Vol. 502 No. 6
I understand the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Woods, is not available as he is away at Structural Funds talks on the very important issue of our fishing fleet. Some Structural Fund proposals may result in the cutting back of our fishing fleet. I wish the Minister well in the deliberations.
I wish to share my time with Deputies Coveney and Deasy.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I am proud to share my time with both Deputies because Deputy Coveney represents a coastal area and has a great interest in seafaring and Deputy Deasy, to whom I have spoken many times on these issues, comes from another coastal community and also has a tremendous interest in the sea.
Because of the growth in international tourism, there is a growing trend towards activity-related holidays, but the water-based tourism market in Ireland remains underdeveloped. Until recently the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources was not active in the area of water-based tourism which did not slot into the normal work of the Department.
The Marine Institute produced a strategy document in 1998 which highlighted a significant role for water-based tourism and leisure. It has the potential to create jobs in many areas that are economically disadvantaged, some of which are peripheral parts of our country. The whole water-based tourism and leisure business makes a sig nificant contribution to our economy. It has an estimated value of £392 million per annum and supports in excess of 14,500 employees. It includes adventure centres as a smaller component of the water-based tourism and leisure business. We are fortunate to have 2,000 miles of coastline and also an extensive lake network with great potential for water-based activities associated with adventure centres. We are also fortunate that the inland waters and the coastline are accessible to our major population centres.
Marine pollution is mainly confined to the coastlines close to our major cities. Most of our coastline remains unpolluted and is ideal for water-based activities. The uncrowded nature of most of our coastline makes it popular with tourists. If funding were provided by local authorities or by the Department for the many ports, inlets and small harbours which are falling into disrepair, it would greatly enhance the profile of our marine, tourism and leisure activities.
The Marine Institute, in a strategy document which embraced tourism and leisure, recognised that user friendly legislation regulating commercial activities in the water-based leisure sector, especially with regard to safety, is needed. In introducing this Bill, I am conforming to the necessity for a Bill for water-based activity centres for people under 18 years of age. I am pleased to introduce this Bill as a voluntary code is not sufficient to protect young people engaged in water sports at marine adventure centres. It is essential that such centres be licensed and their activities supervised by officials from the Health and Safety Authority. This Bill proposes a new licensing and policing system under the aegis of the Health and Safety Authority.
Over the years, with the growth in the tourism industry, there has been a dramatic expansion in the number of outdoor pursuit centres engaged in adventure sports. These adventure centres engage in such diverse activities as canoeing, sailing, wind-surfing, mountain hiking, pony trekking, field studies, archery, orienteering, hill-walking, power boating, rock climbing snorkelling, abseiling sea kayaking and surfing. The location of the adventure centres, whether on the coastline or inland, will dictate the different activities carried on in these locations. The adventure centres cater for all age groups but are most popular with young children and young adults.
In their advertising the centres specify the age group for which they cater, with young children from seven years and upwards attending them. When looking at some Bord Fáilte literature it surprised me to find that one centre was accepting even younger children from the age of three and upwards. Many of them cater for children from the age of seven and upwards and many cater for all ages. In marketing these centres abroad, Bord Fáilte states:
Adventure sports are by their nature hazardous and participants should be aware that no liability will attach to outdoor pursuits centres in respect of accidents caused by or resulting from their inexperience or negligence. They participate at their own risk and are advised to carry their own personal accident insurance policy.
In response to that, let me remind the House that we are talking about young children of six, seven, eight or nine years old. Parents need the comfort of knowing that if they send a young child to an adventure centre it is licensed and there is a proper policing system in place.
Currently, the Association for Adventure Sports, AFAS, does a good job in setting standards for adventure centres relating to safety, safety procedures, safety of equipment and qualification of staff, and issues an annual list of approved centres. The Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation provides limited funding on an annual basis. I emphasise the very limited funding for this body which operates this code very much on a voluntary basis. The organisations included under the umbrella of AFAS include: the Irish Amateur Archery Association, responsible for archery; the Irish Canoe Union, responsible for canoeing, kayaking and canoe surfing; the Speleological Union of Ireland, responsible for caving; the Mountaineering Council of Ireland, responsible for hill-walking, mountaineering and rock climbing; the Irish Orienteering Association, responsible for orienteering; and the Irish Surfing Association, responsible for surfing.
I have no doubt that if the Minister accepts this Bill, the Association for Adventure Sports will still have a strong role in the area of adventure sports and the Bill will strengthen its role. I am not saying that under this Bill the Association for Adventure Sports standards should be abolished. All I am saying is that if it operates on a voluntary basis, it would help to know that the strength of a Bill like this is behind it in the operation of its code of conduct.
Over the years it has been the Department's policy that self-regulation by individuals engaged in water sports and the representative organisations is the most practical and efficient approach to the safety of such activities. Successive Ministers for the Marine have supported self-regulation. However, interestingly, in a reply in the Dáil on 27 May 1998 the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Woods, stated that following the tragic accident off Dunmore East in February 1995, which resulted in the death of two young men who were members of a canoeing party from the local adventure centre, his Department, while recognising that self-regulation remained an important option, had come to the conclusion that some form of regulation of adventure centres would be desirable to provide for an improvement in the safety of people availing of the activities at these centres. Ten months ago the Minister appeared to be very supportive, and in dealing with questions in committee I got the feeling he was interested in strengthening the existing situation. Now is the time for positive action. He further stated:
I have recently taken up with my colleague, the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation, who is responsible for sport in general, the possible introduction of mandatory regulation of the safety of adventure centres.
It is now ten months since the Minister made that statement. Within the Bill I have framed, the Minister has the opportunity to accept it as being suitable for outdoor activity centres engaged in water sports. It could also be extended to all activity centres in due course. In framing the Bill, I was conscious that many outdoor adventure centres are not commercial operations, as such, but are under the jurisdiction of the vocational education committees.
The present situation regarding adventure centres is fragmented as the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation has no statutory responsibility for the majority of them which are private commercial operations. Many such operations on our coastline offer a range of potentially dangerous activities in potentially dangerous locations, and many of their clients are children. The Department of Education and Science, through the vocational education committees, also operates nine outdoor education centres. Other vocational education committees operating adventure centres are seeking recognition from the Department of Education and Science. I estimate there are about 30 adventure centres in all.
In December 1994 the owner of a leisure centre in Britain was sentenced to three years imprisonment and fined £60,000 after a fatal canoeing accident involving a party of school children in March 1993. Four teenagers died in that accident in Lyme Bay. In 1995 the British Government introduced a Bill to regulate activity centres. As this business has rapidly expanded in recent years, it is now timely for us to introduce similar legislation.
It is now possible to establish an adventure centre but one is dependent upon voluntary recognition by AFAS with regard to safety standards and procedures laid down for the operation of such a centre. It is also my understanding that it is not compulsory for a centre to be under the umbrella of AFAS.
I acknowledge the ongoing encouragement of the parent whose son lost his life in a canoeing accident at Dunmore East. I have discussed the matter with the father on many occasions. With regard to this Bill, he is particularly anxious that some form of regulation should be in place, under the control of the Minister and with the strength of the Health and Safety Authority, for the operation of these adventure centres. I hope the Bill will be accepted by the Government. If the Minister is not happy with the text it should be possible to amend it on Committee Stage. It is desirable to have such legislation in operation. Although it will provide little comfort at this stage for someone who has lost a child as a result of such an accident, it would provide comfort for parents whose children will use adventure centres in future. They will know that if their children go to an adventure centre it will be properly regulated by the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, be policed on an ongoing basis by the Health and Safety Authority and will receive a licence. If the legislation achieves that, it will strengthen the outdoor adventures centres and further legitimise them as far as parents are concerned. Such comfort already exists for children who attend the outdoor education centres operated under the aegis of vocational education committees which come under the Department of Education and Science. The Department will carry out an investigation if anything goes wrong. It is desirable to have such an organisation to fall back on and which has a share of strength and muscle.
In framing this Bill I hoped the Minister would take a step in the right direction in taking the matter under his umbrella. Many of the activities in such adventure centres, whether inland or on the coast, are water based. If necessary it will be possible to include all adventure centres under the legislation.
At present, coastal adventure centres would apparently be the responsibility of the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources, even though that Department will say it has no such responsibility. On the other hand the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation under the Minister, Deputy McDaid, will say that it has no responsibility for the matter, apart from AFAS for which the Minister provides funding. The matter needs to be tidied up between both Departments.
Section 4 provides for the Health and Safety Authority to issue licences on behalf of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources. Under this section, the authority would have discretion as to whether an application would be refused or granted. If an applicant is dissatisfied with the decision of the Health and Safety Authority he may appeal to the High Court upon receipt of a certificate outlining the reasons for the authority's decision.
Section 7 provides the Minister with the power to make regulations which will provide for the cases or circumstances in which persons providing facilities for adventure centres are required to hold a licence and to set safety requirements to be satisfied by any applicant to hold a licence.
Section 8 makes it an offence to contravene a provision of a regulation made under this Bill or to knowingly or recklessly give false information to the authority for the purpose of obtaining a licence.
I hope the Bill will be accepted by the Government. Parents who send their children to outdoor activity centres deserve to be assured by the State that adequate safety standards are in place. As the Minister with statutory responsibility for the marine sector, Deputy Woods has an obligation to provide these assurances by introducing safety standards on a statutory basis.
I hope the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, who is from a coastal county, will recognise that it is essential to do something positive in this direction. I commend the Bill to the House and sincerely hope the Minister will accept it.
I congratulate Deputy Finucane for introducing the Bill and am pleased to be involved in, I hope, getting it accepted. As an island nation we have a huge coastline to population ratio. All our major centres of population are situated on the coast or by lakes or large rivers. These include Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Tralee, Limerick, Galway, Sligo and so many other smaller towns. It is not surprising, therefore, that we are seeing an increase in the number of people using water as a source of recreation. An industry is growing up that provides recreational and adventure activities which is centred on water based activities. More and more parents view the sea as a healthy and productive resource for sport and recreation for their children. There are many harbours, bays and sheltered inlets on our coastline that are completely under-utilised from a marine recreation point of view. So many of these areas are just waiting to be developed into potentially exciting adventure, recreation and educational centres. More and more people are realising that water activities can be great fun and very enjoyable. Many of them do not realise the potential danger that water holds, though a great number of Irish people know how lethal the sea and rivers can be. I consider myself very lucky to have practically grown up on the sea and to have been given the opportunity to participate in almost every water based activity one could think of. For a number of summers I worked as a sailing instructor and as a lifeguard, both in Ireland and abroad. I know how much the sea has to offer people of all ages, and young people in particular, from the recreation and sporting points of view.
We should encourage the development of water sports and activity centres to allow as many young people as possible to appreciate the joys of learning how to surf, sail, scuba dive, wind surf or swim. However, if we encourage this sector, we must also take on the huge responsibility of ensuring that our young people are safe in what they are doing. The water can be a dangerous and tragic place if it is not respected.
Fine Gael believes that outdoor activity centres which provide water based sports activities for children under 18 should be strictly regulated. At present there is no statutory regulation of outdoor activity centres, though many of these centres are very professionally run and have superb safety records. They have highly qualified staff members implementing a voluntary safety code, but because of the potential dangers a properly regulated safety standard must be implemented throughout the country. This will be a headache for many people in the water activity business, but it is necessary if we are serious about minimising the risk of water tragedies. This Bill proposes a licensing system to be set up by the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources in co-operation with the Health and Safety Authority. Effectively, the Authority would implement the licensing system, make proposals for safety regulations and look at each licence application separately. Depending on the activities being provided and where those activities were to be based, the Authority would decide on suitable regulations and conditions. It is recognised that that Authority will need extra resources to carry out what will initially be a tedious and laborious process, and the Department of the Marine must finance this.
This Bill will also ensure that it will be within the power of the Authority to withdraw a license in a case where conditions and regulations are not being adhered to. If we are to maximise our recreational water resources and to provide young people in particular with water sport facilities, we must ensure that safety is the priority, regardless of the cost or inconvenience. Too many young lives have been lost in lakes, rivers and the sea for us not to act for the future.
I commend Deputy Finucane on introducing this Bill. The Government should have done it in the past two years, as its necessity is quite obvious. With affluence there is much more outdoor activity as more people take advantage of their leisure time. However, many leisure activities are highly dangerous, and as Deputy Coveney rightly said, one does not mess about in boats on the sea or in rivers, canals or lakes. People risk their lives by doing so, and if statutory regulations have to be introduced to ensure the situation is regulated, particularly when it comes to adventure centres, so be it. It is amazing that we have no laws to regulate such activities. It should have been quite obvious years ago that there was a necessity for these laws, and the fact that it is regulated in Britain should have brought the need for such laws to our notice. There would obviously be a greater amount of assiduity in Britain, given the greater density of population, but this is a growing form of activity, and it will have to be regulated.
I know the Minister brought in some regulations, but those are not sufficient. The Lyme Bay incident to which Deputy Finucane referred, in which four youngsters drowned, is a case in point. The owner of the leisure centre involved was sent to prison for a lengthy period. Those children were under his care, and when they drowned he suffered the consequences: a lengthy jail sentence and a severe fine. That is as it should be.
By pure coincidence, in February 1995 I happened to be in Dunmore East on the afternoon of the tragedy involving the canoeists. At approximately 3.30 p.m. I saw the canoeists in the water close to shore, and I was appalled that any one would be left out on the open sea in any craft on a day like that. Every fishing boat in the Dunmore fleet and Waterford harbour was tied up, as there had been gale warnings coming thick and fast all day and the previous night. Strong gales were forecast. There can be no craft more susceptible to bad weather than a canoe, as the bulk of the canoe is out of the water. How children could be left out in those conditions is beyond comprehension. I said so at the time and I say so again. That children were left out without their parents' permission can only be termed criminal. There is no point trying to fudge the issue.
In future there should be laws that regulate the conditions in which children take to the sea or rivers in boats or who get involved in outdoor activity. Those laws should also regulate the supervision provided for such children. This must be done, as the sea is cruel and takes no prisoners. The Minister of State lives in a maritime county like Deputy Coveney and me. He has seen many tragedies over the years, and those tragedies primarily involved commercial fishermen, many of whom took a chance because the laws regulating their industry were so severe, and, in many cases, unfair. They took risks and paid with their lives. I could name 12 people from my area who were in the commercial fishing category who died in the past 20 years. Deputy Byrne would be able to name a similar number of people. A leisure boat sank off Duncannon four or five years ago, and several people died.
There were two tragedies and seven people were involved.
The Minister must see the need to regulate these activities. People should not be permitted to go out in boats without the basic necessities such as life jackets and flares. Boats should be seaworthy and capable of withstanding the weather conditions. You may remember, sir, that after a boating tragedy off the coast of Clare, a law was passed to regulate the number of fare-paying passengers who could be carried on a boat. Any boat licensed to carry passengers must now undergo stringent examinations. The rules are quite severe and they were introduced following that tragedy.
It was at New Quay.
I would like to think that the Government will allow this Bill to pass. If not, we will see more tragedies such as we saw in Dunmore East and elsewhere. It is sad that good weather brings a number of tragic deaths from drowning. We see tragedies on beaches, rivers and lakes when there is fine summer weather. This Bill goes some way towards imposing order on these activities. Danger is present in swimming, sailing, cruising at sea or on inland water ways and sea angling. Several deaths have occurred since sail boarding became popular 15 or 20 years ago. Sail boarders have been swept out to sea and have died from hypothermia or drowning. People use speed boats, often with very little awareness of the dangers involved, particularly when they take them out of inland waters to the merciless open sea. Water scooters are beautiful to look at on an enclosed water such as a lake but deadly when taken out of a harbour or estuary. There are many such newly popular activities and we have not legislated to control them. We ask tonight that this controlling legislation be passed. It is not too much to ask.
I hope the Minister will consider the points that have been made. We are not kill joys, we do not wish to stop people enjoying themselves. We want to save people, particularly children and young people, who take part in activities which are deadly dangerous and where there is no regulation. We want to see proprietors and those who are benefiting financially from these activities held responsible when problems arise. The Bill meets an elementary need. I hope there is consensus on this issue.
Ar dtús ba mhaith liom a rá go bhfuil áthas orm bheith anseo anocht chun páirt a ghlacadh i ndíospóireacht ar an ábhar tábhachtach seo.
The Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Woods, was most anxious to be here for the debate but is detained in Brussels because of his involvement in a meeting of EU Fisheries Ministers. I am sure everyone in the House will join with me in wishing the Minister well in his endeavours on behalf of the fishing industry.
The Bill before us deals with a very important issue. I, too, compliment Deputy Finucane on his initiative in bringing forward his proposals which give us the opportunity to discuss and debate the various issues arising from the operation of adventure centres and the philosophy which should underpin the legislative approach to be adopted in dealing with them. I understand there are upwards of 100 centres run by private interests, scouting bodies or vocational education committees currently operating all round the country providing training and participation in a number of activities. These range from sailing, power boating, scuba diving, windsurfing, hill walking, pony trekking, canoing, archery, rock climbing, abseiling, caving, pot holing, orienteering, rafting, skiing, jet skiing, parachuting and sky diving to kayaking and bungee jumping.
All adventure activities, by their very nature, involve a certain amount of thrill and excitement which is what attracts participants to them but the obverse of the coin is that, fundamentally, they also involve an element of risk. The challenge facing individual participants who partake of such activities entirely on their responsibility without reference to any organisation or body and commercial, sporting and public bodies who provide such activities in an organised way is to minimise and control the level of that risk. Individuals indulging in such activities on their own account have to take full responsibility for their own actions and, apart from any other consideration, anyone who provides organised activities for members of the general public, other than sporting clubs, is required under the general law to exercise a duty of care towards their customers.
Furthermore, as they are workplaces for those involved in the leadership or training activities, adventure centres are regulated and inspected under the Health and Safety Act which requires safety statements to be in place in the interest of the protection of the workers involved. I have consulted my colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Kitt, about this and he advises me that the Health and Safety Authority is primarily responsible for issues concerning workplace health and safety. The statutory remit of the authority does not, however, extend to matters of general public safety which is a much wider concept than that of occupational safety.
The whole thrust of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, 1989, under which the authority was established, relates to occupational safety and health in places of work. It is concerned with the protection of workers from risks to their safety and health which might arise in the course of the work, physical risks to their safety, injury or death from the improper use of work equipment or other unsafe work practices and health risks such as the development of occupational diseases from working with various substances. The 1989 Act is intended to protect the public only to the extent that where a danger arises from work activities or processes carried on in areas where the public might be present, either on the premises or in the vicinity of where the work is taking place, those responsible for the work should take suitable measures to prevent such danger. For these reasons, the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, is opposed to the piecemeal extension of the authority's remit as proposed in the Bill.
We must not forget that centres currently operating provide a considerable level of employment very often in remote areas where alternative employment opportunities are few and far between. Nevertheless, we must accept that there are currently no standards provided in law, governing levels of competence of instructors or leaders, equipment or procedures. Such standards would reasonably have the aim of ensuring that persons engaging in activities at adventure centres are not exposed to avoidable danger through incompetence or inexperience of instructors, faulty or misused equipment or unsafe procedures. It is probably the case that participants very often have little or no experience, as was mentioned by all three speakers.
These considerations do not apply solely to water-based activities. They apply across the whole range of adventure activities I mentioned earlier and this is the main difficulty that Deputy Finucane's Bill causes for me as Minister of State in the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources. I do not accept that adventure activities which are water-based are in some sense more dangerous or acquiring regulation to an extent greater than activities that take place in other spheres – in many instances, the very opposite is the case. I do not want to go into the area of one competing with the other because the hearts of Deputies Finucane, Coveney and Deasy are in the right place.
To move forward on the basis of this Bill would mean that adventure centres in the marine area would be discriminated against as against those in the non-marine area. It also raises the question of the position of those centres currently providing marine and non-marine activities at the same location which would thereby be placed in the anomalous situation of being tightly regulated in respect of some operations, while being left entirely to their own devices in respect of others conducted from the same premises, some of which as I already indicated may be considered to be more dangerous and requiring more regulation. Many of the outdoor pursuit centres around our coast, particularly those run by the vocational education committees, would be cases in point.
What is required is a comprehensive review of the regulatory requirements for all adventure centres and all types of adventure activities currently provided in the State. In that context, this Bill, which I accept is brought forward with the best of motives, is premature. We should wait until we have had detailed consideration of the range of issues arising in the area of adventure centres as a whole before we proceed to act.
This is what was done in the UK in the Activity Centres (Young Persons' Safety) Act, 1995, on which I presume Deputy Finucane has drawn heavily in drafting his measure as it seems to mirror that legislation almost word for word. I find it difficult, therefore, to understand why the Deputy restricted the Bill to water based activities only when the model on which it was based deals with all adventure activities.
We said we would start with water based activities and that it could be extended to other areas.
I understand the Deputy's point and welcome his initiative.
The UK Act provided a framework for licensing and policing all adventure centres under the aegis of the health and safety authorities there and provided for making ancillary regulations by the Secretary of State for Employment and Education who was given overall responsibility in the matter. I understand the reason the health and safety people in Britain were involved in implementing the legislation was that they came under the aegis of the Employment and Education Department. In any event, I am informed they have a much wider remit than the Health and Safety Authority here.
I further understand that in practice the implementation of the UK legislation has given rise to some difficulties and that a review of it is currently taking place after only three years in operation. We must take note of the UK experience, having regard to the practical difficulties which have arisen in implementing its legislation and adapt its system to the specific requirements applying in Ireland.
I have been assured by various representative industry bodies that they are most anxious to have in place a regime which guarantees the utmost level of safety for all those participating in any form of adventure sport in Ireland. However, they insist that any such regime, whether legislative or self-regulating or a mixture of both, should be all inclusive and fully comprehensive, that is, it must apply to all centres, whether in the public or private sectors and to all types of activity. This is particularly important in our circumstances as adventure activity is so much a part of the tourism infrastructure here. With that in mind, a broad-ranging review has begun of the safety of all adventure centres here, involving senior officials of all the Departments involved, including my Department, the Departments of Education and Science, Environment and Local Government, Tourism and Sport and Enterprise, Trade and Employment. This review is expected to be completed by the end of June and the outcome will be acted on speedily as soon as possible thereafter.
In the meantime efforts are being made by my Department to improve the levels of safety awareness generally among those who use the sea, either for profit or pleasure, and to try to engender a safety culture among our seagoing population, which is the aim of Deputy Finucane's Bill. There is an ongoing publicity campaign in train whereby the Department in conjunction with the National Safety Council, the Irish Sailing Association, the RNLI, the Irish Canoe Union and other interested Departments prepares appropriate safety material for release. Last year a total of six informational and advisory full colour leaflets were produced in the "Safety on the Water" series. They included: man overboard procedures for fishing vessels; man overboard procedures for pleasure craft; emergency procedures for fishing vessels; emergency procedures for pleasure craft; notice to users of jet skis and fast power craft and lifejackets and buoyancy aids.
These have been widely disseminated to all user bodies, including all known adventure centres and were circulated during the course of the various open days and rescue demonstrations organised by the Irish Marine Emergency Service of my Department around the coast. During 1999 it is planned to carry out a customer survey to measure the level of public awareness and the effectiveness of this publication programme and it will be adapted accordingly if necessary and additional material generated. As part of the awareness programme, a total of 29 marine notices issued from the Department's safety services during 1998. These dealt with a wide range of safety issues, including fishing vessel safety and notification of new standards for shipping generally.
We now have total coverage of the whole coastline on VHF radio through a network of master and slave radio stations operated by IMES on a 24 hour basis. This means that anyone in difficulty on the coastline who possesses a VHF radio can contact IMES immediately and secure assistance in the same way as they can be contacted through the general emergency number 999. Additional VHF stations are constantly being added to improve the level of coverage and to eliminate the number of areas where the operation of VHF is poor because of local topographic conditions. The Department is also in the process of providing the necessary infrastructure for the adoption of digital selective calling at all coastal VHF sites by the end of 1999. This system enables IMES to be called automatically by pressing a button on one's radio without the need to operate a handset and deliver a spoken message thus increasing the chances of rescue in an emergency.
Should anyone have the misfortune to get into difficulties off our coast in present circumstances there is now in place a considerable array of equipment and resources which can be summoned to their aid. I am sure everyone joins with me in thanking IMES, the RNLI, lighthouse operators, the Garda and Civil Defence for their wonderful response to those in difficulty around our coasts. The equipment and resources include two medium load Sikorski helicopters based at Shannon and Dublin providing an all-weather 24-hour response with a capability of rescuing up to 14 people 200 miles from shore and an in-air response time of 15 minutes between 7.30 a.m. and 9 p.m. and 45 minutes otherwise; one Air Corps Dauphin helicopter based at Finner Camp, County Donegal; and one Air Corps Alouette helicopter based at Waterford airport, which will be upgraded shortly to a Dauphin giving all-weather 24 hour capability and ensuring that Ireland has a world class helicopter search and rescue coverage. I am delighted this development will cover the south-east. We are very happy to have strong associations with and great co-operation from the RAF who have assisted us on many occasions.
We have a network of 50 IMES coastal units located around the coast, manned by IMES volunteers and a network of RNLI all-weather and inshore lifeboats which is in the process of being constantly upgraded in this their 175th anniversary year. I have been around the coasts on many occasions at launches and to celebrate the wonderful work of the RNLI which, as Deputies know, is a voluntary organisation. The search and rescue facilities of my Department are currently in the process of being extended to inland waterways so that anyone getting into difficulties on, say, the Shannon waterway or the large lakes in the west and the midlands will be on the same footing as those at sea.
As announced by the Minister some time ago, work is proceeding on the establishment of a coastguard service which will be based initially on the IMES headquarters and coastal networks. I am very conscious of what Deputy Finucane said that prevention is better than cure and we all agree with Deputy Deasy in asking for respect for the sea, whether it is two feet of water or 200 feet. On a personal note, I am very glad recognition is being given to the personnel of the IMES coastal units who are available on an all year round basis to help with search and rescue efforts in local areas. Apart from their incorporation into the new coastguard I was very glad to be associated with a recent event in Dublin Castle when gallantry, meritorious and long service medals were presented to a large number of long serving members.
It will be clear from what I have said that questions of safety of life at sea are receiving the top priority they deserve in my Department at all times, and that will continue. I refer to an incident which occurred four years ago in Waterford which very probably prompted Deputy Finucane to introduce the proposal under discussion and was mentioned by three Deputies already, the unfortunate deaths of two young canoeists at Dunmore East in February 1995. My home overlooks Waterford estuary. The person who was in the water for eight hours came to shore about half a mile from my home. The following day I spent some time looking for one of the two who, happily, was found. The other unfortunately was not. Living on the coast I know full well and understand and appreciate the intention behind the Bill.
As regards the tragedy at Dunmore East, my Department looked at all the circumstances surrounding that sad event and made the following safety recommendations for canoeing activity on or near the sea or on large open lakes: all equipment including canoes, helmets, buoyancy aids, paddles, cagoules and both wet and dry suits should be made more visible by attaching retroreflective tape – this would assist the rescue services in locating a person or canoe in the water, especially in heavy seas and poor visibility, be it by way of lifeboat or helicopter; all persons should have a whistle capable of being used in the water, which should be attached to the wrist; a hand flare should be issued to each canoeist and the leader of a group of canoeists should have at least one parachute flare; the leader of a group should carry a handheld marine VHF radio and be capable of operating it; the area of operation of canoe training should be carefully defined and the persons in charge of training should be made fully aware of such areas; a checklist of all the necessary requirements, including weather forecasts and updates as appropriate, should be complied with prior to departure, simple necessities all too often forgotten; the leader of a group should inform the relevant local authorities, for example, the harbour office, pilot station and coast radio station, giving them the time of departure, area of operation, expected time of arrival, number in group and type and numbers of equipment in use; anyone going to sea for leisure purposes should talk to experienced people such as fishermen in the local harbour and make use of the resources already in place; and lifejackets should be worn for sea or open water canoeing.
Those recommendations were incorporated in a leaflet issued in 1997 as part of my Department's information campaign and I have no doubt that they will save many lives in the future no matter what comes about as a result of our deliberations. Deputy Finucane is to be complimented on his initiative in relation to this important issue. All sides of the House recognise the need for progress in this area. As far as this matter is concerned, I would like to think we are all on the same team. I accept that no one is trying to score political points. We are all trying to eliminate the dangers for as many as possible. Buddy Miller, the retired secretary of the Rosslare lifeboat, used to say at the beginning of every year that he would like to see a year pass without a drowning at sea and that is what we want to achieve.
Molaim an Teachta Ó Finnucáin as ucht an mBille um Ionaid Ghníomhaíochta (Sábháilteacht Uisce do Dhaoine Óga), 1998 a chur os comhair na Dála. I compliment Deputy Finucane for bringing this important Bill before the House. As the Minister of State said, the genesis of this legislation dates to a tragedy in my constituency in February 1995 when a young man and a boy were lost. I know the young man's family and in addition to the tragedy they endured a period of great anguish and pain when waiting for the remains to be recovered. A considerable time passed before his body was found, off the Welsh coast. This terrible tragedy brought deep sorrow to two families but that the Oireachtas is discussing and addressing the issue of safety may bring some small comfort to them. Much as we regret what happened and restate our sympathy to those bereaved, we now look forward.
This is not a large Bill but it contains what is necessary and the Labour Party is happy to support it. I have some comments, which are offered in a constructive way. The Bill should define the word "safety", which only occurs once in the text. The legislation gives a great deal of power to the Minister – it seems that those who did not fulfil the conditions of licences issued under the Bill could be brought before the courts on indictable offences arising from regulations introduced by a Minister. This is not common and I am not sure it is a good idea. Indictable offences cannot be created by regulations under the European Communities Act, for instance. I gather the Government will not support the Bill but the Labour Party would wish to introduce a number of amendments on Committee Stage, should we reach it.
Activities relating to water, such as leisure centre activities and canoeing, are becoming much more popular and are part of our tourism and leisure facilities. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds can benefit from having access to water sport. These activities are good for young people. However, self-regulation is not appropriate to this sector because the sea is dangerous, unforgiving and can change rapidly. I take the Minister's point that the spirit of this debate is constructive. We seek to address an important area and to introduce a regulatory regime which will dramatically improve the position, in so far as regulations can improve safety.
The Bill should be fleshed out. Whereas regulations can be introduced for some areas, the main offences should be listed in the primary legislation. There is merit in giving the licensing function to the Health and Safety Authority – although this is not the view of the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt – because it makes use of an existing structure with a great repository of experience in health and safety. The Bill should also address the policing of regulations. The HSA has safety officers but we need specialist inspectors who could keep a close eye on water related activities requiring licensing. The Bill relates to activities provided for people aged under 18 and therefore the regulations will not cover adults. There may be a constitutional reason for this.
I am disappointed the legislation is not being accepted and allowed proceed to Committee Stage. I have no doubt Deputy Finucane would be as flexible as possible in terms of changes which other colleagues, including the Government, would want to introduce to improve the legislation. That the legislation is being stopped at Second Stage, given the strong probability that the Government will vote it down, is regrettable. There is a need to flag concern about this issue, that this State is serious about protecting those under 18 years of age who take part in water related activities, that those who conduct the activities and provide facilities and so on get a clear message that because of the inherent danger in these activities only first class standards of operation are acceptable and in the event of carelessness the State will deal effectively with it.
Given the unanimity, I ask the Minister to consider the position and not to oppose the Bill on Second Stage. It is not contrary to any legitimate aspiration of the Government. Therefore it should be accepted on Second Stage so that it can be further debated, improved and strengthened. If it got to that stage the Government would wish to have a large input.
As a former Minister of State, I introduced regulations. In areas where public safety is involved there is a need to state clearly in primary legislation the basic offences, although that is done to some extent in relation to the sentences. The sentences relate to regulations that have to be introduced. It is important that the primary legislation clearly and unequivocally states the matters which could be the subject of indictable prosecution down the line.
The incident that gave rise to this legislation was a terrible canoeing tragedy. As the Minister said, the development of so many other activities is a large part of what is happening throughout the country. Legislation can anticipate other developments. If the legislation contains the right framework, the licensing process can reach other activities that may be provided in the future. This legislation arises from a great tragedy and a determination that, as far as possible, tragedies such as this could never happen again. There is always a need to signal danger. As a former teacher, I know it is not easy to make young people aware of the dangers. Much good work is done through the Department of the Environment and Local Government and local authorities in terms of swimming activities during the summer. Some voluntary bodies provide expert coastguards and so on. Many competent and professional organisations outside the State or local authority sector lack the necessary funding to provide services.
It took some considerable time to get the lifeguard service in place at a beach in my constituency where there are certain difficulties. Apart from the Bill and the particular issue of licensing and the regulation of that regime afterwards, a comprehensive study should be conducted of all water activities in which young people take part. The black spots should be noted and there should be a definite policy and commitment – as well as the necessary resources to close off the dangerous areas. Accidents take place each year. Young people swim in areas from which they have been warned to keep away. While the warning signs are visible they still find their way to these areas where tragedies occur.
There is a gravitation towards the cities. For the balanced development of young people, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, it is important to gain access to adventure in a rural context whether maritime or inland. That type of activity is important when children develop a competence at particular sporting activities. It builds up their self-esteem and makes them more effective.
A properly regulated industry involving water related activities could provide much employment. Some economists hold the view that the tourism and leisure area has the most potential in terms of job creation. Some of this worthwhile employment could be year round and would give children from urban areas an opportunity to take part in healthy activities which are in general denied to them. However, there must be the highest standards of safety.
The long title of the Bill mentions adventure activities, including provision for the imposition of requirements relating to safety. There have been too many tragedies involving water although accidents can happen in the best regulated circumstances. However, much more can be done in terms of regulation. I was most impressed by the work done with young people whose lives were not progressing as they should. Involvement in water and adventure activities was of tremendous benefit to them. It made them better people and more effective citizens. They had a more positive contribution to make to society.
The events outside Dunmore East in February 1995 which led to the loss of young people's lives are irreversible. All the regret and sympathy we feel will not change that position. I appeal to the Minister to ensure the Government does not oppose Second Stage of the Bill. The legislation would ensure that something good came of that terrible tragedy. I make these comments in a constructive sense and do not wish to score political points. That type of politics is unbecoming and should not be any part of this debate.
Additions should be made to strengthen the Bill. The Minister and his Department have more expertise available to them than members of the Opposition. I ask the Minister to reconsider the Bill in the context of whatever amendments are required to ensure it is effective, acceptable and most importantly, respected. The issue is one which requires the Government to be open and to allow the Bill to proceed to the next Stage. No face would be lost in allowing that, although that is not the Government's motivation in opposing Second Stage. There should be a rethink and the Bill should not be opposed on Second Stage.
Whatever work is necessary in terms of amendments should begin on both sides. Our objective should be to ensure, at the end of that process, that there is legislation of which we can be proud and which will help the people who were bereaved to feel comforted that something good and significant emerged from the tragedy. I do not wish to present emotive arguments but opposing the Bill would send out the wrong signal and this would be unfortunate. I accept the Minister's sincerity on this matter, but he indicated the Government intends to oppose the Bill and that is the wrong way forward. All Members have the same objective, which is to introduce legislation to prevent other unfortunate tragedies in the area of water related leisure activities. The Bill is not an exercise in political point scoring.
That is accepted.
In that spirit, I urge the Minister to reconsider the Bill with an open mind. I hope the result of his deliberations after this debate will ensure unity in the House on the Bill and the issues we are seeking to address. I accept the Bill needs some alteration.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Bill introduced by Deputy Finucane. I compliment the Deputy on the time and effort he put into researching and preparing the legislation.
This issue has always been of concern to me. This may appear strange given that I am from County Laois which is the most inland county in Ireland. In my younger days, and it is still the case today, the only places children could swim were the River Nore, the River Barrow and their tributaries which can be dangerous. There are often currents and whirlpools. If people in the county want to go to the sea, they must travel up to 60 miles to it. My experience is limited to what happens on the banks of rivers.
