Vol. 511 No. 5
12 Mr. Finucane asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources if he will ensure that the findings of the inquiry on the sinking of the Orchidee will be re-examined when the marine casualty investigation Bill is passed, in view of the fact the findings of the inquiry have caused unnecessary distress to the families of the two fishermen who lost their lives. [24665/99]
15 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources if he will make a statement on the report of the investigation into the sinking of the Orchidee; his views on the findings of the report; and the action, if any, taken as a result of the investigation. [24733/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 and 15 together.
A report on the investigation into the collision between the French fishing vessel Agena and the Irish fishing vessel Orchidee, undertaken by the marine survey office of my Department, was published on 19 September 1999. The Deputies will be aware from my replies to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 25 and 60 of 20 October 1999 that publication of this report is an extremely sensitive matter, and understandably so, for the families of the deceased members of the crew of the Orchidee, Mr. James Power and Mr. Robert Doran.
The families have expressed concerns about the report, and these concerns were explored in detail at a lengthy meeting with the Power and Doran families held in my Department on 29 September last. The principal concern of the families is that the report and the media commentary on it are, in their view, open to the interpretation that both vessels were at equal fault in the tragic accident which occurred.
I reiterate, however, that it is not the purpose of the report to attribute fault or blame, as such, to any party but rather to identify what happened and if the accident could have been avoided. It is very important, if further accidents of this type are to be avoided, that the lessons of the tragic loss of the Orchidee are brought home to the owners and crews of all vessels.
As I said earlier, it was not the purpose of the report to apportion blame as between the parties. However, without in any way seeking to qualify the findings in the report, I can only repeat what I stated in my previous replies, which is that it would be entirely wrong to draw any inference that both parties were equally at fault. On the contrary, it is my strong opinion, having considered all the circumstances of the case, that the Irish vessel, which was almost stationary in the water and which was struck at speed at night by another larger vessel on which proper watch was not being maintained, was a passive party to the accident and, in that sense, was in no way responsible for causing it. These views have been conveyed to the families and I sincerely hope that it will be of some solace to them in coping with the tragic losses they have had to endure.
I hope these views and the public statements on the tragic incident and on the terms of the report made by my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, and myself, will allow all to draw this matter to a close. It is my strong view, in the circumstances and for the good of all concerned, that this matter should not be further considered in the absence of new relevant and substantial developments.
The loss of the Orchidee has caused grief to both families. There was a delay of seven years in the issuing of the findings. Certain factors may have been outside the Minister's control in that it went through the French courts. However, the fact that the two fishermen were sentenced in the French court is testimony that the Irish fishermen were not culpable.
The Minister said he will communicate with the people as far he can and, while he is not willing to apportion blame, he is putting the emphasis on the French side. Has he communicated that to the media? Concern was expressed to me that an article in a reputable marine journal apportioned blame to both the Irish and French crews. That has caused a great deal of angst to the bereaved families. I am not sure the families are convinced that that apportionment has been fully communicated.
I accept what the Deputy said. This is a difficult and sensitive situation. The delay was occasioned by the court case in France and the lengthy procedures before and during it. The court case made the position clear in regard to blame.
However, as was said earlier in regard to reporting on accidents, when independent surveyors are asked to give a report they give it in accordance with the existing laws and facts. They do not apportion blame. The problem is that there are two separate issues, the state or con dition of any of the vessels in regard to international regulations and so on and the question of who is to blame. It has been clearly established who was to blame in this case.
The French vessel.
The French vessel. It is unfortunate, but that is one of the problems in this. The Department, particularly the Minister of State, has done everything it can to highlight those findings. They have also been highlighted in the House.
What is the procedure, now that the courts have apportioned blame? What function or role will the Department play in the payment of compensation for the loss of the vessel?
Our principal roles are to investigate and report on accidents and to provide immediate assistance through the Irish Marine Emergency Service. The objective is to learn the lessons to be drawn and make them known to fishermen in particular to ensure there is not a repeat. Much time, money and effort is put into this and it is paying off. Fishermen need to be aware of the causes of accidents. This is a matter on which the Department follows through.
