Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Jun 1945

Vol. 97 No. 16

Committee on Finance. - Vote 58—Marine Service.

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £21,432 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1946, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Marine Service (Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 to 1939, and the Foreshore Act, 1933 (No. 12 of 1933)); for certain payments in respect of Compensation, including extra wages of seamen and the cost of medical treatment; and for the payments in respect of the provision of certain Protective Equipment for Ships.

Does this cover the lifeboat service?

No, the coast lifesaving service.

The Minister may have noticed that two unfortunate men lost their lives recently in a boating accident at the mouth of the Liffey, whereupon a brisk correspondence has broken out in the columns of the newspapers, comprising allegations and counter-allegations against persons, and in defence of persons, who, I understand, in some measure at least, give their services voluntarily. It may be that they accept some honorarium and thereby incur certain responsibilites but, if there is any question as to whether the death of these two unfortunate men was due to the laches of anybody or was due to unavoidable error that no care could have avoided, surely it would be desirable that some responsible officer should be appointed to inquire into this matter or that, if necessary, a small commission should be appointed to inquire into it and give the public a satisfactory report as to what actually happened, and how it came that two men could have their yacht upset under the eyes of hundreds of people and be lost, despite the fact that the lightship mariner alleges that he saw the yacht a very few moments after it turned turtle and that he was making strenuous efforts for a protracted period to get in contact with the life saving service provided for under this Estimate. I do not want in the slightest degree to prejudice the case of anybody associated with that service but the Minister will recollect that, at the inquest, the oddest evidence was given. There was talk of a radio set which was ordinarily supposed to be turned on, with a vigilant officer to listen to every message coming over it. It was alleged that, for the convenience of some ulterior activity, the radio set was turned down so low that nobody could hear it. That may be false or it may be true but it seems to me that a series of allegations relating to the permanent officers of the Department and voluntary and semi-voluntary helpers were being bandied about. A situation developed on which the public should get some authoritative report which would allay their uneasiness.

Specific recommendations were made at the inquest and the Minister should say whether or not effect is to be given to them.

This matter is at present being considered. Under the law, as it stands, there is no authority to hold an inquiry in a case such as that to which the Deputy refers. An inquiry must be held where there is an accident involving a registered vessel. Under the present circumstances, the only inquiry which can be held in a case of this kind is the coroner's inquiry. However, the whole of the legislation in that regard is under consideration and the recommendations which have been made arising out of that accident and the general need for improving the law in that regard are being considered. I cannot say when the new legislation will be ready, but the matter is being considered at the moment.

I should not ask for a commission to inquire into what happened in the bay. My recollection is that it was recommended at the inquest that a telephone be installed in the Poolbeg lighthouse. That is a very specific and cheap recommendation and the Minister might go so far as to say whether it ought to be installed or not.

As the Deputy is aware, there is an anomalous position concerning the Irish Lights Service, which is not at present under the control of the Irish Government.

It would be a desirable thing to incur the cost of the telephone to Poolbeg lighthouse arising out of this accident.

I sympathise with Deputy Dockrell's desire to concentrate on concrete form, but it is a very important thing to maintain public confidence. My experience is that, unless at some stage somebody in whom we all have confidence says: "Very well, I am going to look into the whole matter, fix responsibility and ascertain the precautions necessary to prevent a recurrence", rumour begets rumour, charge begets counter-charge and very often a very disagreeable ruction ensues. At the back of this incident are two unfortunate bereaved families and we have to try to reassure ourselves and others that what happened was not due to criminal laches on the part of anybody. If the Minister would say that he has directed an inquiry to be made in his Department into the circumstances of this whole affair and that he would insist on the inquiry being pursued until he was satisfied that every relevant fact was disinterred and every officer responsible for failure of duty was made to account for it, it would meet the situation.

The whole matter is being considered. A number of loose ends have to be tied up in connection with the lifeboat service, the Irish Lights Service and the growing need for an air-sea rescue service. I hope to have proposals for dealing with all aspects of the matter completed some time in the near future.

One of the allegations made was that there was a telephone at Poolbeg which was not operating. Surely there is a telephone at every lighthouse.

The Deputy is querying the Minister for Industry and Commerce on a matter which relates to the Irish Lights Service which is not under his control or the lifeboat service, which is at present a purely voluntary service.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share