill resulting from a ruptured fuel tank in a vessel which had been towed into the river. It had been discovered that the vessel's bilge pump had been pumping fuel from the ruptured tank into the river. There were concerns that the Harbour Master's office had not been informed that a vessel was entering the area with the potential to cause a fuel spill.

The recent rescue of a man-over-board had emphasised the importance for all river users of wearing lifejackets. This was considered to be a useful opportunity to highlight to river users the risks of not making use of safety equipment or wearing personal buoyancy devices. Members thanked the Marine Director, Harbour Master and their staff for the successful rescue of the individual.

It was confirmed that the PMSC audit had found no matters of concern and that Capt. Capon had found that the Harbour Authority continued to comply with the PMSC. It was reiterated that Capt. Capon was an independent auditor who was appointed under PMSC to ensure that the Harbour Authority complied with the standards imposed. Members felt that the audit report reflected well on the Authority, the Marine Director and the Harbour Master. It was confirmed that the definitive map of the jurisdiction of the Harbour Authority had not yet been located and that the executive responsibilities of the River Hamble Harbour Board had been defined and signed off at the meeting of the Board on 24 March 2006.

It was reported that there had been damages to the CCTV control box and, as a result, it had not been in operation. It was anticipated that this should be fixed within two weeks. It was confirmed that the CCTV, when fully operational, was extremely useful to the Harbour Master's staff and helped to effectively monitor activity on the river at all times. Once fixed the CCTV control box would not be susceptible to damage in the same way.

It was reported that a recent court judgement had clarified that vessels not used in navigation were not classed as ships. Only those vessels which were classified as ships were subject to Merchant Shipping Regulations. The International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea (IRPCS), as an international convention, had force of law in UK waters only by virtue of the Merchant Shipping Regulations. Therefore, pleasure craft that were not being navigated, and were not classed as ships, would not be legally subject to IRPCS.

In order to ensure that IRPCS were complied with by vessels in the jurisdiction of the River Hamble, the Harbour Master had issued a General Direction, in accordance with his powers, that all vessels using the River Hamble comply with IRPCS. The General Direction had been worded such that it applied to all vessels irrespective of whether they were being navigated. As a result the regulations had the force of law in the river by virtue of local legislation. It was hoped that, in the long term, national legislation would be passed to ensure that all vessels were subject to IRPCS in UK waters. It was noted that this ruling was unlikely to impact upon the behaviour of water users but was a technical defense which could be used in a court of law.

67. MARINE BILL

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Environment (Item 9 in the Minute Book) providing an overview of the recently published Defra consultation document `A Marine Bill'. This was not purely an environmental document, but would also have an impact on commerce and recreation with a strong focus on Marine Spatial Planning and the marine consents process. The likely outcomes would result in more protection for natural resources and some impact on the way Harbour Authorities conducted their business. The document was over 300 pages long and contained 141 questions for public consultation.

The proposed manner for compiling the Harbour Authority's response to the document was outlined. A draft response would be drawn up by the Assistant Harbour Master (Environment) which would be circulated to Members of the Management Committee and Board for feedback. Comments and suggestions would then be incorporated and the Board and Chairman of the Management Committee would meet informally to discuss the response. The Chairman of the Board would have final responsibility for approving the response to be sent to Defra by 23 June 2006.

As an independent body, the Harbour Authority's response would not be exactly the same as the response of Hampshire County Council due to the different responsibilities and statutory roles of the two authorities. It was considered important that the two responses be as consistent as possible, but was recognised that there may be differences between the two. It was confirmed that, in drafting the response of the Harbour Authority, there would be discussions with Hampshire County Council, the British Marine Federation and the Royal Yachting Association. Members felt it important that local groups and businesses were made aware of the consultation and it was agreed that details of where to access the document would be sent to them. However, it was noted that, in this case, the Harbour Authority was not the consulting body but was responding to a national government consultation document.

It was felt by some Members that the consultation document had a strong focus on the reduction of the impact of human activities on coastal areas, but that little consideration appeared to have been given to the importance of leisure activities. It was highlighted that the consultation was open to members of the public and, therefore, any person could respond individually to any of the questions raised by the document.

RESOLVED:

That it be a RECOMMENDATION to the River Hamble Harbour Board:

a) That a formal response be drafted and circulated to Members of the River Hamble Harbour Board and River Hamble Harbour Management Committee for comments.

b) That those comments be incorporated into the response of the Harbour Authority to be approved by the Chairman of the Board.

68. ITEMS FOR INCLUSION ON FUTURE AGENDAS

The Committee noted the report of the Chief Executive (Item 10 in the minute book) on items for future meetings. Added to the outline agenda for the meeting on 3 July 2006 was the report of the Notes of the River Hamble Forum and the Marine Director's Current Issues report outlining responses to questions raised at that Forum.

It was reported that it was unlikely that the reports of the Boat Capacity and Glossary of Terms Working Groups would be ready for the meeting on 3 July. The possibility of holding an extraordinary meeting was discussed but it was considered appropriate to wait until the Working Groups were in a position to be certain when the reports would be ready in order to decide whether or not an extraordinary meeting would be necessary.

69. DATE OF NEXT MEETING

It was noted that the next meeting would take place at 2.00 pm on Monday 3 July 2006 at Royal Southern Yacht Club, Hamble. It was confirmed that this meeting would be preceded by a boat trip and lunch for Members of the Board and Management Committee.