Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 2 Jun 2010

Vol. 711 No. 2

Merchant Shipping Bill 2009: Report Stage (Resumed) and Final Stage

I move amendment No. 2 to amendment No. 53:

In subsection (2), in the first line after "ship" to insert "or any ship travelling or berthed in Irish waters".

This is a complicated situation where we effectively have a new Bill inserted into the middle of an existing Bill. In this section, I have been asking the Minister to extend the new rules so that they refer to any ship travelling or berthed in Irish waters. We had a division on this before and the Minister won the division. I made the argument before and I ask him to consider it again.

The proposed amendment would enable the Minister to make rules and regulations to prescribe the requirements for Irish nuclear carriers and the survey requirements that must be carried out in respect of those ships. We have had this discussion before and I have already indicated that the Minister has no power to prescribe survey requirements, as proposed by the Deputy, in respect of all ships travelling or berthed in Irish waters. Other ships must be surveyed and given certification in their own State. Our surveyors of ships can board and inspect any of these ships when berthed in a port here to check for certification and compliance. Ships that are not compliant may be detained until the matters are rectified.

The principle of the Deputy's amendment has already been met by current legislation, so I ask him to withdraw it on that basis.

Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendment No. 3 to amendment No. 53 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 54:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"39.—(1) No change shall be made to an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies in regard to carriage of cargo to which the nuclear carriage rules apply, other than by direct replacement, unless approved by a surveyor of ships or such person as the Minister may authorise for the purpose.

(2) Following receipt of a report referred to in section 38(5)(a) the Chief Surveyor or other surveyor of ships notified shall:

(a) if the ship is in the jurisdiction of another state to which the Convention applies, ensure that the matter is reported by the master or owner of the ship to the appropriate authorities of the government of that state, and

(b) arrange for any additional survey which in his or her opinion may be required in the circumstances under the nuclear carriage rules.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 55:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

‘40.—(1) A surveyor of ships may board and inspect any ship for the purpose of seeing that it complies with this Chapter and the nuclear carriage rules.

(2) If a surveyor of ships finds that a ship to which this Chapter applies fails to comply with any provisions of this Chapter or relevant requirements of the nuclear carriage rules he or she shall give a notice in writing to the owner or master stating in what respect the ship fails to comply with them.

(3) A surveyor of ships may board and inspect any ship for the purposes of seeing that a notice under this section has been complied with.

(4) A surveyor of ships may for the purposes of an inspection make such tests (either on the ship or ashore or at dock), ask such questions, inspect such documents or records and have access to such parts of the ship as he or she considers appropriate for that purpose.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 56:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"41.—(1) If an owner or master of a ship to which this Chapter applies fails to comply with any of the duties required of him or her under section 38 (other than subsections (4) and (5) of that section) then the owner of the ship (if in fault) and the master of the ship (if in fault) commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(2) In the case of a ship to which this Chapter applies—

(a) an international certificate of fitness (INF) for the time being in force in respect of the ship is not available on board for examination in contravention of section 38(4),

(b) the owner or master of the ship, without reasonable excuse, fails to make a report as provided for in section 38(5)(a) and (b), or

(c) the ship operates to carry nuclear cargo or attempts to operate or proceeds, or attempts to proceed, to sea—

(i) without an international certificate of fitness (INF) for the time being in force in respect of the ship in contravention of section 37(6)(a),

or

(ii) being regarded as an unsafe ship under section 37(6)(b), in contravention of a notice of detention under section 66,

then the owner (if in fault) and the master (if in fault) commits an offence and is liable—

(i) in the case of an offence under paragraph (a) or (b), on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(ii) in the case of an offence under paragraph (c)

(I) on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(II) on conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(3) If a ship, in respect of which a notice has been given to its owner or master under section 40(2) which requires compliance with the rules before the ship proceeds to sea, proceeds or attempts to proceed to sea, without compliance as required in the notice, then the master or owner (as the case may be) commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.”.

I move amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 56:

In subsection (1)(b), to delete “€100,000” and substitute “ten per cent of annual turnover”.

Given that there might be nuclear carriage on some ships, very significant offences could be involved here. Would the Minister be interested in going for 10% of turnover with the company in section 41? I would like him to up the fines on indictment to 10% of turnover as a major deterrent to companies.

Since we were last debating this Bill, we have seen the BP disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, which has turned into a national calamity for the US and for President Obama. We saw the value of the BP company collapse on stock markets yesterday, because people are estimating the fines and compensation that it will have to pay. The situation in the Gulf of Mexico is turning out to be the biggest environmental disaster at sea. This disaster reiterates how important it is for us to cover every conceivable angle in respect of major vessels bringing dangerous cargoes through our waters. There should be very significant consequences for the oil industry and related energy industries if they get it wrong, as BP clearly did.

Everybody hopes that something like this will never happen in Irish waters, but we have to be aware of it, hence this Bill. Perhaps the Minister should take fairly draconian powers to ensure that vessels and companies operating in our waters will comply with our environmental standards and with this Bill. I urge the Minister to go for the greater penalty of 10% of turnover. People might say that even that is very little. I noticed that President Obama and his agencies have begun criminal investigations into the behaviour of BP in the gulf, and its impact on the southern states of the United States. Will the Minister re-examine this for a final time and include strong measures in the legislation?

We discussed this on a number of occasions and I indicated previously to the Deputy that this is not the type of amendment I would like to make on the hoof to a Bill such as this. I gave a commitment to the Deputy and I will reiterate it here that we need to do further policy analysis on this and decide, if we go down this particular route, how we might make the type of decisions he is discussing on income and turnover without placing the courts in a position where they are trying to figure it out. I indicated to the Deputy that between now and when the consolidation of merchant shipping legislation is undertaken I will have considered it to see if it is a route we can take.

I take the Deputy's point on the pollution occurring in the Gulf of Mexico, which is not ship borne but due to drilling operations. In similar circumstances here the EPA would have power to levy huge fines and rightly so. I call on the Deputy to withdraw the amendment on the basis that I will consider it for inclusion in the consolidation of the merchant shipping legislation.

I welcome the Minister's comments. We are trying to create a deterrent of which people would be aware whereby very stern measures would be taken if a company engaged in practices which led to an environmental disaster in our waters. My amendment would change the wording to provide for up to 10% of turnover so it is not as precise as the Minister suggests. It would give the courts discretion. I look forward to the forthcoming consolidating legislation. The Minister told us this morning about other legislation in the marine area. On that basis, I withdraw my amendment to the amendment.

Amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 56, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 to amendment No. 56 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 57 to 64, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendments Nos. 57 to 64, inclusive.

I move amendment No. 57:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"CHAPTER 4

High-Speed Craft

42.—In this Chapter—

"accepted high-speed craft safety certificate" has the meaning assigned to it by section 45(7)(b);

"date constructed" in relation to a ship to which this Chapter applies, means the date the keel of which was laid or was at a similar stage of construction;

"High-Speed Craft Code 1994" means the International Code of Safety for High-Speed Craft adopted by the Maritime Safety Committee of the Organisation by Resolution MSC.36(63) as amended by the Maritime Safety Committee of the Organisation by Resolutions MSC.119(74), MSC.174(79) and MSC.221(82);

"High-Speed Craft Code 2000" means the International Code of Safety for High-Speed Craft, 2000 adopted by the Maritime Safety Committee of the Organisation by Resolution MSC.97(73) as amended by the Maritime Safety Committee of the Organisation by Resolutions MSC.175(79) and MSC.222(82);

"high-speed craft" means a ship capable of a maximum speed, in metres per second (m/s), equal to or exceeding:

3.7Δ0.1667 where

Δ = volume of displacement corresponding to the design waterline (m3);

but does not include craft the hull of which is supported completely clear above the water surface in non-displacement mode by aerodynamic forces generated by ground effect;

"high-speed craft safety certificate" has the meaning assigned to it by section 45(1)(a);

"high-speed craft rules" means rules made under section 44;

"maximum speed" means the speed achieved at the maximum continuous propulsion power for which the craft is certified at maximum operational weight and in smooth water;

"permit to operate (HSC)" has the meaning assigned to it by section 45(3)(a);

"place of refuge" means any naturally or artificially sheltered area which may be used as a shelter by a ship to which this section applies under conditions likely to endanger its safety;

"similar stage of construction" means the stage at which construction identifiable with a specific ship begins, and assembly of that ship has commenced comprising at least 50 tonnes or 3 per cent of the estimated mass of all structural material, whichever is the less;

"transit voyage" means a voyage for the purpose of delivery or repositioning of a ship.".

These amendments deal with a new Chapter 4 on high-speed craft. Amendment No. 57 inserts Chapter 4 to provide for the regulation under the Saving of Life at Sea, SOLAS, Convention of certain high-speed craft. The purpose of this chapter is to set out the separate standards and regulatory measures that are appropriate for high-speed craft. Ireland has no applicable high-speed craft on its flag at present.

Amendment No. 57 provides for section 42 to set definitions for terms used in Chapter 4. Amendment No. 58 provides section 43 to set out the application of Chapter 4. Amendment No. 59 provides section 44, which is a key enabling provision to allow the Minister for Transport to make high-speed craft rules. Amendment No. 60 provides section 45 for the certification and endorsement of continued compliance with standards for operation of high-speed craft. Provision is also made for the issue of permits to operate as a safety and regulatory control for safe operation to carry passengers and cargo.

Amendment No. 61 provides section 46 to impose duties on owners and masters to have high-speed craft comply with statutory requirements. Amendment No. 62 provides section 47 for continued compliance with standards and prohibits unauthorised changes to the structures and equipment of high-speed craft. Amendment No. 63 provides section 48 to confer enforcement powers for surveyors of ships to check for compliance with this chapter, the high-speed craft rules on permits to operate through inspection of vessels and the issue of notices of non-compliance. Amendment No. 64 provides section 49 to set out the maximum monetary fines that the master or owner of a high-speed craft vessel is liable for if convicted in court of breach of the provisions of this chapter.

Will I address the Labour Party amendments to the amendments or will I allow the Deputy to put the amendments and then address them?

The Minister can address them now.

The Deputy proposes to amend amendment No. 59 so that the flag under which a vessel is registered be inserted as one of the matters that regard be had to when categorising high-speed craft into classes for the purposes of making regulations and rules under section 18. We already discussed this and I indicated that I will not make a distinction on the basis of the flag of the vessel. The same requirement will apply to all vessels to which the relevant section applies. His amendment would have the opposite effect to the one he wants it to have. It could restrict us whereas as it is all of the rules apply to all craft.

Amendment No. 60 will enable the Minister to make rules and regulations to prescribe requirements for Irish high-speed craft and the survey requirements that must be carried out in respect of those ships. I already indicated that the Minister has no power to prescribe survey requirements as proposed by the Deputy in respect of all ships travelling or berthed in Irish waters. Other ships have to be surveyed and given certification in their own state and our surveyors of ships can board and inspect any of these ships when berthed in a port here to check for certification and compliance. Ships that are not compliant can be detained so the provisions of the amendment tabled by the Deputy are already covered by the section.

We have just discussed amendment No. 64 and for the reasons outlined I do not intend to accept the amendments to it that have been tabled except in the sense of considering them for consolidated merchant shipping legislation.

We have discussed the flag issue on other sections and I propose to insert it again. The Minister is making a strong case with regard to it. Past experience has not vindicated what the Minister stated on the extent to which we could monitor or invigilate all ships travelling on Irish waters. There is responsibility for the flag state and those ships which joined our register in recent years, and we are in a position to invigilate them. However, there is still a problem with ships travelling through our waters. I know we are discussing high-speed craft.

On Committee Stage we discussed accessibility. It is a separate issue but I wonder whether the Minister has done anything on it. I may have included it in Committee Stage amendments. Was the matter of accessibility in catamarans which may be used for ferry travel addressed in the changes made by the Minister?

I have already discussed this point and do so for the last time today. I do not think the Minister takes the flag issue seriously enough. The Acting Chairman is a former distinguished chairman of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and is aware of some of the issues raised and brought to our attention during the 29th Dáil. It is still unsatisfactory and an area in which we need legislation. We should move on this and not let the good name of Ireland ever be sullied through ships adopting flags of convenience simply to get rid of their workforce and put them on wages below the minimum wage with very bad working conditions. Again, I am not quite happy with the Minister in this regard. I would like to hear him again on it.

How stands this amendment? Does the Deputy want the Minister to speak on it again?

I want him to speak again on the flag and disability aspect.

We recently published, for the first time ever, guidelines for accessible maritime passenger transport. Those rules and guidelines apply now. They were issued under the Disability Act to provide practical advice and information for those involved in the provision of maritime passenger transport services and cover all aspects of maritime passenger journeys. For example, they provide advice on providing accessibility information for the planning of a journey, improvements to shore side facilities in ports, harbours and piers, improving access on board vessels, disability awareness training for staff, emergency planning and improving customer relations for mobility impaired passengers.

We did that because we obviously support and encourage the continued improvements, as does the Deputy, in accessible maritime passenger transport services because it gives people with disabilities the chance to avail of those facilities. From the point of view of accessibility they have been catered for, not just in this section. An earlier section, the number of which I cannot recall, deals with accessibility. We have the guidelines in place. That point is addressed.

The point I am making about the flag ship is that it would be impossible for Ireland to have to clear every vessel which comes into our waters. It is a flag state responsibility, except when they dock in Ireland. We the have the power to board and detain, which is sufficient for the concerns which the Deputy has.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 58:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"43.—(1) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), this Chapter applies to Irish ships which are high-speed craft constructed—

(i) on or after 1 January 1996 and before 1 July 2002 under the High-Speed Craft Code 1994 or on or after 1 July 2002 under the High-Speed Craft Code 2000, and

(ii) to any other ship so constructed, while it is within any port in the State, unless it would not have been in any such port but for stress of weather or any other circumstance that neither the master nor the owner of the ship could have prevented or forestalled, and which does not proceed in the course of its voyage—

(I) where the ship is a passenger ship, more than 4 hours at 90 per cent of maximum speed from a place of refuge, and

(II) in any other case, being of 500 gross tonnage and upwards, more than 8 hours at 90 per cent of maximum speed from a place of refuge when fully laden.

(b) Paragraph (a) does not apply to—

(i) high-speed passenger craft to which Article 3 of Directive 2009/45/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 20091 on safety rules and standards for passenger ships (recast) applies, or

(ii) ships of war, troopships, fishing vessels and pleasure yachts not engaged in trade.

(2) The following do not apply to a ship to which this Chapter applies, namely—

(a) rules made under—

(i) section 10, 15, or 18 of the Act of 1952,

(ii) section 3 of the Act of 1966, and

(iii) section 31 or 33 of this Act,

(b) the issue of a general certificate, short voyage safety certificate, a qualified safety certificate or a qualified short voyage safety certificate as referred to in section 20 of the Act of 1952,

1OJ, 25.06.09, L163, p.1

(c) the issue of a safety equipment certificate under section 22 or of a radio certificate under section 23 of the Act of 1952,

(d) the issue of a cargo ship safety construction certificate under section 4 of the Act of 1966,

(e) the issue of a passenger ship’s certificate under section 8 of the Act of 1992 or under that section as applied by the European Communities (Passenger Ships) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 716 of 2004),

(f) the issue of a cargo ship safety certificate under section 13 of this Act, and

(g) the provisions of—

(i) section 26 of the Act of 1952, and

(ii) section 12 of the Act of 1992.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 59:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"44.—(1) The Minister may, in relation to any ships to which this Chapter applies, make rules ("high-speed craft rules") prescribing requirements for—

(a) the design, construction, machinery of and fuel used in, equipment, subdivision and stability, electrical installations, fire protection, lifesaving appliances and arrangements, navigation and tracking, and radio communications of such ships,

(b) the management, operation and maintenance of such ships,

(c) repairs, alterations, modifications and outfitting related to it, and

(d) such ships to be surveyed to such extent, and in such manner and at intervals as may be prescribed by the rules.

(2) Without prejudice to subsection (1) high-speed craft rules may include requirements for all or any of the following matters—

(a) buoyancy and stability of the ship,

(b) structure of the ship,

(c) accommodation and escape measures,

(d) directional control, anchoring, towing and berthing of the ship,

(e) fire safety and life saving appliances and arrangements,

(f) machinery, auxiliary systems, remote control, alarm and safety systems,

(g) electrical installations, shipborne navigational systems and equipment and voyage data recorders,

(h) radiocommunications,

(i) navigation and tracking systems and equipment and voyage data recorders,

(j) operating compartment layout,

(k) stabilisation systems, handling, controllability and performance of the ship,

(l) operational limits and requirements including craft operational control, recording of passenger details, training and qualifications of crew, manning survival craft and supervision, emergency instructions and drills,

(m) inspection and maintenance requirements,

(n) ship’s management,

(o) carriage on board of adequate information and guidance in the form of technical manuals to enable the ship to be operated and maintained safely,

(p) notification of accidents or defects,

(q) format for high-speed craft safety certificates and permit to operate (HSC), and

(r) conditions and procedures relating to the application for and grant of permit to operate (HSC).

(3) In making high-speed craft rules the Minister may categorise ships into different classes having regard to one or more of the following, where appropriate—

(a) the service for which such ships are to be employed,

(b) the nature and duration of voyages to be undertaken,

(c) the type and quantity of cargo such ships are designed to carry on board,

(d) the age and date of construction of such ships,

(e) the number of passengers or other persons, or both, that such ships are designed to carry on board, and

(f) such other matter or matters that the Minister considers appropriate to take into account in the circumstances.

(4) Different high-speed craft rules may be made in respect of different classes of ship for different circumstances and for different areas of operation.

(5) High-speed craft rules shall include such requirements as appear to the Minister to be necessary to implement the provisions of the Safety Convention, including the HSC codes, in relation to high-speed craft.

(6) Subject to subsection (2), the powers conferred on the Minister by this Chapter are in addition to the powers conferred by any other enactment enabling him or her to prescribe the requirements that ships to which this Chapter applies must comply with.”.

Amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 59 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 60:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"45.—(1) (a) Where after a declaration of survey, made by a surveyor of ships following a survey under the high-speed craft rules of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies, is received by the Minister and if he or she is satisfied that the ship complies with such rules as are relevant to such ship, he or she shall issue, in respect of the ship, a certificate (“highspeed craft safety certificate”) in the form prescribed in the high-speed craft rules.

(b) In this subsection “declaration of survey” means a declaration made under section 272 (as applied by section 27(2) of the Act of 1952 and section 3(4) of the Act of 1966) of the Principal Act.

(c) A survey under paragraph (a), subsection (2)(a) and (b) and sections 46(2) and 47(3)(b) includes a survey by a radio surveyor, within the meaning of section 16 of the Act of 1952.

(2) (a) An Irish ship in respect of which a high-speed craft safety certificate is in force shall be subject to such further survey or surveys as are provided for in the high-speed craft rules to ensure that the ship continues to comply with the requirements of such rules.

(b) Where, following a survey referred to in paragraph (a), the Minister is satisfied that the ship continues to comply with the requirements of the high-speed craft rules he or she shall endorse the high-speed craft safety certificate to that effect.

(3) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), the Minister may issue in respect of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies and for which there is a high-speed craft safety certificate for the time being in force, a permit to operate a high-speed craft (“permit to operate (HSC)”), in the form prescribed in the high-speed craft rules, stipulating the conditions of operation for such ship, where he or she is satisfied that the requirements of the high-speed craft rules relevant to the ship in relation to the issue of such a permit, are being complied with.

(b) Before a permit to operate (HSC) is issued to a ship to which this Chapter applies which is intended to operate on international voyages, the Minister, or such person as he or she may have appointed for that purpose, shall consult with the appropriate authorities of the government of each state to which the ship is to voyage, to obtain details of any operational conditions associated with the operation of the ship in that state which they may require and these operational conditions shall be included in the permit to operate (HSC).

(4) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies—

(i) must not proceed or attempt to proceed to sea unless a high-speed craft safety certificate for the time being in force in respect of the ship, and

(ii) must not operate or attempt to operate to carry passengers or cargo unless a permit to operate (HSC) for the time being in force in respect of the ship in relation to such carriage, is in force in relation to it.

(b) A ship to which this Chapter applies may undertake transit voyages without a permit to operate (HSC) for the time being in force in respect of the ship provided there is a high-speed craft safety certificate for the time being in force in relation to it, and—

(i) the ship is not transporting passengers or cargo,

(ii) the owner has developed a safety plan for the voyage,

(iii) the master is provided with the materials and information necessary to operate the ship safely during the voyage, and

(iv) the Minister, or such person as he or she may authorise for the purpose, is satisfied that arrangements have been made for the safe conduct of the voyage.

(c) An Irish ship which—

(i) proceeds, or attempts to proceed, to sea without a high-speed craft safety certificate for the time being in force in respect of the ship in contravention of paragraph (a)(i),

(ii) operates, or attempts to operate, to carry passengers or cargo without a permit to operate (HSC) for the time being in force in respect of the ship in contravention of paragraph (a)(ii), or

(iii) undertakes transit voyages in contravention of paragraph (b), shall be regarded as an unsafe ship for the purposes of Chapter 7.

(5) (a) Subject to paragraphs (b) and (c), a high-speed craft safety certificate shall be in force for a period not exceeding 5 years or such shorter period as may be specified in it. The certificate may be cancelled where the Minister, or such person as he or she may authorise for the purpose, is satisfied that the ship no longer complies with any of the requirements of the high-speed craft rules applicable to it.

(b) The Minister may extend the period for which a high-speed craft safety certificate may be in force subject to a maximum period not exceeding 5 years and 5 months as may be prescribed in the high-speed craft rules.

(c) A high-speed craft safety certificate ceases to be in force—

(i) if any relevant survey of it has not been completed within the periods specified for such survey as prescribed by the high-speed craft rules or as required under section 47(3)(b),

(ii) if such certificate is not endorsed under subsection (2)(b),

(iii) upon any unapproved alteration affecting the safety or certification of the ship in contravention of section 47(1)(a), or

(iv) upon transfer of the ship to the flag of another state.

(6) (a) Subject to paragraphs (b) and (c), a permit to operate (HSC) is in force for a period not exceeding 5 years or such shorter period as may be specified in it and may be cancelled where the Minister is satisfied that the conditions for the grant of such permit are no longer being complied with.

(b) The Minister may extend the period for which a permit to operate (HSC) under this Chapter may be in force subject to an overall maximum period of validity of 5 years and 5 months for any such permit.

(c) A permit to operate (HSC) in respect of a ship to which this Chapter applies ceases to be in force whenever the high-speed craft safety certificate for such ship ceases to be in force.

(7) (a) Sections 27(9) and 28(1) of the Act of 1952 apply in relation to highspeed craft safety certificates as they apply to a certificate the issue of which is authorised under that Act.

(b) Section 28(2) of the Act of 1952 applies in relation to high-speed craft safety certificates as it applies to a certificate issued under that Act and a high-speed craft safety certificate issued by the government of another country, other than the State, to which the Safety Convention applies, under such Safety Convention, in respect of a ship to which this Chapter applies, other than an Irish ship, and accepted as having the same force in the State as a high-speed craft safety certificate shall be referred to as an accepted high-speed craft safety certificate.

(8) (a) The references to a high-speed craft safety certificate in subsection (4) (a)(i), (7), and section 49(2)(a) and (d), shall, in the case of a ship other than an Irish ship, be read as meaning an accepted high-speed craft safety certificate.

(b) The references to a permit to operate (HSC) in subsection (4)(a)(ii) and in section 49(2)(b) and (e) shall, in the case of a ship to which this Chapter applies, other than an Irish ship, be construed as meaning a permit for the time being in force to operate a high-speed craft issued by the appropriate authorities of the government of a state to which the Safety Convention applies, other than the State, in accordance with the High-Speed Craft Code 1994 or the High-Speed Craft Code 2000.

(9) The Minister may authorise on his or her behalf a person to issue, endorse, cancel or extend a high-speed craft safety certificate or a permit to operate (HSC).".

Amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 60 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 61:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"46.—(1) It is the duty of the owner and master of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies—

(a) to ensure it complies with the requirements of the high-speed craft rules, and

(b) to maintain such ship in conformity with the high-speed craft rules to ensure that the ship in all respects remains fit to operate without danger to the ship or the persons on board.

(2) It is the duty of the owner and master of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies—

(a) before the ship is put into service,

(b) before the high-speed craft safety certificate is issued in its respect for the first time, and

(c) before the ship continues in service after the expiration of its high-speed craft safety certificate, to have the ship surveyed by a surveyor of ships and a radio surveyor or such other person or persons as the Minister may authorise for such purpose, in accordance with the high-speed craft rules.

(3) It is the duty of the owner and master of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies to have it surveyed under section 45(2)(a)** or section 47(3)(b)*** where required.

(4) (a) Without prejudice to section 23 of the Act of 2000, whenever an accident occurs to an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies, or a defect to such ship is discovered, either of which affects the safety of the ship or the efficiency or completeness of its structure, equipment, fittings, arrangements and materials, the owner or master of the ship must, at the earliest opportunity, report the matter to the Chief Surveyor or any other surveyor of ships in the Marine Survey Office, Department of Transport.

(b) In the case that the ship is in a port of a state to which the Safety Convention applies, other than the State, the owner or master must also report at the earliest opportunity to the appropriate authorities of the government of that state.

(5) It is the duty of the owner and master of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies—

(a) to ensure that it complies with section 45(4)**,

(b) to ensure that the permit to operate (HSC) is available on board for examination at all times, and

(c) to ensure that the high-speed craft safety certificate is available on board for examination at all times.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 62:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"47.—(1) (a) No change shall be made in the structure, equipment, fittings, arrangements and material of a ship covered by a survey under the highspeed craft rules, other than by direct replacement, without the approval of the Minister or a person authorised by him or her for such purpose.

(b) Repairs, alterations and modifications of a major character, and outfitting related thereto, in relation to a ship to which this Chapter applies, constructed on or before 1 July 2002 are required to meet the requirements for a ship constructed on or after 1 July 2002 insofar as may be directed by the Minister.

(2) (a) Where the high-speed craft rules require that a particular fitting, material, appliance or apparatus, or type of it, must be fitted or carried in a ship to which this Chapter applies, or that any particular provision must be made, the Minister, if he or she is satisfied, by trial of it or otherwise, that such fitting, material, appliance or apparatus, or type thereof, or provision, is at least as effective as that required by the rules, may allow such fitting, material, appliance or apparatus, or type thereof, or provision.

(b) Where compliance with any of the requirements of the high-speed craft rules would be impracticable in relation to the particular or novel design of a ship to which this section applies, the Minister may agree for the substitution of alternative requirements provided that he or she is satisfied that such arrangements provide equivalent safety.

(3) Following receipt of a report referred to in section 46(4)(a) the Chief Surveyor or other surveyor of ships notified shall—

(a) if the ship is in the jurisdiction of another state to which the Safety Convention applies, ensure that the matter is reported by the master or owner of the ship to the appropriate authorities of the government of that state, and

(b) arrange for any additional survey which in his or her opinion may be required in the circumstances under the high-speed craft rules.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 63:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"48.—(1) A surveyor of ships may board and inspect any ship, being a ship to which this Chapter applies, for the purpose of seeing that it complies with the highspeed craft rules including the conditions, if any, for the operation of the ship attached to its permit to operate (HSC).

(2) If a surveyor of ships finds that a ship to which this Chapter applies, fails to comply with any high-speed craft rules relevant to it or to any conditions attached to its permit to operate (HSC), he or she shall give a notice in writing to the owner or master stating in what respect the ship fails to comply with them.

(3) A surveyor of ships may board and inspect any ship to which this Chapter applies for the purposes of seeing that a notice given under this section has been complied with.

(4) A surveyor of ships may make such tests (either on the ship or ashore or at dock) ask such questions, inspect such documents or records and have access to such parts of the ship as he or she considers appropriate for that purpose.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 64:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"49.—(1) If any provision of this Chapter or of the relevant high-speed craft rules are not complied with, then the owner of the ship (if in fault) and the master of the ship (if in fault) commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(2) In case of a ship to which this Chapter applies—

(a) a high-speed craft safety certificate for the time being in force issued in respect of the ship is not available on board for examination in contravention of section (6(5)(c),

(b) a permit to operate (HSC) for the time being in force issued in respect of the ship is not available on board for examination in contravention of section 46(5)(b),

(c) the owner or master of the ship, without reasonable excuse, fails to make a report as provided for in section 46(4)(a) or (b),

(d) the ship proceeds or attempts to proceed to sea without a high-speed craft safety certificate for the time being in force issued in respect of the ship in contravention of section 45(4)(a)(i),

(e) the ship operates or attempts to operate to carry passengers or crew without a permit to operate (HSC) for the time being in force in respect of the ship as required under section 45(4)(a)(ii),

(f) undertakes a transit voyage in contravention of section 45(4)(b), or

(g) being regarded as an unsafe ship under section 45(4)(c) proceeds or attempts to proceed to sea, operates or attempts to operate to carry passengers or crew or undertakes a transit voyage in contravention of a notice of detention under section 66****, then the owner of the ship (if in fault) or the master of the ship (if in fault) commits an offence and is liable—

(i) in the case of an offence under paragraphs (a), (b) and (c), on summary conviction, to a fine of €5,000, or

(ii) in the case of an offence under paragraph (d), (e), (f) and (g)

(I) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(II) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(3) If a ship, in respect of which a notice has been given to its owner or master under section 48(2)***** which requires compliance with the rules in accordance with the notice before the ship proceeds to sea, proceeds or attempts to proceed to sea, without compliance as required in the notice, then the owner or master (as the case may be) commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.”.

Amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, to amendment No. 64 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.

I move amendment No. 65:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"50.—In this Chapter—

"at anchor" means at anchor or moored to a mooring device that is secured to the sea bed or is otherwise not in a position to provide direct means of access for passengers or crew or both to or from the shore; "passenger boat" has the meaning assigned to it in section 2(1) of the Act of 1992; "passenger ship" has the meaning assigned to it in section 2(1) of the Act of 1992; "permit to tender" means a permit to undertake tendering operations issued under section 53**; “safety management certificate” means a certificate issued under regulation 3 of the European Communities (Maritime) (International Safety Management Code) Regulations 2008 (S.I. No. 60 of 2008) or under Regulation 4 of Chapter IX of the Annex to the Safety Convention; “tender” means a passenger boat or a passenger ship which carries passengers or crew or both to or from a vessel at anchor from or to a place in the State; “tendering operation” means the carrying of passengers or crew or both to or from a ship or boat at anchor from or to a place in the State by a tender or by a vessel’s tender; “tendering operations regulations” means regulations made under section 52**; “tendering operations safety plan” means a plan covering details of the proposed tendering operation in accordance with section 52**; “vessel’s tender” means a vessel which is launched and recovered from a passenger steamer, including a passenger ship, in respect of which a valid safety management certificate is in force, for the purpose of carrying passengers or crew or both to or from a place in the State and which forms part of such steamer’s equipment and where the steamer’s safety management system encompasses the safe operation of the vessel’s tender.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 66:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"51.—(1) The owner or master of a ship or boat who proposes to undertake a tendering operation at any place in the State in respect of that ship or boat must apply to the Minister for a permit to undertake such operation ("permit to tender") by submitting, for approval, proposals in a tendering operations safety plan for such undertaking in the form as may be prescribed in regulations made under section 52(1).

(2) An application for a permit to tender must be made in good time to enable the Minister to have the proposals in the tendering operations safety plan approved or otherwise, before the date of the proposed tendering operation, and, unless notified to the contrary, no later than 28 days before the date of the proposed tendering operation.

(3) The following provisions of the Merchant Shipping Acts do not apply to a vessel's tender, namely—

(a) section 271 of the Principal Act,

(b) section 10, 15, 18 or 20 of the Act of 1952,

(c) section 6 or 15 of the Act of 1992,

(d) section 8 of the Act of 1992 or that section as applied by the European Communities (Passenger Ships) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 716 of 2004), and

(e) section 31 or 33 of this Act.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 67:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"52.—(1) The Minister may make regulations ("tendering operations regulations") for tendering operations prescribing requirements for:

(a) the submission of proposals for a tendering operations safety plan in respect of each proposed tendering operation,

(b) the issue of a permit to tender, and

(c) any consequential, incidental, ancillary and supplementary matters including, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, the charging of fees as the Minister considers necessary or expedient.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), the Minister may, in making regulations, specify the information which must be submitted in the proposals for a tendering operations safety plan including requirements for the following matters, namely—

(a) identity of the ship or boat and of its operator,

(b) proposed location of the ship or boat at anchor and its distance from shore,

(c) proposed tendering location and periods of operation for the tendering operation,

(d) number of crew and passengers on board the ship or boat,

(e) safety inspection history of the ship or boat,

(f) details of each tender or of each vessel’s tender that it is proposed to use in the tendering operation including details relating to materials of construction, proposed number of crew and passengers, means of propulsion, life-saving equipment and fire fighting equipment and arrangements for the transport of personal effects,

(g) arrangements for the embarkation and disembarkation of passengers and crew or both including arrangements for berthing of the tender or vessel’s tender,

(h) operational conditions (weather, sea) and time of tendering operation,

(i) safety briefing and announcements to passengers,

(j) the keeping of operational records for each tendering operation to record the date and time of the operation, the number of tenders or of vessel’s tenders used, the number of passengers and crew carried, and details of pier used,

(k) in the case of a tender, details of the passenger boat licence or of the passenger ship’s certificate in respect of it,

(l) in the case of a vessel’s tender which is to carry more than 12 passengers, details of annual inspections carried out and the vessel’s tender insurance cover, and

(m) such other matter or matters that the Minister considers appropriate to take into account.

(3) Any fees under subsection (1) shall be paid into or disposed of for the benefit of the Exchequer.”.

Amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 67 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 68:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"53.—(1) On application of the owner or master of a ship or boat for a permit to tender the Minister or such other person as he or she may authorise for that purpose may, where he or she is satisfied that the proposals in the tendering operations safety plan are in compliance with this Chapter and with any tendering operations regulations and are sufficient to ensure the safe undertaking of the tendering operation, issue a permit in respect of the ship or boat to tender subject to such conditions as he or she sees fit.

(2) An owner or master of a ship or boat, tender or vessel's tender must not carry out or attempt to carry out tendering operations without a permit to tender for the time being in force in respect of it.

(3) If a ship or boat, a tender or a vessel's tender engage in tendering operations, or attempts to engage in tendering operations, without a permit to tender for the time being in force in respect of it, it shall be regarded as an unsafe ship for the purposes of Chapter 7*.

(4) After a permit to tender has issued no change shall be made in the undertaking of the tendering operation to which the permit relates without the prior approval of the Minister or such other person as he or she may authorise for that purpose.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 69:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"54.—(1) It is the duty of the owner and master of a ship or boat to whom a permit to tender in respect of a tendering operation has issued under section 53(1)**

(a) to undertake such operation in compliance with the permit to tender and with the conditions, if any, attaching to it,

(b) to display on board the ship or boat, in a place where passengers can view it, the permit to tender issued in respect of it,

(c) in the case of a vessel’s tender engaged in such operation, to ensure that a copy of the permit to tender is available on board for examination while the tendering operation is being undertaken, and

(d) in the case of a tender to which the permit to tender applies, to ensure that a copy of such permit is supplied to the owner or master for the purpose of having it on board the tender and available for examination while the tendering operation concerned is being undertaken.

(2) It is the duty of the owner and master of a tender to carry out a tendering operation in accordance with the permit to tender and with any conditions attached to it issued in respect of the ship or boat concerned.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 70:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"55.—(1) A surveyor of ships may board and inspect any ship or boat including any tender or vessel's tender for the purpose of seeing that a permit to tender is being complied with (either on the ship or boat, at anchor, ashore or at dock) at any time for that purpose.

(2) A surveyor of ships may for the purposes of an inspection under this section make such tests (either on the ship or boat, at anchor, ashore or at dock), ask such questions, inspect such documents or records and have access to such parts of the ship or boat as he or she considers appropriate for that purpose.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 71:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"56.—(1) If any condition of a permit to tender or a provision of any tendering operations regulations is not complied with, then the owner (if in fault) or the master (if in fault) of the ship or boat commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(2) If the owner or master of a ship or boat to which this Chapter applies carries out or attempts to carry out tendering operations without a valid permit to tender for the time being in force in respect of the ship or boat, then the owner (if in fault) or the master (if in fault) commits an offence and is liable— (a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or (b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(3) If—

(a) the permit to tender is not displayed on the ship, boat or tender in compliance with section 54(1)(b), or

(b) a copy of the relevant permit to tender is not available for examination on a vessel’s tender in compliance with section 54(1)(c), or

(c) a copy of the relevant permit has not been supplied to the owner or master of a tender in compliance with section 54(1)(b), or

(d) if a ship, boat or tender or a vessel’s tender being regarded as an unsafe ship under section 53(3) engages or attempts to engage in tendering operations, in contravention of a notice of detention under section 66, then the owner (if in fault) or master (if in fault) of the ship or boat commits an offence and is liable—

(i) in the case of an offence under paragraph (a), (b) or (c), on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(ii) in the case of an offence under paragraph (d)

(I) on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(II) on conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(4) Where a copy of a permit to tender has been supplied by the owner or master of a ship or boat to the owner or master of a tender in respect of a tendering operation to be undertaken and it is not subsequently available for examination on the tender while the tendering operation concerned is being undertaken, the owner (if in fault) or master (if in fault) of the tender commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000.

(5) If a tendering operation is not carried out in accordance with a permit to tender and any condition attached to it issued in respect of the ship or boat concerned, then the owner (if in fault) or the master (if in fault) of the tender commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.”.

Amendments Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, to amendment No. 71 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 72 to 78, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together with any amendments thereto.

I move amendment No. 72:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"CHAPTER 6

Safe Manning Regulations

57.—In this Chapter—

"accepted minimum safe manning document" has the meaning assigned to it by section 60(4)**; “approved ship’s security plan” means the security plan for the ship approved by the Minister under Regulation (EC) No. 725/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on enhancing ship and port security2; “IMO number” means the identification number which conforms to the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) ship identification number scheme adopted by the IMO under regulation 3.2 of chapter XI-I of the Safety Convention; “IMO principles of safe manning” means the principles of safe manning adopted on 25 November 1999 by Resolution A.890(21) of the Conference of Contracting Governments to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea 1974, as amended by Resolution A.955(23) adopted by such Conference on 5 December 2003; “minimum safe manning document” means, in relation to a ship to which this Chapter applies, a document issued by or on behalf of the Minister under section 60 (1)**; “passenger ship” has the meaning assigned to it in section 2(1) of the Act of 1992; “safe manning regulations” means regulations made under section 59***.”.

The purpose of this amendment is to insert Chapter 6 to put enabling provisions in place for the regulation of safe manning on solace ships. Amendment No. 72 provides section 57 to give definitions of the terms used in Chapter 6. Amendment No. 73 provides section 58 to set out the application of Chapter 6. Amendment No. 74 provides section 59, which is a key enabling provision to allow the Minister for Transport to make safe manning regulations to prescribe requirements for the appropriate minimum safe manning of solace ships. There is separate legislation under domestic and European Community law to regulate the safe manning and safety management of other vessels.

I understand amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 74 in respect of section 59, which was tabled by Deputy Broughan, was ruled out of order.

The Minister can discuss it anyway.

If it was ruled out of order I had better not. We can return to the amendments to the amendments. I will continue to speak to my amendments. Amendment No. 75 provides section 60 to prescribe a procedure for the submission of proposals to the Minister for transport by the owner of an Irish ship on international voyages for safe manning and the issue of safe manning documents. No unauthorised change can be made in the minimum safe manning of the ship. A ship is prohibited from going to sea without having a minimum safe manning document in force.

Amendment No. 76 provides section 61 to impose duties on owners and masters of ships, to which this Chapter applies, to comply with safe manning requirements. Amendment No. 77 provides 62 which provides enforcement powers for surveyors of ships to check for compliance with this Chapter through the inspection and issue of notices of non-compliance. Amendment No. 78 provides section 63 to set out the maximum monetary fines that the master or owner of a ship are liable for if convicted in court of the breach of minimum safe manning requirements.

The two amendments to amendment No. 78 address the 10% annual turnover. We have had a full discussion on those and have reached an agreement as to how we will approach that in the future.

I am advised that one of Deputy Broughan's amendments to the amendment is out of order as it is outside the scope of the Bill. It could relate to labour laws, entitlements and workers' terms and conditions, and these factors are not comprehended within this Bill. The Deputy can speak on the second amendment to the amendment.

The second amendment to the amendment refers to a ship berthed in Irish waters. Can I speak to the third amendment to the amendment? It refers to salaries and fiscal entitlements of mariners.

The third amendment to the amendment is out of order as it is also outside the scope of the Bill. The Deputy can discuss amendments Nos. 2 and 4 to amendment No. 73.

Amendment No. 2 to amendment No. 73 has been discussed a number of times. The Minister has referred to it; it concerns other ships in Irish waters.

Amendment No. 4 deals with double hulls, an issue which arose in the context of previous maritime legislation. The amendment would require double hulls in chemical and oil tankers. In light of the ongoing disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, this should be set out in legislation as a mandatory requirement.

The issues of safe manning levels and the regulations that the Minister will introduce are closely related to wages and conditions for mariners. Unsafe manning levels in commercial fleets often result from decisions to save money on wages. The minimal rights granted to workers are also related. The Bill refers to the international convention on the rights of mariners. This House and the Minister need to support the campaign being pursued by the International Transport Federation and SIPTU, as well as my colleague, Ken Fleming. This particularly important given that we are an island nation and 99% of our goods are transported by sea. We do not want the ignominy of having these goods transported by what is in effect slave labour. There is no reason this issue cannot be addressed in the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 73:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"58.—(1) Subject to subsection (2) this Chapter applies to—

(a) Irish ships to which Chapter 1 of the Annex to the Safety Convention applies,

(b) other Irish sea-going ships of 100 gross tonnage or more, and

(c) any other ship while in any port in the State unless it would not have been in such port but for stress of weather or any other circumstance that neither the master nor the owner of the ship could have prevented or forestalled.

(2) This Chapter does not apply to—

(a) ships of war, troopships, fishing vessels under 24 metres in length, and

(b) pleasure yachts not engaged in trade.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 74:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"59.—(1) The Minister may, in relation to any ships to which this Chapter applies, make regulations ("safe manning regulations")—

(a) prescribing requirements and principles for the appropriate minimum safe manning of ships,

(b) setting out guidelines for the application of principles for the appropriate minimum safe manning of ships,

(c) regulating the procedures for the submission of proposals and application for a minimum safe manning document by or on behalf of the owner of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies, and

(d) regulating any consequential, incidental, ancillary and supplementary matters including, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, the charging of fees as the Minister considers necessary or expedient.

(2) Without prejudice to subsection (1) safe manning regulations may include requirements for the following to be taken into account in determining the minimum safe manning of a ship—

(a) the capability to—

(i) maintain safe navigational, engineering and radio watches and general surveillance of the ship,

(ii) moor and unmoor the ship safely,

(iii) manage the safety functions of the ship when employed in a stationary or near-stationary mode at sea,

(iv) perform operations, as appropriate, for the prevention of damage to the marine environment,

(v) maintain the safety arrangement and the cleanliness of all accessible spaces to minimise the risk of fire,

(vi) provide for medical care on board the ship,

(vii) ensure safe carriage of cargo during transit,

(viii) inspect and maintain the structural integrity of the ship, and

(ix) operate in accordance with the approved ship's security plan, where relevant,

(b) the ability to—

(i) operate all watertight closing arrangements and maintain them in effective condition, and also deploy a competent damage control party,

(ii) operate all on-board fire-fighting and emergency equipment and lifesaving appliances, carry out such maintenance of this equipment as is required to be done at sea, and muster and disembark all persons on board, and

(iii) operate the main propulsion and auxiliary machinery and maintain them in a safe condition to enable the ship to overcome the foreseeable perils of the voyage,

and

(c) any other special considerations in relation to the operation of a vessel or class of vessel.

(3) In prescribing requirements and principles for minimum safe manning of ships the Minister shall take account of—

(a) relevant national and international law relating to—

(i) watchkeeping,

(ii) hours of work or rest,

(iii) safety management,

(iv) certification of seafarers,

(v) training of seafarers,

(vi) occupational health and hygiene, and

(vii) crew accommodation,

and

(b) where applicable—

(i) on-board functions in relation to training requirements for all personnel, including the operation of fire-fighting and emergency equipment, life-saving appliances, watertight closing arrangements, specialised training requirements for particular types of ships and training opportunities for entrant seafarers,

(ii) provision of proper food and drinking water, and

(iii) need to undertake emergency duties and responsibilities.

(4) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), the Minister may, in making safe manning regulations, specify the information which must be submitted in the proposals for a minimum safe manning document including requirements for the following matters, namely—

(a) details of ship’s name, port of registry, distinctive number or letters, IMO number, where relevant, gross tonnage, main propulsion power, type and area of operation and whether or not the machinery space is unattended,

(b) a table showing the number and grades or capacities or both of the personnel assessed by the owner as the minimum safe manning complement required to be carried, together with any special conditions or other relevant observations in regard to same, and

(c) particulars of the assessment by the owner upon which the proposed minimum safe manning complement of personnel was assessed.

(5) In making safe manning regulations the Minister may categorise ships into different classes having regard to one or more of the following, where appropriate—

(a) the size, or configuration of such ships,

(b) the service for which such ships are to be employed,

(c) the nature and duration of voyages to be undertaken,

(d) the type of cargo carried including the severity of the environmental and safety hazards involved,

(e) the age and date of construction of ships, and

(f) such other matter or matters that the Minister considers appropriate to take into account in the circumstances.

(6) Different safe manning regulations may be made in respect of different classes of ships and in relation to different classes of ships for different circumstances and different areas of operation.

(7) Safe manning regulations shall include such requirements as appear to the Minister to be necessary to implement the provisions of regulation 14 of Chapter V of the Annex to the Safety Convention taking account of the IMO principles of safe manning.

(8) The powers conferred on the Minister by this Chapter are in addition to the powers conferred by any other enactment enabling him or her to prescribe requirements for ships to carry numbers and categories of masters and crew and the standards of competence for such personnel.

(9) Any fees under subsection (1) shall be paid into or disposed of for the benefit of the Exchequer.”.

Amendments Nos. 1 to 4 to amendment No. 74 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 75:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"60.—(1) On submission by the owner of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies, of an application and proposals for the minimum safe manning of the ship, the Minister may, where he or she is satisfied—

(a) that the proposals satisfy the minimum safe manning requirements for such ship, having regard to the safe manning regulations and, in respect of a ship to which Chapter 1 of the Safety Convention applies, the IMO principles of safe manning, and is adequate at all times and in all respects for the safe operation and the security of the ship and for the protection of the marine environment, and

(b) that the application and proposals satisfy the requirements for the making of such application,

issue a document ("minimum safe manning document") in respect of the ship, subject to such conditions as he or she sees fit, in the form prescribed by the Minister under the safe manning regulations.

(2) The Minister may require an applicant for a minimum safe manning document to amend a proposal for the minimum safe manning level of a ship if, following evaluation of the proposal, he or she is not satisfied that the proposal meets the minimum safe manning requirements referred to in subsection (1).

(3) Sections 27(9) and 28(1) of the Act of 1952 apply in relation to a minimum safe manning document as they apply to a certificate the issue of which is authorised under that Act.

(4) Section 28(2) of the Act of 1952 applies in relation to a minimum safe manning document as it applies to a certificate issued under that Act and a minimum safe manning document issued by the government of another country, other than the State, to which the Safety Convention applies, under such Safety Convention, in respect of a ship to which this Chapter applies, other than an Irish ship, and accepted as having the same force in the State as a minimum safe manning document shall be referred to as an accepted minimum safe manning document.

(5) After a minimum safe manning document has issued no change shall be made in the minimum safe manning of the ship without the prior approval of the Minister or such other person as he or she may authorise for that purpose.

(6) The minimum safe manning document issued to a ship under subsection (1) ceases to be in force if any changes to or in relation to the ship in respect of—

(a) its area of operation,

(b) its machinery or equipment, or

(c) its operation and maintenance,

are made.

(7) The Minister may cancel a minimum safe manning document in respect of a ship where he or she is satisfied that the requirements for its minimum safe manning are not being consistently complied with, taking account of rest hours requirements applicable to its crew or any other requirements for its minimum safe manning.

(8) The Minister may authorise on his or her behalf a person to issue or cancel a minimum safe manning document or to require amendment of a proposal in accordance with subsection (2).

(9) A ship to which this Chapter applies shall not proceed or attempt to proceed to sea without a minimum safe manning document for the time being in force.

(10) If a ship to which this Chapter applies proceeds or attempts to proceed to sea—

(a) without a minimum safe manning document for the time being in force in respect of the ship, or

(b) with manning levels which are not in compliance with its minimum safe manning document,

it shall be regarded an unsafe ship for the purposes of Chapter 7.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 76:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"61.—(1) It is the duty of the owner and master of a ship to which this Chapter applies—

(a) before the ship is first put into service, or before the ship is put into service in any case after the expiration or cancellation of its minimum safe manning document, to submit or have submitted proposals and an application for a safe manning document in accordance with the requirements and procedures for such application as set out in the safe manning regulations,

(b) to ensure that the ship is manned to comply with the minimum safe manning requirements, specified in the safe manning document, including any conditions specified, and

(c) to ensure that the ship operates in compliance with the safe manning regulations.

(2) In making proposals and application for a minimum safe manning document, the owner of an Irish ship to which this Chapter applies, shall, without prejudice to any other requirements prescribed in the safe manning regulations—

(a) make an assessment of the tasks, duties and responsibilities of the ship’s minimum manning level required for its safe operation, for its security, for protection of the marine environment, and for dealing with emergency situations,

(b) make an assessment of the numbers and grades or capacities or both in the ship’s minimum manning complement required for its safe operation, for its security, for protection of the marine environment, and for dealing with emergency situations,

(c) prepare and submit the proposal for the minimum safe manning level based upon the assessments at paragraphs (a) and (b) justifying the proposal by explaining how the proposed ship’s minimum manning level will deal with emergency situations, including the evacuation of passengers, where necessary, and

(d) ensure that the minimum safe manning level is adequate at all times, and in all respects, including the meeting of peak workload situations, conditions and requirements and is in accordance with the requirements, principles and guidelines prescribed in the safe manning regulations.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 77:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"62.—(1) A surveyor of ships may board and inspect any ship for the purpose of seeing that it complies with the provisions of this Chapter and the safe manning regulations.

(2) If a surveyor of ships finds that a ship fails to comply with any provisions of this Chapter or the safe manning regulations he or she shall give a notice in writing to the owner or master stating in what respect the ship fails to comply with them.

(3) A surveyor of ships may board and inspect any ship for the purposes of seeing that a notice given under subsection (2) has been complied with.

(4) A surveyor of ships may for the purposes of an inspection under this section make such tests (either on the ship or boat, ashore or at dock), ask such questions, inspect such documents or records and have access to such parts of the ship as he or she considers appropriate for that purpose.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 78:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"63.—(1) If any provision of a minimum safe manning document or a provision of any safe manning regulations is not complied with, then the owner (if in fault) or the master (if in fault) of the ship commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.

(2) If the owner or master of a ship which for the purposes of section 60(10) is regarded as an unsafe ship or in contravention of a notice of detention under section 66 proceeds, or attempts to proceed to sea with the ship then the owner (if in fault) or the master (if in fault) commits an offence and is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €5,000, or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €100,000.”.

Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 to amendment No. 78 not moved.
Amendment agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 79 to 81, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendment No. 79.

I move amendment No. 79:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"CHAPTER 7

Unsafe ships

64.—This Chapter applies to—

(a) Irish ships to which this Part applies, and to any other ship to which this Part applies, while they are within any port in the State, unless it would not have been in any such port but for stress of weather or any other circumstances that neither the master nor the owner of the ship could have prevented or forestalled, and

(b) boats to which Chapter 5 applies.”.

These amendments insert Chapter 7, which provides that unsafe ships may be detained by a surveyor of ships. Amendment No. 79 inserts new section 64, which specifies that the deterrent and enforcement measures to detain an unsafe ship apply in respect of the proposed SOLAS and safety regulations in the aforementioned Chapters 1 to 6, inclusive. The power to detain an unsafe ship in other circumstances is provided for in existing merchant shipping legislation and this amendment ensures the corresponding provision is put in place in respect of the new measures.

Amendment No. 80 inserts new section 65 to provide that a ship or boat may be detained by a surveyor of ships in a port in this State on the grounds of being regarded as an unsafe vessel until the relevant certificate or permit is issued. This power to detain gives teeth to the enforcement of the mandatory certification permits and documentation processes that have been put in place to ensure safe operations.

Amendment No. 81 inserts new section 66 to provide for the issuance of a notice of detention by a surveyor of ships. This notice can be withdrawn when the non-compliance defect is remedied.

How does the new arrangement differ from the current regulations? I understood we always had that power.

Restating them in the context of the Chapters just inserted will ensure we have a deterrent that can be used.

Amendment agreed to.
Bill reported with amendment.

I move amendment No. 80:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"65.—Where a ship or boat being in a port in the State is regarded as an unsafe ship or boat under section 19(9)(b), 28(9)(b), 37(6)(b), 45(4)(c), 53(3) or 60(10) a surveyor of ships may detain the ship to be detained in the port in which it is berthed until the relevant certificate, permit or document is issued.”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 81:

In page 23, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:

"66.—(1) Where a surveyor of ships detains a ship or boat under section 65 he or she shall give a notice of detention to the owner or master of the ship or boat stating in what respect the ship or boat is an unsafe ship and the defects to be remedied to the satisfaction of a surveyor.

(2) Where a surveyor of ships is satisfied that the defects referred to in a notice of detention have been satisfactorily remedied he or she shall withdraw the notice.".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 82:

In page 24, line 25, to delete "accessible" and substitute "as fully accessible as practicable".

The Minister has addressed the substance of my amendment, which attempts to create a formula that allows as much accessibility as possible. Perhaps the Bill as it stands addresses the issue, however. Much depends on the regulations that the Minister introduces because certain vessels present bigger challenges than others for people with reduced mobility. We have to enable people with disabilities to fully enjoy ships and boats.

The Deputy quite rightly raised this issue on Committee Stage on 4 March and we have since published guidelines on my Department's website and in hard copy. From my recollection of our previous discussion, the guidelines will meet the concerns raised. A range of improvements which can be made to existing vessels to increase their accessibility in regard to signage, lighting, handrails and tactile surfaces are set out in the guidelines.

Unlike other modes of transport, however, vessels have long life spans of 30 years and more. The existing stock of vessels includes a large number of older ships and the scope for alterations is therefore limited.

While I recognise what the Deputy is attempting, the form of words used in the amendment may have a contrary effect. An argument could be made that the words "as fully accessible as practicable" may be restrictive. I ask the Deputy to accept the section as it stands on the basis that it is the most all-encompassing version.

I will withdraw my amendment on the basis of the Minister's reassurances.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 83 not moved.

I move amendment No. 84:

In page 25, between lines 23 and 24, to insert the following:

"(g) consideration to be taken of local, economical and fleet size.”.

I ask the Minister to respond as there was some doubt on Committee Stage as to whether this matter is covered in existing law.

The provisions of the reduced mobility regulations will apply nationally, having regard to the specifics of the classes of vessels. Sections 17(1) and 17(13)(a) and (b) afford ample opportunity for any representations made on the particular circumstances. The concerns raised by the Deputy are addressed in the section.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I move amendment No. 85:

In page 25, to delete lines 42 and 43 and in page 26, to delete lines 1 to 3.

The purpose of the amendment is to remove subsection (12) which provides that the Minister "may exempt from all or any of the provisions of reduced mobility regulations, on such terms and conditions as he or she sees fit, any passenger vessel or any class or classes of passenger vessel, having regard to the nature of the vessel and the use to which it is put." This is a wide-ranging power which appears to remove the safeguards being inserted for citizens with reduced mobility.

I realise that a literal interpretation of the subsection could give the impression that the Minister may ignore the system of improved accessibility and safety being introduced elsewhere in the legislation. This is not the intent of the subsection, which is necessary because it may be desirable in the case of certain vessels to provide an exemption from reduced mobility regulations. While it is intended that practically all vessels will comply with the higher safety standards, it may be necessary to exempt particular vessels from some or all of the provisions. The subsection is useful for existing vessels with limited capacity for major physical alterations. The vessels in question are most likely to be vintage or heritage type vessels on which alterations would not be feasible for reasons of space or heritage. The provision is intended to be applied in a narrow set of circumstances to ensure we retain some of our vintage and heritage vessels.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Amendments Nos. 86 and 87 are related and may be discussed together.

I move amendment No. 86:

In page 26, line 13, after "representations" to insert the following:

"and after the approval of the Houses of the Oireachtas".

The amendment reflects the view that Oireachtas approval should be secured in the case of much secondary legislation. Given the importance of reduced mobility regulations, it is proposed that such regulations be placed before the Houses for approval. Amendment No. 87 makes a similar provision. The amendments are in accordance with provisions in similar legislation introduced in recent years which required that secondary legislation be laid before the Houses. Given the critical importance of disability regulations, all such secondary legislation should be placed before the Oireachtas. To reflect the key role of the committees in this regard, it is proposed that the Committee on Transport be the relevant committee.

The amendment proposes that the approval of the Houses of the Oireachtas be obtained after representations have been received under the consultation process on reduced mobility regulations and before the regulations are made. It is not normal practice to have to obtain approval prior to the making of regulations and I do not propose to introduce such a requirement in this legislation.

Section 17(13) already imposes a requirement for the mandatory publication of a draft of any proposed reduced mobility regulations to afford any person, including an Oireachtas committee, an opportunity to make written representations on the draft regulations. The provisions for prior consultation are adequate and Members have an opportunity to engage in the consultation process. It would be perfectly in order for the Committee on Transport to discuss the regulations and make suggestions on them once they are published.

On amendment No. 87, section 18(1) on codes of practice for reduced mobility provides that the Minister may prepare and publish codes of practice or approved codes of practice following consultations as he or she considers relevant. While I anticipate that the Committee on Transport will seek to be involved in this process, this does not need to be expressly stated. Under section 18(1), the Minister may engage in consultations with such persons as he or she considers relevant. Clearly Ministers will not disagree with the notion that the Committee on Transport is a relevant body for this purpose.

I am providing, in amendment No. 88, that a committee of one or both Houses of the Oireachtas be consulted on the draft code of practice prior to its publication. This step has been taken following our previous discussion of this matter. It is open to the Houses and the Committee on Transport to engage fully in the consultation process before regulations are finalised.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 87 not moved.

Amendments Nos. 88 to 90, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

I move amendment No. 88:

In page 26, line 40, after "with", to insert the following:

"a Committee of the Houses of the Oireachtas having responsibility for matters relating to transport and with".

The amendment arose as a result of the Committee Stage debate on this matter during which I undertook to examine section 18. The amendment provides that a draft code for reduced mobility be forwarded to the clerk of the committee of one or both Houses of the Oireachtas — to all intents and purposes the Committee on Transport — for the purposes of the consultation process. This provision is being made in direct response to the case made by Deputy Broughan for having the Committee on Transport involved in this matter. I hope it meets his requirements and on that basis, I ask him to withdraw amendments Nos. 89 and 90.

I welcome amendment No. 88. The Minister has come a long way in addressing the issues raised on Committee Stage.

We sometimes feel that we do not get important information on issues we need to discuss or are discussing. Issues seem to arise at 6 p.m. on a Friday. We have been through that before, as the Acting Chairman will remember, with other issues in the maritime area. We tend to hear at 6 p.m. on a Friday of some major change or that major documents have been received. The Oireachtas often seems to be the last body to get a look at that. In some of the controversies we have discussed at the Joint Committee on Transport there was a strong feeling among members that important documentation could have been brought to our attention at an earlier time when the Minister had reports in the area of aviation and other areas that would have been the entitlement of the Joint Committee on Transport. I welcome that the Minister has moved in that regard in this area of disability and accessibility. However, we need to address the wider problem.

Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 89 and 90 not moved.

I move amendment No. 91:

In page 31, line 10, after "crews" to insert "or for environmental protection".

This amendment would change the wording to "ensuring the safety of vessels or their crews or for environmental protection". This relates to powers regarding the raising of sunken vessels.

Amendment No. 92 proposes to insert "salvaging a vessel of special cultural and historic importance". I was thinking, obviously, about the Asgard in that regard. The amendment would give the Minister powers in that area. The former Minister for Defence was addressing that issue and many people were disappointed that he decided not to salvage the vessel given the insurance situation etc. My amendment seeks to protect our maritime heritage by giving the Minister powers regarding a vessel of special cultural and historic importance, of which, thankfully, we have several.

As we have strayed into amendment No. 92 as well as 91, I will deal with both of them with your permission, a Chathaoirligh.

Amendment No. 91 seeks to include environmental protection as a ground on which the Minister for Transport might cause a sunken vessel to be raised under Part 4 of the Bill. It is not necessary because it is already catered for. Legislation exists for that purpose. The Merchant Shipping (Salvage and Wreck) Act 1993 brought the International Convention on Salvage 1989 into national law. The focus of that Act is on marine environmental protection and provides that wrecks that are sunken or partially sunken in harbours or near coasts of the State can be required to be removed at the expense of the owner for marine environmental protection. I believe it has been invoked on one or two occasions.

The Minister for Transport may also take measures under that 1993 Act and the Sea Pollution Act 1991 to protect the coastline from pollution or the threat of pollution following a maritime casualty — that term includes a sunken or partially sunken vessel — and to give direction regarding salvage operations. The Deputy's good intent in that matter is already covered in legislation and it would not be wise to have two different sets of legislation covering the same matter because it could give people an escape hatch.

With the indulgence of the Chair I will deal with amendment No. 92, which proposes to insert "salvaging a vessel of special cultural and historic importance". That matter is and can be covered in legislation under national monuments or preservation of heritage legislation. It is not necessary to include it here and on that basis I ask the Deputy to withdraw those two amendments.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 92 to 94, inclusive, not moved.

I move amendment No. 95:

In page 37, line 40, after "protection" to insert ", management and operation".

Section 33(6)(b)(iii) states “the protection of vehicle decks on the ship”. To make the provision more complete the section should also address the management and operation of vehicle decks on the ship. In other words all aspects of the management and operation of a ferry would be within these requirements. Although thankfully not in recent times, there have been a number of ferry disasters in Europe in the past. The Minister’s powers should extend to all aspects of the ongoing management of a vehicle deck.

Section 33 of the Bill provides for fire protection rules and the provision in section 33(6)(b)(iii) relates to the protection from fire of vehicles on vehicle decks of ships. That would entail, for example, the provision of fire prevention and fire fighting measures. The Deputy wants the management and operation of vehicle decks to become a criterion for which fire protection rules may provide. However, operational functions of this nature are governed by safety management codes. My advice is that it is not necessary to include these functions in the subsection that deals specifically with the fire protection of vehicle decks. On that basis, I ask the Deputy to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 96 not moved.

I move amendment No. 97:

In page 39, lines 2 and 3, to delete all words from and including ", or" in line 2 down to and including "kept," in line 3.

Section 34(1) contains the phrase "or if there is no official log-book, cause other record to be kept", which is an extraordinary cop out or opt out for operators. Clearly in every case there should be a logbook. We discussed all this regarding modern technology, video, cameras and so forth. I wanted to get the Minister to extend it as widely as possible. It could be envisaged that companies could have ongoing contacts with their operations. Even in the recent disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, it was noticeable that the company, BP, seemed to be very anxious to try to control video and other reports from the undersea location of the disaster. We should incorporate modern technology into this in the era of iPhones, iPads, video links, video conferencing and so on.

Maritime legislation seems to be more 19th century legislation than 21st century legislation. Why, therefore, does the Minister not just make the deletion? There should be an official log. That should be a requirement

The provision in section 34 provides that if there is not an official log, a record must be kept of every boat and fire drill and of the checks made on life-saving appliances. That is a mandatory provision. Therefore, a record must be kept, whether it is in a log-book, a written record or recorded on computer. This is the case, even when there is no official log book. The Deputy's point is that the log book should be mandatory, but that is arguable. Irrespective of whether it is mandatory, a record must be kept of every boat and fire drill. That is the effect of section 34 and it covers the point made by the Deputy.

Amendment put and declared lost.

I move amendment No. 98:

In page 39, line 21, to delete "€500" and substitute "€5,000".

This also concerns keeping a log book. I think the amount in question is too low and should be for up to €5,000.

Amendment put and declared lost.

I move amendment No. 99:

In page 39, between lines 33 and 34, to insert the following:

"36.—(1) A person shall not pilot or attempt to pilot a mechanically propelled vessel while he or she is under the influence of an intoxicant to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vessel.

(2) A person shall not pilot or attempt to pilot a mechanically propelled vessel while there is present in his or her body a quantity of alcohol such that, within 3 hours after so piloting or attempting to pilot, the concentration of alcohol in his or her blood will exceed a concentration of 50 milligrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood.

(3) A person shall not pilot or attempt to pilot a mechanically propelled vessel while there is present in his or her body a quantity of alcohol such that, within 3 hours after so piloting or attempting to pilot, the concentration of alcohol in his or her urine will exceed a concentration of 67 milligrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of urine.

(4) A person shall not pilot or attempt to pilot a mechanically propelled vessel while there is present in his or her body a quantity of alcohol such that, within 3 hours after so piloting or attempting to pilot, the concentration of alcohol in his or her breath will exceed a concentration of 22 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath.

(5) A person who contravenes this section commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.".

I would like to hear the Minister's response on this amendment.

The Deputy's amendment reflects the blood, breath and urine threshold levels for alcohol concentrations that are being proposed for motorists under the new Road Traffic Bill. As I indicated on Committee Stage, policy on the control of drug and alcohol use in respect of seafarers is being developed in the forum of the International Maritime Organisation, IMO. It has undertaken a comprehensive review of safety training and certification for watchkeepers, the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping, STCW, convention and code. As part of the review, at the 40th session of the group, Germany presented a proposal which relates to the prevention of drug and alcohol abuse. That proposal recommends the following: the implementation of a mandatory alcohol limit on board seagoing ships of 0.05% blood alcohol level; the prohibition to consume alcohol within four hours prior to serving as a member of the watch or being on call; and provision for adequate random tests on board ships, under the responsibility of the master, by means of devices for estimating blood alcohol content from a breath sample.

Ireland supported the proposal at the STCW 40th session and expects it may be endorsed at the diplomatic conference in Manila in June 2010. If endorsed, it will be brought before the next meeting of the IMO assembly. After Committee Stage, I considered whether an enabling provision could be included in the Bill to follow through on whatever policy will emerge from the deliberations taking place in the IMO. The drafting of a provision was discussed with the Parliamentary Counsel and my Department was advised that a general, open enabling measure as proposed could have vires problems if sufficient policies and principles were not being provided in the enabling primary legislative measure. It would not be appropriate to try to anticipate and second guess principles and policies emerging from the type of provision that would be pursued by the IMO. The prudent course of action is to follow closely and await the details of the policy that emerges from the IMO and to legislate accordingly as a follow-up to agreed international practice. Currently, in the Maritime Safety Act 2005, a range of offences are provided for master or crew of an Irish ship who operate vessels in Irish waters or operate an Irish ship in waters anywhere if impaired by being under the influence of alcohol or drugs or a combination of these intoxicating substances.

We have considered this issue. Work is progressing at the IMO and we support that work. The legal advice is that unless we had significantly more work done with regard to the principles and policies before putting this section into the Bill, we could have difficulties with it in the future. Rather than delay the Bill, we have decided to go ahead with it as it is. However, as soon as the IMO convention is finalised, we will bring the necessary legislation before the House.

I accept the Minister's bona fides with regard to the abuse of drugs and alcohol and as far as I am concerned, that is not at issue. However, this proposal is a recommendation of the Marine Casualty Investigation Board in one of its recent reports. With respect, I do not accept the points made by the Minister. There is no reason he cannot incorporate the same basic regime as will be incorporated tomorrow with regard to road safety. Members on all sides of the House are agreed on the charter to which we will sign up in that regard.

I am trying to get to the nub of the Minister's point. He is suggesting that what is being done internationally must become part of the international system before he will be happy to include it in his legislation. What we are saying is that the limits that apply in the road traffic legislation should apply on all of our mercantile ships. Can the Minister clarify why those provisions should not be included now? The Minister's argument relates to policies and primary legislation. It is clear where the Minister stands on the issue and I have no doubt of his stance. However, the proposal is a recommendation of the investigation unit that examines these issues. This is clearly an issue with regard to people in charge of ships or on watch who may have taken alcohol and be unfit to do the job they are doing and who put themselves and others at risk as a result.

I understand this is a matter of concern for the Deputy and I share his impatience. However, it is not a case of nothing being in place to provide for these matters. People cannot be half drunk or half drugged and be involved in seafaring. That is not the case currently. We have a number of rules, regulations and laws in this area. International trading ships are required to comply with the International Maritime Organisation's international safety management, ISM, code. That requires a shipping company to identify all hazards and to manage the associated risks. Most companies assess risks and develop company specific drug and alcohol policies. In addition, domestic passenger ships proceeding to sea and domestic cargo ships in excess of 500 gross tonnes are also subject to safety management requirements. These require that the company identify all the hazards and manage the associated risks, including drink and drugs.

The merchant shipping medical examinations' regulations 2005 require seafarers employed or engaged in any capacity on board every seagoing ship, whether publicly or privately owned, to hold a valid certificate attesting to their medical fitness for the work in which they are employed. Those medical fitness standards applying in Ireland include comprehensive physical and mental fitness standards and may include addiction disorders. The revised medical standards provide for an updated and more comprehensive medical assessment with improvements in the standards relating to a number of conditions. The Department relies on the work of a panel of approved doctors located throughout Ireland to carry out medical assessments of seafarers.

As already stated, the approach taken in Ireland was to make provision in the Maritime Safety Act 2005 to prohibit the operation of vessels by a master or crew of a vessel in Irish waters or of an Irish ship in waters anywhere if they are impaired by being under the influence of alcohol or drugs or a combination of these intoxicating substances. Section 28(1) of that Act contains a prohibition on operating vessels while under the influence of alcohol or drugs and states:

A person being in command or in charge or another member of the crew of a vessel in Irish waters or an Irish ship in waters anywhere shall not operate or control or attempt to operate or control the vessel or carry out any task or duty in relation to such operation or control while he or she or the other is under the influence of alcohol or a drug or any combination of drugs...

Section 29 of the Maritime Safety Act 2005 addresses drunkenness among members of a crew. Section 30 imposes a duty on the person in command of a vessel in Irish waters to control the consumption of alcohol or drugs on board that vessel. Section 32 prohibits any person on board a vessel in Irish waters or on board an Irish ship in waters anywhere from endangering other vessels or persons on board by reason of being under the influence of alcohol or a drug or any combination of drugs.

I accept the Deputy's bona fides in respect of this matter. I share the view that we need to tighten up the position as much as possible. However, the advice available to me indicates that we would either need to develop the relevant provisions to a much greater degree than originally anticipated or that we should wait and continue to use the existing provisions until the IMO finalises its position on the matter. When the latter occurs, we could then put in place new provisions as swiftly as possible. This is the route we intend to take.

I remind the Minister that on Report Stage the second contribution is normally limited to two minutes. However, I granted him some latitude because what he had to say was important.

I thank the Acting Chairman.

What limits currently apply in the context of determining whether someone is under the influence of alcohol or drugs? How much alcohol must one consume before one is deemed to be under the influence?

There are no individual thresholds in place. It is a judgment call.

So it is a subjective measurement. In other words, there are no regulations which apply at present. In such circumstances, a person who has imbibed three or four pints of beer could decide that he or she is competent and qualified to be in charge of a ship. Who decides whether that is the case? A serious issue, which is of some concern to me, arises in this regard.

The Minister stated that as soon as the IMO decides on the standards that shall apply, these will be the subject of legislative provision. How soon will the relevant legislation be introduced following the IMO's decision? Everyone is agreed that legislation of this nature is required and I am not happy that provision relating to this matter is not being made in the Bill before us. Will the Minister indicate when the relevant legislation will be introduced, particularly in light of the serious safety issues that have arisen?

I remind Members that we are on Report Stage. Members can speak twice on amendments and the proposer can speak three times.

In light of the importance of the issue, I did not speak at all until now.

I understand that the IMO's consideration of this matter should be completed by the end of this year or early next year. At that stage, the next maritime Bill to which I referred earlier in the context of my previous discussion with Deputy Broughan will be before us. If the IMO has finalised the standards it intends to introduce or if we have a good idea of the direction it intends to take in this regard, I will include the relevant provisions in the Bill to which I refer.

In some senses the Deputy is correct to state that the judgment that will have to be made with regard to whether a person is under the influence of alcohol or drugs initially will be subjective in nature and will be made by the senior officer present. I presume that the final decision will eventually be made by the master of the ship. As the Deputy stated, there is no measurement in place at present but we would like to see the 50 mg measurement being introduced. We will support the introduction of such a measurement.

I accept the Minister's genuine commitment to deal with this matter, either by the end of the year or as soon as possible thereafter.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Amendments Nos. 100 to 102, inclusive, are out of order as they are outside the scope of the Bill.

Amendments Nos. 100 to 102, inclusive, not moved.

Amendments Nos. 103 to 105, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together by agreement.

I move amendment No. 103:

In page 41, line 36, to delete "section 14, 31” and substitute “section 14, 23, 32, 40, 48, 55, 62, 31”.

The purpose of these amendments is to extend the application of the enforcement support measures already contained in the Bill to include the new SOLAS and safety regulation provisions which, in turn, are contained in amendments to chapters 1 to 7 and which I have already outlined.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 104:

In page 41, to delete lines 41 to 44 and in page 42, to delete lines 1 to 2 and substitute the following:

"(a) under section 15(13) or 18(9) of the Act of 1952, section 8(2) of the Act of 1966 or section 14(10), 23(2), 32(2), 40(2), 48(2), 31(9)(b), 33(10) or 36(5)(b) in respect of a ship or vessel, make an application to the judge of the Circuit Court in whose Circuit the port in which the ship or vessel is or was berthed or docked at the time of making the application is located, or”.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 105:

In page 42, to delete lines 39 to 42 and substitute the following:

"(a) inspections made under sections 14, 23, 32, 40, 48, 55, 62, 31 and 33 and certificates issued under section 13,

(b) surveys carried out in accordance with regulations made under sections 10(1)(b) and 15(1)(c) of the Act of 1952, section 19(2), 28(2), 37(2), 45(2)(a), and

(c) certification and verification for—

(i) ships and companies under Regulation (EC) No. 336/20063 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2006, and

(ii) ships under Regulation (EC) No. 725/20044 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 106:

In page 43, between lines 21 and 22, to insert the following:

"(2) Any fees payable under regulations made under section 3(2)(c) and 8(1)(b) of the Merchant Shipping (Certification of Seamen) Act of 1979 shall be paid into or disposed of for the benefit of the Exchequer.”.

The purpose of this amendment is to amend section 40 to include the standard provision for the disposal for any fees paid under the Merchant Shipping (Certification of Seamen) Act 1979.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 107:

In page 43, after line 31, to insert the following:

"42.—(1) The following section is inserted after section 58 of the Harbours Act 1996:

‘58A.—(1) It is the duty of a company, as a result of medical examination, to assess whether the health of a person who is—

(a) employed or applies to be employed by the company on its staff as a pilot, or

(b) an applicant for the grant or renewal of, or the holder of, a pilot’s licence to perform acts of pilotage,

within its pilotage district is such as to enable the person to perform satisfactorily the duties of a pilot. The company in this regard must satisfy itself that the medical fitness of the person, particularly regarding eyesight, hearing and physical fitness, meets the standards required for certification of masters and officers in charge of a navigational watch under the International Convention on Standards of Training Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers 1978 done at London on 7 July 1978 and such other requirements as the company thinks appropriate.

(2) A person employed as a pilot or the holder of pilot's licence must, for the purposes of assessment under subsection (1) by the company in whose pilotage district he or she acts as a pilot, undergo medical examination at intervals specified by the company but not later than in each period of 2 years.

(3) Where a company considers that the physical health of a person it employs, or who has applied to be employed, as a pilot or an applicant for the grant or renewal of, or the holder of, a pilot's licence, within its pilotage district is not sufficient to enable the person to satisfactorily perform the duties of a pilot, the company may suspend or cease the employment, or refuse the application for employment, of the person as a pilot, or refuse the application for a pilot's licence or suspend or revoke the holder's pilot's licence, as the case may be.

(4) Where a company suspends the employment of a person as a pilot the suspension ceases to have effect when the person is able to satisfy the company concerned of his or her physical fitness to satisfactorily perform the duties of a pilot.

(5) A pilot's licence—

(a) if revoked under subsection (3) ceases to have effect, or

(b) if suspended under that subsection ceases to have effect until the holder is able to satisfy the company concerned of his or her physical fitness to satisfactorily perform the duties of a pilot.

(6) A decision under subsection (3) in respect of a pilot's licence shall be notified to the applicant or holder concerned personally or by post at the address at which he or she resides.

(7) Where a company refuses to grant or renew a pilot's licence or suspends or revokes a pilot's licence under subsection (3) the applicant or holder, as the case may be, may, within the period of 21 days beginning on the date of the decision to refuse the application for the grant or renewal of a pilot's licence or to suspend or revoke the pilot's licence, apply to the judge of the Circuit Court, for the circuit in which the registered office of the company concerned is registered, for an order cancelling or varying the decision. The judge may confirm, cancel or vary the decision or require the company concerned to re-assess the appellant's medical fitness in respect of his or her suitability to satisfactorily perform the duties of a pilot.".

(2) Section 69 of the Harbours Act 1996 is repealed.

(3) Part II of the Sixth Schedule to the Harbours Act 1996 is amended:

(a) by substituting for paragraph 46 the following:

"46. Prescribing requirements that must be complied with by or in respect of a person who applies to the company—

(a) to be employed as a pilot, or

(b) to be granted a pilot’s licence to act as a pilot,

in its pilotage district, being requirements as to medical fitness (including particularly requirements regarding eyesight, hearing and physical fitness) completion of an apprenticeship, length of previous service as a pilot or mariner, local knowledge, skill, character and such other matters that the company deems appropriate.",

and

(b) in paragraph 47, by substituting “(including requirements as to medical fitness and in particular requirements regarding eyesight, hearing and physical fitness)” for “(including requirements as to physical fitness)”.”.

Does this amendment cover the circumstances contemplated in amendment No. 108?

I thank the Minister for doing that for the maritime pilots of Ireland.

Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 108 not moved.

Amendment No. 109 is out of order as it is outside the scope of the Bill.

Amendment No. 109 not moved.
Bill reported with amendments, received for final consideration and passed.

The Bill will be sent to the Seanad.

Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share