On Second Stage we expressed our concern that so many ships using our waters do not have the same trained personnel and manning standards demanded in this Bill for seamen travelling on Irish registered ships. I asked the Minister to make approaches to the international shipping body which regulates and controls such matters to see that there was a standard of uniformity throughout the world with regard to the amount of trained personnel and the standard of that personnel on all ships using the high seas, and our coastal waters in particular. Does the Minister intend to bring this point to the notice of the Inter-governmental Maritime Consultant Organisation? Are all the countries in the world which have ocean going ships affiliated to this body? If not, how many are not? Has the Minister any suggestions as to how sanctions should be taken against those countries which are in shipping to a major degree but which are not following international shipping conventions?
Private Business. - Merchant Shipping (Certification of Seamen) Bill, 1979: Committee Stage.
The Deputy will remember that when I concluded Second Stage I mentioned that the Bill would, inter alia, cover all ships registered in Ireland, that is, owned by Irish citizens or by Irish bodies corporate. The Bill also covers foreign ships, but only those carrying passengers from one Irish port to another Irish port. For a number of reasons it would be impracticable to try to extend the application of this Bill to enable us to set down manning and competency requirements for foreign vessels coming into our ports from abroad. We, in common with our Community partners, operate an “open ports” policy under which ships of every nation are free to trade to and from our ports. The Deputy will accept that this is a long established and accepted policy based on the sound economic premise that the balance of national advantage lies in securing the lowest possible freight rates because of our open economy and the size of our import and export trade. Our basic thinking on this whole matter is the same as that in the Community generally, that is, that the manning level and the certification standards on foreign vessels are, in the first instance, a matter for the foreign maritime authorities concerned. Our best option is to seek to complement the action of national authorities by concerted international action at a multilateral level with a view to improving and harmonising standards for ships' officers and crews on a worldwide basis. The 1978 IMCO Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers is a concrete step in this direction. The convention is a relatively recent one, about 18 months old, but the progressive adherence of countries to it should encourage the development of a harmonised international regime of standards for the training and certification of seafarers.
This Bill and the regulations to be made under it shortly will enable Ireland to implement the terms of the convention. As I mentioned previously, we are not entirely dependent on international law in cases where we have doubts about foreign vessels entering our ports. The Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, gives us very wide-ranging powers to inspect and, if necessary, to detain foreign vessels within our jurisdiction in various circumstances such as doubts about seaworthiness, manning, safety and so on. These are provisions which give us a wide degree of discretion and control. The Deputy will agree that adherence by the countries throughout the world to the 1978 IMCO Convention is the best way of overcoming the problems mentioned.
Are there states and shipping fleets which are not members of IMCO?
I think most countries adhere to it but there would be some who are not members.
The Minister said that we could take action against ships which were not up to standard or which were not sufficiently manned or did not have the necessary trained personnel under the 1894 Act. Has there been one example in modern times where we have taken action under this Act?
I do not think so.
There is no need for me to labour the point. There was a major tragedy within the last 12 months. There would appear to be a reasonable doubt as to the standards on the ship in question.
That matter should not be discussed here.
I did not make any specific reference. There are a large number of ships using our waters and ports which are not up to the requisite standard. The 1894 Act should be adhered to and it should be used much more frequently. I would ask the Minister to ask his Department to do just that.
The Deputy will appreciate that the convention we are referring to relates to standards of training and certification and watchkeeping for seafarers.
The Minister said in his reply that we could take action against ships which are not up to standard.
Yes. I just wanted to give the Deputy some more information.
This is the really important section in the Bill. This requires ships to carry such numbers and such categories of personnel and so on and to ensure that the crew is a competent crew. How is the matter of increased personnel on certain passenger boats affected by this Bill? As the Minister is aware, ships which ply between Cork and Great Britain, Rosslare and Great Britain, Dún Laoghaire and Great Britain and so on consist of passenger ships with a very inflated crew during the summer period. I trust that when the regulations are made with regard to personnel that aspect will be taken into account.
On the general question I would like the Minister to say whether there has been consultation with the shipping companies. It would be appropriate also if there had been consultation with the trade unions. I took it upon myself to consult with one trade union, the National Union of Seamen, and they were concerned to get an assurance from the Minister that certificates issued by certain overseas administrations would be accepted by the Irish authorities.
Section 3 states:
The Minister may make regulations requiring ships to which this Act applies to carry such numbers and such categories of personnel as he may specify in the regulations...
This section also empowers the Minister to make regulations with regard to the standards of competence and the conduct of examinations, and under section 9 (2) the Minister may make regulations governing the conduct of an inquiry. Will the Minister say whether these regulations would be placed on the table of the House and be revoked within a certain period, say 21 sitting days, or would they be absolute and come into effect once the Minister makes them? I do not know whether he can be specific on this. How will he decide the numbers and the categories? What guidelines will he have? Also I would like to know whether there is an international convention with regard to the procedure proposed in this measure. What sort of examination boards will there be and what will the personnel be like? Would shipowners, trade unions, mercantile engineers and so on be included?
Section 3 is the important section. Deputy Quinn has asked me to raise the question of the status of the jet-foil which goes into service in the spring of 1980. I would be concerned with levels of manning and technical competence because I am informed that the engine size is very large compared to the tonnage. I presume that that would get special and urgent attention in view of the fact that engineers are going on a training programme starting 2 January in the coming year with Boeing in the USA.
The first question the Deputy asked related to manning. The manning will be settled in consultation with the shipping industry. I was asked previously by Deputy Quinn whether I would be willing to have consultation with the unions. I will.
Good.
Some consultations have taken place already with the industry and further consultations will take place later. Reciprocal arrangements are in force governing the mutual recognition of certificates of competency. Therefore, in those circumstances they would be recognised. The examinations are conducted by officers of the Mercantile Marine Office of my Department. The biggest problem is to get sufficient qualified people to deal with this matter.
Are the people in the Department qualified?
Yes.
Will they have certain guidelines related to what is done in other parts of the world, particularly Britain?
The people we have are highly qualified, but to get sufficient people to do the work is the difficulty. There are considerable problems such as the amount of money a qualified officer can earn at sea as compared with what he would be offered on land, and so on.
Will the Minister give particular attention to the status of jet-foil? If he says yes I will be satisfied.
Is the Deputy referring to manning levels and so on?
Yes. Will special attention be given there?
Yes, special attention will be given to that.
The other question which the Minister did not answer related to the regulations. Will they be laid on the table of the House or will they be operative from the time they are made?
There is no provision in the Bill for laying them on the table of the House.
Then as soon as they come into operation they can take effect?
Yes. The Deputy will appreciate that there will be considerable consultation before we make regulations.
This section refers to standards of competence and certificates of competency. Section 3 (2) (b) provides for the conduct of examinations and, with the consent of the Minister for the Public Service, the appointment and remuneration of examiners for such examinations. The Minister has said that there is a shortage of such examiners. Have we no facilities in this country for the training of such people? Has everything concerned with these certificates of competency and with the training of these examiners to be done abroad, namely in Britain? Is any other maritime nation in the world so lacking in facilities and institutes for the training and qualification of shipping personnel? From my experience anybody who wants to get any advanced training in this regard has to go abroad. We will take our own Irish Naval Service, for instance, to draw a parallel. The officers of that service have to go to Britain, namely to Dartmouth in Devon and to Greenwich College in London, to get their certificates of competency. Can the Minister hold out any hope that we will set up a maritime faculty in one of our universities or at least a major faculty in one of our regional colleges whereby people can get their certificates to which I refer here in our own country?
It is a fact that for advanced training our officers go abroad, but the Deputy will appreciate that the number of examiners that we would need is relatively small and there would be a problem in setting up a course for such small numbers. The whole question of examinations is under review at present.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 3, to delete lines 25 to 41 and substitute the following:
"(2) A Justice of the District Court shall have jurisdiction to try summarily an offence under this section if—
(a) the Justice is of opinion that the facts proved or alleged against a defendant charged with such an offence constitute a minor offence fit to be tried summarily,
(b) the Director of Public Prosecutions consents, and
(c) the defendant (on being informed by the Justice of his right to be tried by a jury) does not object to being tried summarily,
and, upon conviction under this subsection, the defendant shall be liable to a fine not exceeding £500.
(3) Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, shall apply in relation to an offence under this section as if, in lieu of the penalties specified in subsection (3) of the said section 13, there were specified therein the penalty provided for by subsection (2) of this section, and the reference in subsection (2) (a) of the said section 13 to the penalties provided for in the said subsection (3) shall be construed and have effect accordingly.".
These are mainly merely drafting amendments advised by our legal people. The original wording of subsection 2 (a) was:
(a) the Justice is of opinion that the facts proved or alleged against the defendant constitute a minor offence....
The amendment states:
(a) the Justice is of opinion that the facts proved or alleged against a defendant charged with such an offence....
In section 5 (2) (b) we have substituted "Director of Public Prosecutions" for "Attorney General". Subsection (3) is a drafting amendment.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 5, lines 6 to 11, to delete subsection (4) and substitute the following subsection:
"(4) A person in relation to whom an inquiry under this section is to be held or has been held may appeal to the High Court against a suspension or cancellation under this section and the High Court, after it has heard such evidence as may be adduced and such submissions as may be made by or on behalf of the person and the Minister, may revoke the suspension or cancellation.".
Again, this is a drafting amendment.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 5, line 13, to delete "468" and substitute "469".
This is a very simple amendment, merely substituting one figure for another.