The following Statement was made in the House of Commons on Monday
26 February. “With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a
Statement on the recent response to Houthi aggression in the Red
Sea. Thirty years ago, the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea came into force. That agreement was ratified by 168 nations
and it states explicitly in Article 17 that ‘ships of all States,
whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent
passage...Request free trial
The following Statement was made in the House of Commons on
Monday 26 February.
“With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a Statement on
the recent response to Houthi aggression in the Red Sea. Thirty
years ago, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
came into force. That agreement was ratified by 168 nations and
it states explicitly in Article 17 that
‘ships of all States, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the
right of innocent passage through the territorial sea’.
Since 19 October, the Houthis, aided and abetted by Iran, have
launched a ruthless and reckless campaign of attacks against
commercial shipping. These attacks are not solely limited to
commerce; our military vessels are also in the Houthi crosshairs.
The Royal Navy, the US Navy and most recently the French navy
have also been targets. Vessels owned by Chinese and Bulgarian
companies and crews from India, Sri Lanka and Syria have been
targeted indiscriminately, making a mockery of Houthi claims that
this is all about Israel.
From the outset we have been clear that this cannot carry on.
Freedom of navigation underpins not only our security but our
prosperity. Around 80% of traded goods are carried over the seas,
as are about 90% of the goods arriving in the United Kingdom.
These necessities on which we depend arrive through a small
number of critical waterways, so upholding these precious
freedoms is essential for the preservation of life. This
Government are determined to help restore the tranquillity of the
Red Sea. That is why the UK was one of the first members to join
the US-led taskforce, Operation Prosperity Guardian, with HMS
‘Richmond’ now taking over from HMS ‘Diamond’ to patrol in the
Red Sea to help protect commercial shipping. It is why we are
working in tandem with the US and other allies to reduce the
Houthis’ capacity to harm our security and economic interest, to
limit their impact on the flow of humanitarian aid, to prevent
further regional escalation, and to show Iran in no uncertain
terms that we will push back against its destabilising
behaviour.
On occasion, in response to specific threats and in line with
international law and the principle of self-defence, we have
tackled the Houthi threat head on. Since 11 January, we have
conducted a number of precision strikes against Houthi targets.
In these previous rounds of strikes, RAF aircraft successfully
struck some 32 targets at six different locations, including
drone ground control stations as well as other facilities
directly involved in the Houthis’ drone and missile attacks on
shipping. I am pleased to say that it remains the case that, to
date, we have seen no evidence at all to indicate that the RAF
strikes caused civilian casualties, and the UN has noted that it
has observed no civilian impact arising from the RAF strikes.
Although we have eroded the Houthis’ capacity, their intent to
prosecute indiscriminate attacks against innocent vessels remains
undiminished. Just last week, MV ‘Rubymar’—a Belize-flagged,
British-registered cargo vessel—was targeted in the Gulf of Aden
near the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Hit by missiles, the crew were
forced to abandon ship. An oil slick, caused entirely by damage
sustained in the Houthi attack, now stretches many miles from the
vessel. On Thursday, the British-registered MV ‘Islander’ was
similarly targeted. It was struck by two missiles, resulting in a
fire on board. Fortunately, there was no loss of life.
This all comes not long after two US-registered bulk carriers, MV
‘Navis Fortuna’ and MV ‘Sea Champion’, suffered minor damage from
Houthi strikes. The attack on ‘Sea Champion’ highlights the
Houthis’ recklessness and near-sightedness, considering that ‘Sea
Champion’ has delivered humanitarian aid to Yemen 11 times in the
past five years and was due to unload thousands of tonnes of much
needed aid to the Yemeni people through the ports of Aden and
Hodeidah. The Houthis’ attack was, quite simply, callous. As
near-sighted as these attacks are, they continue to have serious
and potentially long-term consequences across the region, as they
cut off vital aid to civilians in Yemen and Syria, restrict
crucial food imports to Djibouti and threaten significant impacts
in Egypt.
Last time I spoke on this issue, I told the House that we will
not hesitate to act again in self-defence. We have given the
Houthis ample opportunity to de-escalate, but once again, the
Houthi zealots have ignored our repeated warnings. As a result,
we have once again taken action to defend ourselves against these
intolerable attacks. On Saturday night, a Royal Air Force package
of four Typhoons, supported by two Voyager tankers, joined US
forces in a deliberate strike against Houthi military facilities
in Yemen that have been conducting missile and drone attacks on
commercial shipping and coalition naval forces in the Bab
al-Mandab Strait, the southern Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. As
the House knows, it was the fourth such operation to degrade the
Houthi capabilities that are being used to threaten global trade
in the Red Sea.
Intelligence analysis indicates that the strikes were successful,
and that the sites we attacked were being used by the long-range
drones that the Houthis use for both reconnaissance and attack
missions, including at a former surface-to-air missile battery
site several miles north-east of Sanaa. Our aircraft used Paveway
IV precision-guided munitions against the drones and their
launchers. Assessment continues at this still early stage, but
the analysis so far indicates that all eight RAF targets were
successfully struck. Three buildings were hit at the Bani
military site, and five one-way attack drones are assessed to
have been destroyed at the Sanaa military site.
On planning these strikes, as is normal practice for the RAF,
operations were carried out meticulously, and consideration was
given to minimising any risk of causing civilian casualties.
Assessments so far indicate that, across the four sets of
airstrikes, some 40 military targets have been hit at seven
different Houthi facilities. I pay tribute to the immense skill
and tireless dedication of the men and women who made that
possible.
Once again, I would like to make it clear that military action is
only one aspect of our approach to the crisis in the Red Sea. The
whole international community has an interest in stopping these
attacks, and we continue to work with it to turn that intent into
action. The Prime Minister has engaged regional leaders,
including the Sultan of Oman, as well as G7 partners. The Foreign
Secretary and I have travelled repeatedly to the region in recent
weeks to discuss regional security. We are determined to end the
illegal flow of arms to the Houthis, using whatever levers are
available, including enduring diplomatic engagement, and
determined to continue to intercept illegal weapons and the
shipping that helps to feed that supply. We are cutting off the
Houthis’ financial resources, to further degrade their capacity
to conduct attacks; for example, jointly with the US, we are
sanctioning four Houthi leaders, and we will continue to work
with the US to cut the flow of Houthi funds.
Despite the best efforts of the Houthis, we also continue to
provide humanitarian help to people in the Middle East. This
year, we will send some £88 million of humanitarian support to
Yemen, which will feed 100,000 Yeminis every month. The UK has
recently worked closely with our Jordanian partners to air-drop
life-saving supplies directly to the Tal al-Hawa hospital in
northern Gaza.
The Houthis could stop this barbaric behaviour any time they
want. Instead, they callously choose to continue their reckless
acts of aggression, causing harm not just to innocents, but to
their own people in Yemen. Until they stop, we will continue to
act, but consensus continues to grow that the Houthis’ violations
simply cannot continue. That is why, recently, the European Union
officially launched its Operation Aspides; Members will know that
‘aspides’ meant ‘shield’ in ancient Greek. We very much welcome
the commitment of our EU partners to joining in the work that has
been going on, because no nation should ever be able to threaten
the arteries of global commerce.
Thirty years ago, nations of the world all came together to
protect innocent passage on our high seas. Thirty years on, the
House should be in no doubt whatever that we will continue to
stand up for those rights, and do all that we can to defend life
and limb of sailors everywhere, and to preserve their precious
trading routes, on which we all depend. I commend this Statement
to the House”.
11.50am
(Lab)
My Lords, I remind your Lordships’ House of my interests in the
register, specifically my roles with the Royal Navy. I thank the
Government for their Statement and want to make it clear—as my
friend, the right honourable , did in the other place—that
His Majesty’s Opposition accept that the weekend’s airstrikes
were legal, limited and targeted to minimise the risk of civilian
casualties. Before we move on to the substantive part of the
Statement, I pay tribute to the total professionalism of all
forces personnel involved in the operations, currently numbering
in excess of 2,500. As ever, military deployments do not come
without risk; I thank those serving and their families for the
personal sacrifices that they make every day to keep us safe.
Research from the British Chambers of Commerce this week showed
that 55% of UK exporters have now been impacted by the disruption
of shipping to the Red Sea. Among UK firms more broadly, 37% have
seen the effects of Houthi strikes, with manufacturers, retailers
and wholesalers more likely to be affected. This is having a
direct impact on our economy and cannot be tolerated. The Houthis
are threatening international trade and maritime security, and
are putting civilian and military lives in serious danger. We
accept that the military action over the weekend was justified
and necessary but, as the shadow Secretary of State asked in the
other place, was it effective?
Deterrence does not feature in the weekend’s eight-nation joint
statement in support of the strikes, and the Defence Secretary
said on Monday that the Houthi intent remains undiminished, so
can the Minister clarify exactly what our specific objectives are
for this UK action? Is it deterrence or are we seeking to degrade
Houthi capabilities? If it is both, as I hope it is, what will
success look like? How successful have the four missions that we
have been party to been in achieving these objectives?
Of course, the Labour Party continues to back the Royal Navy’s
role in the defence of shipping from all nations through
Operation Prosperity Guardian. Although we are a key partner in
Operation Prosperity Guardian, we are now not the only ones
seeking to secure freedom of navigation in the Red Sea and to
tackle the Houthi threat. Can the Minister update your Lordships’
House on the current co-ordination efforts with our allies?
The EU has launched Operation Aspides with similar objectives to
Operation Prosperity Guardian. How is the US-led task force
co-ordinating with Operation Aspides and what plans are there for
combined action? The Saudi-led intervention into the Yemeni civil
war against the Houthis began nine years ago, almost to the day.
Can the Minister update your Lordships’ House on the current
discussions with the Saudis and the intersection between these
efforts and the recent airstrikes? Military action against the
Houthis must be reinforced by a diplomatic drive in the region
aimed at stopping the flow of Iranian weapons, cutting off Houthi
finances and settling the civil war in Yemen. A limited update
was shared in the other place about these diplomatic efforts.
What additional information can the Minister give us about these
efforts, specifically the diplomatic plan accompanying the
strikes to manage escalation risks? Can he inform your Lordships’
House what other partners and allies we are engaging with to stop
the escalation of these Iranian-backed Houthi strikes?
There is no excuse for the current attacks by the Houthi rebels
on international maritime activity. There is an onus on us to
protect freedom of navigation, which is why we support the
efforts of the UK Government and, as always, thank our service
personnel for their bravery, professionalism and dedication.
of Newnham (LD)
My Lords, I, too, pay tribute to His Majesty’s Armed Forces for
always acting very effectively and professionally. Like the noble
Baroness, Lady Anderson, we on these Benches support the limited
strikes that we have seen so far. It is clearly right that, in
line with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the United
Kingdom supports rights of navigation—in particular the right of
innocent passage, which is enshrined in Article 17.
That said, can the Minister tell the House at what point His
Majesty’s Government would feel it appropriate to come to this
Chamber or, more likely, the other place to talk more fully about
engagement in the Red Sea and attacks on Houthi targets? There
are questions about parliamentary scrutiny of military
intervention. For limited strikes, it is clearly right that the
Government say, “This happened two nights ago”, but at what point
does the number of limited strikes cumulatively become something
that Parliament really should be addressing and able to
scrutinise more fully?
Beyond that, as the noble Baroness, Lady Anderson, pointed out,
what we are seeing from the Houthis is action that is impacting
on trade and navigability. It impacts not only the United Kingdom
or our conventional western allies; these attacks are affecting
global trade. There have been attacks on Chinese-registered
companies’ ships and on crews from India, Sri Lanka and Syria.
Although we clearly need to be talking with our conventional
partners and allies, what discussions are we also having with
China, India and other countries about more global ways of
tackling this situation? In defending the Red Sea and keeping it
open for trade, we are not only acting for the West but looking
more globally. Is there scope within the United Nations to be
talking much more broadly with a variety of countries that are,
perhaps, not our normal partners and which even the noble Lord,
, may not yet have reached in
his travels around the world in his first 100 days as Foreign
Secretary? There may be opportunities that we could think
about.
It is clearly welcome that the attacks so far appear to have been
targeted, precise and proportionate. They have taken out Houthi
targets, Houthi drone bases and so on but, as the noble Baroness,
Lady Anderson, asked, what is the Government’s intent? Is it to
degrade the Houthi capabilities, which is clearly welcome, or is
it to deter? If it is trying to degrade, which the Government are
saying has been successful, is that going to be a long-term
degradation or are the Houthis simply going to look to their
Iranian backers for further military support? In other words, can
the Minister tell the House to what extent these limited attacks
will remain limited and to what extent we are going to be able to
work with partners to try to ensure that the reckless and
opportunistic Houthi attacks stop? What is the endgame for the
Government? Is it to ensure that there is full deterrence of the
Houthis?
The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (The ) (Con)
My Lords, let me start by making it absolutely clear that the
Houthi attacks on ships in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden are
illegal and intolerable. Their reckless and dangerous actions
threaten freedom of navigation and global trade, let alone the
risk to innocent lives. That is why the UK, alongside the United
States and with the support of our international partners, has
carried out additional strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen in line
with international law and in self-defence.
We continue to take action that is necessary, limited, legal and
proportionate in terms of self-defence, freedom of navigation and
protecting lives. Our aim remains to disrupt and degrade Houthi
capabilities to put an end to this persistent threat, and we will
not hesitate to take further appropriate action to deliver this
purpose.
I turn to the specific questions raised by the noble Baronesses,
which I hope will go a long way to explaining this. First, on
behalf of the Government, I continue to appreciate the support
from all Benches in the House; it is extremely valuable and very
helpful in reaching these decisions, and, of course, we
appreciate the immense professionalism of all the Armed Forces
and their support who are involved in this continuing and
extremely tricky situation.
The effect on commerce goes without saying. As the noble
Baroness, Lady Anderson, pointed out, it is really starting to
have an impact on European markets and, by definition, it must be
having an impact on the manufacturing and supply bases in the Far
East that ship towards Europe. On the point made by the noble
Baroness, Lady Smith, about China and its silence so far on this
entire issue, one can only hope that the diplomatic efforts in
that direction, when tinged with a little bit of economic
reality, may have a slightly more impressive effect.
As for the actual effect of the specific attacks that we have
undertaken, it may be helpful to run through exactly what we are
trying to do, and to delineate these specific attacks in relation
to a more general approach. These carefully targeted sites—and
they really are carefully targeted—are attacking deeply buried
weapons storage, launch sites, ground-control systems and radars,
which are the four things that will stop these attacks. The
intention to deter and degrade is absolutely present, and
Prosperity Guardian is all about deterrence. These three things
are intricately linked. In the attack last weekend, we hit three
buildings, destroyed five drones that were ready to be launched,
and, as far as we are aware, no civilian casualties were caused.
To date, we have had four strikes on seven facilities and 40
targets. The information is that all four have been successful in
support of Prosperity Guardian and our American, and other,
allies—it is the Americans, of course, who are leading.
The noble Baroness, Lady Anderson, quite rightly raises the
question of Aspides, which is the EU stepping up to the plate, to
some extent. To put a scale on that, it consists of four frigates
and a single aerial asset. It is a defensive maritime security
operation, and it will protect commercial shipping from attacks
at sea or by air, but it will not involve itself in strikes on
land. It started on 19 February 2024, it is based in Greece and
it has an Italian force commander. It provides a valuable
defensive role, but we do not see it being involved in any
degrading or deterring.
On the question of the conversations with wider allies and other
countries in the area, the whole purpose of the diplomatic effort
is to put pressure on Iran, to try to stop the supply of weaponry
to its acolytes. By taking military action—which is a final
resort—as well as the diplomatic effort, we are doing all we can
to restrict weapons and finance. It is consistent with our whole
approach; it is appropriate and backed up with force.
My final point goes back to the question of global trade and the
point that was well made by the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, that
it is not just the allied shipping that is under attack. The idea
that the Houthis are attacking only ships that are proving to be
in support of something going on in Gaza is completely spurious.
They attack whatever they like, including, as I am sure your
Lordships are fully aware, the one ship that brings aid to Yemen,
to support the UK and international partners. So that claim is
just complete nonsense.
Finally, I will respond to the question of when these individual
strikes become something more of a sustained campaign. It is a
very difficult question to answer and it is not an easy one to
grasp, because we do not quite know what level of effect these
strikes are having on the overall capability of the Houthis.
These are limited and deliberate strikes in direct response to
the Houthi attacks on commercial shipping, our Navy and coalition
ships in the region. There is no doubt that we have degraded the
Houthi capability and we will continue to urge the Houthis, and
those who enable them, to stop the illegal and unacceptable
attacks on UK commercial and military vessels, and on those of
our partners in the Red Sea and the wider region. Beyond that, it
is very difficult to see how a broadening of this action may
evolve.
12.07pm
(Con)
Would my noble friend agree that it is highly desirable that
other countries that have substantial military assets should use
them to participate with the United States and the United Kingdom
in the relevant military action against the Houthis? There is no
reason why we should be confined to doing it by ourselves with
the United States; other countries should play their part.
The (Con)
My Lords, I entirely agree with my noble friend’s point. However,
it is the decision of each individual sovereign state to decide
at what level they wish to become involved.
(Lab)
Is the Minister aware that HMS “Diamond” is replenishing with
missiles in Gibraltar—which, I have to say, confirms the
strategic importance of Gibraltar? I have a question for the
Minister, and if he does not know the answer, perhaps he could
write to me. The future fleet solid support ships must have the
ability to replenish vertical launch missiles at sea. As I
understand it, that is not in the spec at the moment; could the
Minister please check that, because obviously the whole point is
that we could have replenished Diamond out on station, rather
than having to send her 1,500 miles home?
The (Con)
The noble Lord makes a very good point. I do not know the precise
situation of where we are, but I know that there is great
flexibility in transitioning to the new fleet. I will find out
and respond.
(CB)
My Lords, the Minister will remember that, at an early stage in
the crisis, the UN Security Council called on the Houthis to
desist. What consideration are the Government giving to further
action at the United Nations? Are they, for example, seeking to
put together a majority in the UN Security Council, calling on
all member states to stop supplying weapons to the Houthis and
stop helping them in their illegal actions? If the first
resolution went through, is there not a chance of getting
something a little stronger by building on that?
The (Con)
My Lords, the noble Lord makes an extremely good point. Yes,
there is quite some activity, but I am sure I need not point out
to your Lordships that the Houthis pay scant regard to anything
that the United Nations says.
(Con)
My Lords, I declare my interest as a serving member of the Armed
Forces. The noble Lord, Lord West, makes an interesting point,
but it also exposes a slightly uncomfortable truth: we are using
multi-million-pound missiles to defeat drones which are a
fraction of the cost. This is ultimately unsustainable. What is
the plan? Are we going to learn lessons from Ukraine, where there
is a rather more layered approach to defeating drones?
Ultimately, are we going to find some other way of defeating
these weapon systems?
The (Con)
I admit that I look at this from a slightly different
perspective. We are launching a missile in self-defence at an
incoming attack vehicle, which is attempting to hit something
behind us, which is probably worth half a billion pounds and well
in excess of 100 lives. Having moved into position, there is no
question that we are doing absolutely the right thing in
deterring, degrading and reducing the Houthis’ effectiveness. On
lessons from Ukraine, I assure the House that there is an
enormous amount of activity going on in precisely that area,
about what action can be taken to update and diversify all the
weaponry at our disposal.
(CB)
My Lords, the noble Earl mentioned the intention to disrupt the
Houthis’ ability to make these attacks. What steps are being
taken, if any, to stop the shipment to Yemen, from Iran or
elsewhere, of offensive weapons for use by the Houthis?
The (Con)
The noble and gallant Lord makes an interesting point. As part of
the international force dedicated to degrading the Houthis’
effectiveness, our partners are diverting and searching vehicles,
both at sea and elsewhere, to ensure that as much as possible can
be stopped from arriving in Yemen. At the same time, we are
looking at disrupting the manufacturing capability behind this,
which of course is based in Iran.
(LD)
My Lords, in lessons learned, I hope the Government are also
looking back at Operation Atalanta, which the noble Lord may
recall was an EU operation commanded by the UK through Northwood,
dealing with the Somali threat. Indeed, I recall—I was then a
Minister—that there were some informal contacts between that
UK-led force and Chinese naval vessels, which were also in the
area. On the question of degrading, if the Houthis are mainly
using speedboats and drones, how easy is it to degrade their
capability over more than a very short period? Those are cheap
and easy to move and therefore able to operate through all sorts
of places. Are there limits to how far we can maintain having
degraded them for more than a few weeks?
The (Con)
My Lords, the point is extremely well made. All parties are
conversing at a certain level. Degrading these small drones and
unmanned boats is not just a question of physically destroying
them but also of disrupting their ability to land where they are
supposed to.
(Con)
My Lords, further to the question of my noble friend about the help we are getting
from allies, can my noble friend confirm that the two biggest
economies in Europe are Germany and France, in that order, which
are importing significant quantities of goods from the Far East
and China through the Suez Canal and therefore have a big
interest in protecting shipping in the Red Sea? What is either
country doing to suppress the Houthis’ missile systems?
The (Con)
I thank my noble friend for that question. To be honest, I do not
know precisely what they are doing; I will find out and write.
They are definitely supportive of Aspides, and that is certainly
a move in the right direction.
(CB)
My Lords, has the FCDO sufficiently studied the people of north
Yemen, who are quite different from those in the south? In the
view of some experts, they are irrepressible. What is the
reaction of international diplomacy to that?
The (Con)
The noble Lord makes a very good point—one brought out earlier by
the involvement of Saudi Arabia. It is very difficult to answer.
We must take action to deter the disruption going through the
Suez Canal because we believe so passionately in global trade.
One would hope that there comes a point when diplomatic efforts
and other activity in the region may bring a halt to this very
unfortunate situation.
(Con)
My Lords, Maersk, which I understand is the largest container
company in the world, and Hapag-Lloyd, based in Germany, have
taken the decision for commercial reasons not to risk going
through the Red Sea but to take the long way around. Does my
noble friend agree that this is possibly one reason why Germany
and other European countries have not committed their forces
against the Houthis at this time, as is the increased threat seen
to Denmark’s home security and the fear of repercussions at home
were it to do so?
The (Con)
My noble friend makes a good point. These enormous shipping
operations have clearly taken some commercial decisions, which
are almost certainly the right thing to do for them and their
customers. One can see why there may be some reticence for
sovereign states to get involved in more direct action, thereby
threatening some of those countries’ commercial assets.
(GP)
My Lords, a clause in the Statement says:
“Intelligence analysis indicates that the strikes were
successful”,—[Official Report, Commons, 26/2/24; col. 25.]
yet elsewhere, the Statement notes:
“The Houthi intent remains undiminished”.—[Official Report,
Commons, 26/2/24; col. 27.]
Picking up the point of the noble Lord, Lord Wallace, there is
little or no evidence thus far that there has been a meaningful
diminishment in capacity. Is the word “successful” right, or
should perhaps the Government not be saying something such as
“achieved its objectives”?
I very much welcome the fact that the Statement says:
“Military action is only one aspect of our approach”,—[Official
Report, Commons, 26/2/24; col. 25.]
focusing on diplomatic action but, on the countries we are
working with, it talks about G7 partners, the US and the Sultan
of Oman. However, many countries have been significantly impacted
by this. For example, in Bangladesh, 65% of its garment exports,
which are so central to its economy, go to Europe. The cost of
containers is already up by about 50% and expected to go up by
another 20%. Should the Government not be looking to do more to
bring in countries such as Bangladesh, the Philippines and
Indonesia, with so many seafarers being put at risk? Is this not
a real opportunity to look truly globally and internationally, to
try to get the international community working collectively—not
necessarily but possibly through the UN—acknowledging that it
cannot just be about a few countries?
The (Con)
My Lords, I agree with much of what the noble Baroness says. The
countries involved in the specific action we are taking are doing
everything they can to get a situation where the Red Sea returns
to being a safe passage of water. It is globally important; it is
not just important for a few countries, as the noble Baroness
rightly points out. That is precisely why we are acting as part
of an international force to deter the Houthis and degrade their
effect.
(Con)
My Lords, I refer the Minister to the UK-registered merchant
vessel “Rubymar”, which was hit by Houthi missiles two days ago.
Mercifully, none of the crew were injured, but the vessel is
drifting and sinking. It is carrying a very volatile cargo of
fertiliser and there is already a fuel leak, so we could well be
looking at quite a major maritime environmental disaster. What is
HMG’s assessment of the situation at the moment and what efforts
will be made to make sure that this injured, badly damaged vessel
is towed to the nearest safe port?
The (Con)
My noble friend is absolutely right that it is potentially quite
a severe issue. The Government and others are looking at what can
be done. It is obviously unstable in an unstable environment and
it is important that something is done about this relatively
quickly.
|
