Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 31 Mar 1987

Vol. 371 No. 5

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Kowloon Bridge Casualty.

16.

Mr. Sherlock

asked the Minister for Communications the measures he intends to take to ensure that Irish coastal waters and the environment are not put at risk again from an incident such as the sinking of the Kowloon Bridge; the measures he is taking to ensure that the owners bear the cost of the clean-up operation; the measures he is taking to ensure that tourism in the region is not damaged as a result of the accident; the steps being taken to have the vessel removed; the steps being taken to check reports that the vessel was carrying large quantities of a highly toxic TBT paint; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

19.

Mr. Kavanagh

asked the Minister for Communications if, in light of the Kowloon Bridge disaster, which was caused by the inability of the Kowloon Bridge to cope with excessively bad weather, he will introduce legislation to strengthen the powers of port authorities and/or his powers in relation to the movement of ships in such bad conditions; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Mr. Wilson

I propose to take Questions Nos. 16 and 19 together.

I have already made arrangements for a review of domestic legislation covering marine safety and pollution in the light of the Kowloon Bridge casualty and any legislative changes that are considered necessary in the light of this review will be introduced as soon as possible. The insurers for the owners of the Kowloon Bridge have stated that they will meet their legal liabilities arising out of the incident. Legal action will be taken, if necessary, to enforce these liabilities.

Removal of the wreck is primarily a matter for the owners. I am selecting a marine consultancy firm which will, subject to my approval, make arrangements for the safe removal and disposal of all oil remaining on the wreck.

Exhaustive inquiries have been made by the Department of the Environment and my own Department regarding the reports of the presence of TBT paint on board the Kowloon Bridge. On the basis of information received to date, I am satisfied there is no TBT paint on board the vessel.

I understand that Cork County Council have begun their final clean-up of beaches and other contaminated areas in west Cork and are aiming to have the clean-up finished by the Easter weekend. Bord Fáilte have continued to promote west Cork in the various markets as an attractive holiday destination. Within their ongoing publicity programme the board will ensure that the unspoilt, clean and beautiful image of west Cork is maintained. Strong advance bookings on the new Cork-Swansea ferry service indicate good prospects for the region in 1987.

Mr. Kavanagh

Will this legislation incorporate the ratification of the Convention for Intervention on the High Seas in the case of oil pollution casualties which would give the Government greater power of action in, for example, the Kowloon Bridge? Will it also include the ratification of the 1969 convention on civil liability and the 1971 convention for the establishment of an international fund for compensation for oil pollution damage? Will the Minister comment on the statement by the Taoiseach that the owners of the Kowloon Bridge will be pursued relentlessly by him under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894? If so, is he aware that the maximum compensation which would be paid under that Act is £8 per tone or £750,000? The estimated damage to our coastline and the environment amounts to about £80 million according to a recent article in The Sunday Press which seems a more realistic figure than the miserly sum of £750,000 which may be gained under the 1894 Act.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is a very long question.

Mr. Kavanagh

It is a very important question.

Mr. Wilson

I assure Deputy Kavanagh that the conventions to which he referred will be studied by the people preparing the legislation. I should also like to endorse what the Taoiseach said in regard to making those responsible pay. Of course they may pay for the damage caused but, if necessary, we shall pursue the matter through the courts. The insurance company, the P and I, are on record as saying they would be responsible for what happened. Compensation may not necessarily be under the 1894 Act or any subsequent Acts. As the Deputy knows, where insurance is concerned the matter does not necessarily have to come before the courts.

Deputy Sherlock rose.

An Ceann Comhairle

In respect of a question of this kind the Chair hears only the Deputy who has tabled the question. I appreciate that Deputy Sherlock had an ordinary question tabled for today which was not reached. However, he cannot ask a question now.

Mr. Kavanagh

Are we now aware of the ownership of this vessel? Is there an agreement with the insurance companies that the various Acts will not be used as a limitation on the amount of compensation to be paid?

Mr. Wilson

Our legal advisers are quite satisfied that we will be able to pursue the company concerned for substantial sums.

Mr. Kavanagh

The Minister is not answering my question. Can he say under which Acts he is pursuing? It would appear to me that the type of money which would relate to the damage that has been caused would not be achieved under the Act I have mentined, the Oil Pollution of the Sea (Amendment) Act, 1977 and that the only Act under which he should or could pursue is the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 which would allow Cork County Council far greater latitude in achieving a higher amount of compensation.

Mr. Wilson

I am glad the Deputy raised the question of Cork County Council. As the House knows, the Taoiseach, the Minister for the Environment and I visited that area. We were more than impressed by Cork County Council's actions in this area, by the Cork County Manager, Mr. Dowd, and by their engineer in charge of clearing the pollution, Mr. Mullins. That local authority in this instance deserve great credit.

The legal advisers of the Government will use whatever Statute is available to them if the matter comes to law and if the insurance company do not pay before it comes to law to recover the money from the company. This will include the one mentioned as being utilised by Cork County Council.

Mr. Kavanagh

We have learned from the Minister that we will be getting damages above the £0.75 million which I have mentioned and nearer the figure of £80 million. Can the Minister tell the House and the country who the owner of this boat is? Is it, as mentioned in an article recently, owned partially by Chase Manhattan Bank and others, and, if so, are they the people being pursued?

Mr. Wilson

The company mentioned originally Helinger, and another person has been mentioned who is also on record as saying that Helinger still have an interest in the ship.

Mr. Sherlock

I wish to have a written reply to Question No. 16.