Two submissions will be made today. I welcome Mr. Maurice Mullen, Director General of the Maritime Safety Directorate, and his colleague to the committee. I come from a coastal region and the current consultation paper before us has generated much debate, excitement and concern. I am glad you are here to further outline the directive with which we are dealing. After you give a brief introduction, Mr. Mullen, committee members will ask you a few questions on the issue.
Maritime Safety Directorate: Presentation.
Mr. Maurice Mullen
I would be delighted to address the committee and I thank members for inviting us. The Maritime Safety Directorate is an internal unit within the Department which deals with all safety issues relating to the marine environment - everything from the largest ships to pleasure crafts. The intention in bringing it together was to co-ordinate safety and plan for accident prevention. For my sins, I am also responsible for the overall operation of the coastguard.
As regards the work programme for the directorate, as you rightly said, Chairman, two or three issues are topical at the moment. One issue is a new suite of passenger boat regulations which came into force on 1 January. They require any boat carrying passengers for reward to have a licence. A major change from before is that a boat must meet a certain standard in that construction must be to a certain level and there must be safety equipment on it. Fishing boats used for sea angling are included which means everyone must get a licence.
The second issue is the consultation paper we distributed seeking views following the terrible tragedy in Fethard in July last. The Minister called for a review of all safety issues dealing with small craft, whether used for recreation or reward, for passenger purposes. He placed emphasis on a number of issues, one of which was the wearing of lifejackets. Members may recall there was much public concern about the circumstances in which people should wear lifejackets and about why people should not be compelled by law to wear them. We prepared a consultation paper setting out current laws on lifejackets. This paper was circulated to the public seeking views. So far, we have received about 100 submissions on it, primarily from the different sports bodies and water governing bodies but also from many coastal communities which are concerned.
The thrust of the paper is to challenge the public on why there should not be greater statutory provisions requiring the wearing of lifejackets. At the moment there is no requirement on one to wear a lifejacket, except in a limited number of circumstances. If one is on a fast, mechanically propelled craft, such as a jet ski, one must wear a lifejacket. Everybody up to 16 years of age must wear a lifejacket on an open mechanically propelled boat.
We know we need to do more in the public education and enforcement arenas and, of course, enforcement at sea is quite difficult. How much more effective would statutory based requirements be? We asked questions such as why one should only be compelled to wear a lifejacket when one falls out of a mechanical craft into the water. When one enters the water, the issue is not about safety but about survival. In terms of survival, a lifejacket is necessary. If one does not have a lifejacket, the chances of survival are hugely reduced.
The general drift is that the Minister would like to see legislation. Many groups do not believe legislation is the way forward. Some of the sporting groups believe a lifejacket or, indeed, a buoyancy aid inhibits their sporting opportunities. Others believe enforcement is so hard that public education is what is needed. Some people believe these issues are intruding into the rights of individuals and that we, as a State, should not interfere in these areas.
Although we are assessing the returns from the public, it is clear there is grave concern among the public reflected following the Fethard incident that the rules need to be tightened up, that there needs to be greater visibility as far as safety is concerned and that there must be better enforcement coupled with good education. We need to establish exactly what we should strengthen in terms of legislation and suggest that to the Minister.
There is a difficulty on many large rivers, in particular, and along the coast with jet skis. Is the regulation in regard to jet skis tight enough? There is commercial fishing, commercial traffic, jet skiing, swimming, aquaculture and myriad other activities on rivers. Is the Department doing enough in terms of overall development plans for rivers? Is it okay to put a lifejacket on someone and to ensure a boat is all right although it may be in an area where people are swimming? There are many activities on our rivers but there is no overall plan. Should we start to manage areas in the sea as we do on land? That would involve safety as well as many other issues. I agree we must take a holistic approach and that we cannot depend on legislation. Public awareness is important.
Safety is important and one death is one too many. Do you believe this is a blunt instrument, particularly in relation to passenger boats? Some boats operate in areas which are sheltered and they are never far from land, while others head into the open sea and dangerous territory. A view was expressed to me that there should have been a five year lead-in time. The situation has changed and the amount of equipment required has increased. The regulations were brought back from June to January and people may have booked a leisure activity for the summer. That may not now be provided, which is a cause of concern. In some cases anchorage facilities may not be able to take the sort of boat needed. These issues should be examined by the directorate. My main concern is the overall safety issue. Are we tinkering at the edges or do we need to take a more holistic approach to the different activities in our waters?
Mr. Mullen
The holistic approach is critical to safety. It is clear that account seems to be taken of the management of river systems on a holistic basis. There are efforts made to manage them for the purpose of fisheries, such as catchment management fisheries, and by local authorities to manage rivers and river systems for the purposes of water quality under the heading catchment management. However, in terms of use these come under the planning Acts and we will have to move on the way they knit together.
On specific issues, jet skis presented a particular problem in many areas close to coasts and inland waters. The solution to the problem lies close to the matter raised by the Chairman - it must fit in with the local authority's services or zoning in a planned way. We have been encouraging local authorities to zone specific areas for jet skis, accommodating them in a suitable area prevents accidents. Experience abroad suggests one can zone beach and water areas to allow different activities to take place. There is not as much of this as we would like to see and scope for much more to be done. The lead has to be taken by local authorities in their plans. Many local authorities, coastal authorities in particular, are aware of this. In the case of Dublin, for example, they have taken the lead when it comes to jet skis, which has alleviated the problem enormously.
Regarding the overall safety measure being a blunt instrument, this relates in particular to moves to bring forward new regulations for passenger boats, the impact of which would be that any boat that was not up to the standards for a licence, which would be used as an award, could not act as a passenger vessel. The difficulty we face is that fishing boats are built as working vessels, with their decks holding equipment and so on. A fisherman can move around the deck just as a factory worker moves around the factory floor, but a boat is not a bus, nor is it built to a special design. Also, fishing boats tend to be built according to designs which accommodate carrying equipment, hauling loads and a limited number of passengers. Carrying a fishing party would adversely affect the design.
To move forward, as part of the new regulations, we recognise that there are fishing boats which could be developed and improved. We will look at them individually to see if they can be brought up to the required standard. I underline, however, that while I appreciate that many fishermen have had an important source of additional income over many years from this area, it is not often possible to bring boats up to scratch. They are fishing boats which cannot reach the standards of safety necessary for carrying passengers for reward.
You say fishing parties represent an additional source of income for fishermen. Many fishermen from my area in Greencastle are under pressure from the area 6 rule. Such earnings are not just considered supplementary income, they form part of a major tourism initiative through angling. As it does not last all year round, they cannot maintain a boat specifically for this purpose. You say each case is looked at individually——
Mr. Mullen
Each boat.
You also say some issues can be referred to local authorities. As members from coastal areas know, some are also very much in the domain of the Department and the local authorities are told it has nothing to do with them. Similarly, some issues are in the province of local authorities and the Department is told it has nothing to do with it. Until there is a marriage of tourism and leisure activities, which the delegation accepts will have to happen in the future, the horse and cart will be the wrong way around. The number of such activities is increasing all the time. Perhaps the directorate will reflect on this matter.
Mr. Mullen
The way we manage the coastal zone in the future will have to be developed from where we stand at present. Our coastal zone management system needs to be developed. Issues such as jet skis can fall within the remit of local authorities, although I fully accept there are others, which are very important in terms of local coastal developments, which fall within the remit of the Department. A key issue for the Department is to have coastal zone planning arrangements strengthened. Such a process is taking place. Ultimately it will probably become more statutory-based, which will ensure the kind of co-ordination the Chairman desires.
Two rivers run very close to me. In the case of one of them I would not start from here if I was starting now. I hope the other issue is solved before it becomes like the first, which is a mess.
I compliment Mr. Mullen on the outline he has given us. An issue that concerns us all is the matter of safety jackets worn at sea. On the one hand, it is preferable that there is a statutory obligation to wear them and that people are forced to behave sensibly and safely. However, the issue that arises is enforcement. How does one enforce it? As the coastline and river systems are so vast, this is always a dilemma. One can bring forward all the rules one wants, but if they cannot be enforced, it is a nonsense.
I always understood that when it came to beaches, responsibility to the high water mark rested with the Department, and above it the responsibility of the local authority. I come from Tramore where for some years people have been riding horses and motorcycles at random among the sand dunes. Even with the best will in the world, keeping people away from such activities which damage the sand dunes is very difficult. I find the holistic approach attractive, but it is only possible to implement it as a one-stop-shop system covering all the activities that occur near our rivers, lakes and coastal areas. If it is neither practical nor possible to enforce regulations, what is the point in bringing them forward? At the same time we need to ensure that people who go into water out of their depth wear life-jackets.
There is also a sort of random development of various activities. I recall one occasion when skiing was taking place on a lake and anglers present were not very happy with what was happening. My problem is that these events can be organised without many restrictions in terms of what the authorities can either prevent or regulate. There is an issue in regard to jet skis and so on, which is a highly dangerous and irresponsible activity, yet we do not appear to have any effective mechanism in place to regulate it.
The issue of enforcement comes up time and again. I do not think there is an answer to the enforcement role, which is a resource issue and for which the money is not available. If there is random enforcement, one must apply penalties which will cause people to think twice before behaving carelessly or irresponsibly to the detriment of their own safety or that of the public. We will need to have squads or individuals who can move around in a random fashion. However, that would be a fairly useless exercise unless those who are found to be in breach of regulations are sufficiently punished. That is the only way we will get progress in this regard.
I wish the director general and his team every success in their very daunting role, particularly against a backdrop of some terrible tragedies at sea which have taken place in recent years. What is particularly poignant is to see more than one member of a family involved, as has been the case in the past 12 months. What crosses the minds of many of us is how anyone can go out to sea, particularly if young people are on board, without lifejackets or some safety device. In fairness, some people will still get into a motor car and not use their safety belts. However, it is amazing the impact the new points system has had on drivers. It remains to be seen whether this change in attitudes will continue, but there is no doubt that the type of penalty is very important. A fine is not restrictive enough because no one deliberately goes out in a vessel to flout the law or risk a life. It is a matter of over confidence and perhaps feeling over safe in the sea or whatever the case may be. It would help if a penalty points system was introduced which would eventually mean that people could not operate a vessel if they notched up a number of infringements.
I was going to take up Deputy O'Shea's point on policing of the regulations because that is very important. I do not know if one could ever have an exact policing system. However, if one wants to impose constraints and bring people into line, people must be aware there is a pretty good chance that if they flout the law they will be caught, not that it is a chance in a 100, but a much greater risk.
Having watched some of the graphic advertisements on television relating to road safety, for the past two years I must say they have made an impact as far as I am concerned. Two or three advertisements internalise the idea that we must be careful or we might find ourselves in that position. I have not noticed any huge advertising campaign of a similar nature over the years in regard to waterways. I accept fewer people are involved. Nevertheless the tragedy is very traumatic and has a huge psychological impact on the nation when it happens, even though I am not saying one life is more important than another. We must alert people through advertising campaigns. The benefit of this is that the whole home is involved in these trips and if the husband is out with the children, the mother is at home, or vice versa. If they have internalised certain messages from a television advertising campaign, I have no doubt the last message they will get when leaving the house is to ensure they have their safety devices or lifejackets with them. Has the director general or his directorate any views on an advertising campaign because money spent on such a campaign could save lives?
I thank the delegation for their presentation. It is very laudable of the Government to seek to put in place safety measures and regulations in regard to all types of pleasure craft. However, I do not think this will be workable. The difficulty of policing these regulations was alluded to. My question relates to the enforcement of the regulations. I was going to make the same point as Senator Ó Murchú that the regulation will not be capable of being enforced, therefore, it will not work. If something cannot be enforced it is ridiculous. People will not observe a regulation if they do not think they will be caught in breach of it. Resources should be put into instilling a sense of safety through publicity campaigns and so on so that people will know they must be responsible for their own safety. The tragedy which led to this initiative touched the whole nation. Nobody would like to think that would happen to our family or friends. It was then that people probably went out and bought lifejackets. It is a question of people becoming more responsible.
Highlighting and recognising the danger of water would be a far more effective approach for the Department to take. While it is laudable to seek to implement these regulations, they are not workable. Poor fishermen who are currently strapped for cash cannot afford to fit out their boats to the required standards. They may not be able to continue to work in the same manner if these safety devices are required. However, they are the first people who would be very aware of the need for safety equipment. It would be in their interest to have this safety equipment, not because the State requires it.
I will attend a meeting on estimates of my local authority this evening. Local authorities will do much of the work in this regard but I doubt if they will get the money to provide the resources. I cringe when I hear people saying they will get the local authorities to do something because I know they will not be paid properly.
Is it correct that if a person is on a private vessel he or she will not be required to have a lifejacket? If that is right it is ridiculous. The point was made that it is a question of survival and that it does not matter how someone got in the water. What difference does it make whether the victim in danger was from a commercial vessel or a private vessel?
I welcome the delegation and thank it for its presentation. Maritime leisure activities are so wide and varied that it is difficult to cover all aspects under the different regulations. I favour early legislation. As our marine leisure and tourism business expands there will be further need for regulation and legislation. It is necessary to consolidate the existing regulations which cover a varied range of activities.
There is a lack of grant aid facilities to enable people to comply with regulations, particularly for people involved in the passenger business. This lack is a deterrent to compliance with licensing regulations. In any legislation introduced some provision should be made for grant aid for people such as the small commercial fishermen mentioned by Deputy Manning who would find the burden of the costs of safety equipment excessive. Grant aid should not cost the State an enormous amount of money.
The delegation is aware that the cost of providing safety and cover at present is enormous such as when the marine search and rescue helicopter service from Shannon is called out because some individual goes out on a surfboard and gets half way to Boston. What is the cost of these emergency facilities provided by the marine search and rescue service? Many of these cases could be avoided if people took some care and personal responsibility. This concerns especially people who go surfing in west Clare. It might be fine to surf on Lough Derg but when one meets the tides of the Atlantic Ocean it is a different matter. I am equally concerned about activities in areas such as Lough Derg and the Shannon estuary. Business in these areas will expand out of all proportion in the coming years and it is timely now to look at the overall legislative area and introduce specific legislation. If there are particular difficulties they can be dealt with through the provision of assistance.
Enforcement of regulations is a difficulty. The coastguard has said that the Garda would hold the main responsibility. Authorised officers were mentioned. I presume these would be people who would be employed by local authorities such as coastguards. There has been little indication from the coastguard as to how it would achieve its goal. The coastguard is new also and perhaps it will give us some indication of its strength, locations and how it has expanded. The appointment of authorised officers would be one way to deal with enforcement. They could be drawn from a variety of areas such as local associations in resort areas to the local authority or the local landing club or the people who rent or lease out boats. People are making enormous amounts of money from the provision of leisure facilities and they should be made comply with regulations as part of their licensing procedure. That is being done, to some extent, at present.
I am concerned that this document does not mention anything to do with communication. In a recent incident off the Cliffs of Moher six people would have lost their lives but for the fact that one of them had a mobile phone. There would not be much use for lifejackets off the Cliffs of Moher if one was in difficulty there. It is far more important to have a communication system in place that will alert people on shore of the difficulty. Often people on shore are not aware there is a difficulty. There have also been false and misleading calls sending out the rescue service which costs the State a great deal of money Such conduct is deplorable. People should know better and should not use the emergency line to call out the rescue service when there is no emergency. I welcome the moves that have been made here. I urge the delegation to look clearly at the proposals for the new legislation to cover this area and for consolidating the existing regulations.
I also welcome the delegation and thank it for its presentation. I grew up in what was a coastal fishing village. Unfortunately, as with a number of towns along the coast of north County Dublin, the fishing boats there have been replaced by a growing number of pleasure craft. The number of fishing vessels is diminishing almost in direct proportion to the increase in pleasure craft. As I grew up rowing a boat was as natural as riding a bicycle. Unfortunately, that has all changed dramatically.
The principle area with which I am concerned is the emergence of the jet ski. This topic has been discussed at Fingal County Council meetings. I support any attempt to apply regulations in relation to jet skis. There are obvious difficulties with enforcement. Without appropriate enforcement facilities regulation of any type is counter productive and brings the overall legal system into disrepute. We only need to look at difficulties with speed limits on our roads to see that. Enforcement against jet skis is a simple matter in comparison with other craft. Some form of warden system such as we have in regard to dogs or litter would be easily enforced.
While I know that we are dealing with regulations in regard to maritime craft I want to mention a difficulty in my constituency in regard to the area of beach below the high water mark. This area is under the jurisdiction of the Department although I do not know precisely whether it comes under maritime. Someone raised the point of horses galloping across beaches and Deputy O'Shea referred to wind sailing. Beaches in our area are a favourite venue for driving schools. These are matters which should be urgently addressed. The introduction of the penalty points system and the more rigid enforcement of the Road Traffic Acts means that in the future even greater numbers will avail of the facility. There are beaches in my area and in Deputy English's area and in other parts of the country which are favoured venues for the less well organised driving schools and for private driving tuition. They always drive below the high water mark because by definition that is the best surface. If a warden system is being contemplated to control the use of jet skis, I suggest that the warden system could also apply to these other activities if they fall within the bailiwick of the Department.
I come from a maritime county which has 300 miles of coastline so I have some interest in this consultation paper. Certainly there is a need for a new regime regarding maritime safety. People are losing their lives because of carelessness and the lack of lifejackets and other safety devices on board vessels. We should put a tight regime in place and, as previous speakers have said, it will have to be enforced and supervised. The priority is to put the regime in place and resources must then be provided to ensure the law is enforced. That is what the directorate is doing and it is up to us as legislators to provide the funding. It is very important that we have this process and are given the opportunity to make a contribution. I am sure this applies to all types of outdoor and marine activity centres and has a broader application than just to fishing vessels.
Deputy Glennon spoke about the use of beaches. There is a practice in Kerry where people use beaches for motorbike riding and it is quite dangerous on one beach in particular. It is not a related matter but I wish to take the opportunity to raise the issue. Motorbike garages in Limerick use the beach to test motorbikes. It is a danger to people using the beach. There should be regulations in place to control matters such as noise pollution but I am aware that is not the directorate's business.
Does the directorate propose to enter into a consultative process with the county councils? Will it consult with the local people in places such as Dingle? A number of councillors on Kerry County Council would be delighted to have the opportunity to discuss this consultative paper. Will there be a broad consultative process put in place?
This is a proposal which is overdue. There have been many accidents which could have been avoided had due care and diligence been exercised. I hope this process will serve that purpose when it is implemented.
I was going to say that the potential of our coast is vastly underdeveloped but obviously I have missed the level to which our coast is being developed.
Being abused.
There are lots of other developments we will not mention, especially in Ballybunion.
Let us not get personal.
Many people walk on the roads at night. Serious walkers tend to buy the proper equipment such as reflective clothing. I suppose availability is part of the lifejacket issue especially for people who are not regular users. Most of our discussion has centred on the major issues of enforcement, policing and the need for legislation and perhaps Mr. Mullen could comment on this.
Mr. Mullen
The Chairman's final comment is correct. There are three or four key themes emerging. I wish to clarify a couple of issues. If I have interpreted her correctly, Deputy O'Malley was surprised that there is no law governing the use of lifejackets on private vessels. She is correct; there is no law. The lifejacket debate started with the issue of the passenger boat which is used for reward. Our paper purposely pushed it into the big arena because of the type of questions which are coming out here to which Deputies alluded. We believe there is a direction in which we should go and there is the issue of whether or not additional legislation is necessary. Outside of fishermen and children under 16 years and people using jet skis, there is no provision. When boats are being used for reward there are provisions that they carry lifejackets. There needs to be a regime in place across the board so that it does not really matter what the boat is being used for. This would provide that lifejackets would be available on all vessels. In certain circumstances the Minister was effectively saying that they should be worn on the small open decked boats as a matter of course whether the boats are used for reward or for private use. That is a question that must be answered in the process.
Traditionally, this has met with objections because many sports people say that they do not want to use lifejackets. Education is the way forward. Many of the victims of drowning have not been members of clubs or organisations which have succeeded in hearing the message. There is a growing consensus that we should not make an artificial distinction between business and pleasure but rather look at the vessel. Lifejackets should be on board vessels in all cases and in certain circumstances they should be worn by all on board. It will be difficult to find a way to deal with the issues raised by the sports people but we will have to look at that and see if we can accommodate them. The end result should be that the law is clear to all those who go out.
The second issue identified is the question of enforcement. Senators Ó Murchú and Daly and Deputy O'Shea alluded to the fundamental need for enforcement, but stressed the importance of its effectiveness. Good intentions are not enough, as a presence at sea is needed. We need to approach enforcement in a different manner. We need to be clear about the law if we think a wider application of it is necessary. The enforcement regime has to move in a number of new directions. We have not yet made recommendations to the Minister as part of the ongoing review, but the issues emerging from it are clear. The Garda Síochána and the Naval Service have a particular role in enforcement. The Naval Service has certain fisheries patrol functions and its functions in relation to maritime safety need to be clarified. Both the Garda and the Naval Service are willing to participate in safety programmes, but we need to focus on what is to be policed.
If the law says that everybody must wear a lifejacket or that boats must carry a lifejacket for everyone on board, international law says that the skipper of a boat must deliver. He or she will be deemed negligent if lifejackets are not provided. A skipper should not allow a member of the crew to board a vessel without a lifejacket, but it happens on fishing vessels. The law says that fishermen must wear a buoyancy aid, at least, while on deck. We have been targeting the skippers of fishing boats to remind them that they are responsible. This has had a greater effect than saying to members of the crew that they must wear the jackets. The question of authorised officers is an important one. People with positions in coastal communities, such as harbourmasters and coastguards, can play a major role in safety matters. I agree that checking to see if the law is being upheld should be done randomly.
Our culture does not lend itself to wearing lifejackets to the degree that it might and we need to invest in education. I agree with Senator Ó Murchú's comment that accidents of a serious nature do not take place very often, but they are frightful for communities and families when they happen, as was the case in Fethard last year. There is a temptation to put in place education programmes through clubs and sporting organisations, but I have to say that such programmes have a limited impact. We need to examine how alternative education programmes can be used to help create a culture that impacts beyond the clubs. The safety efforts of sailing clubs have been very effective.
The road traffic penalty points system is effective at present, partly because the recent decisions of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Séamus Brennan, have a legal basis. The new directorate has identified the need to develop a separate communications strategy for safety, something the Department has not had up to now. It has to be done in a way that meets the needs of different risk groups, such as children. Adults have to understand that they are role models in everything they do. A number of other key issues were raised. It costs more than €20 million each year to retain a helicopter service at Cork, Dublin and Shannon and I presume it costs a similar amount to retain the Army's service at Finner Camp.
What about hoax calls?
Mr. Mullen
I do not have the figures for hoax calls - I will check with the director of coastguards - but it is true that many hoax calls are made. I was asked about communications and I can inform the committee that, under new passenger boat regulations, serviced radios have to be carried. Individual skippers must ensure that the radios are working and I believe they will do so if they are rewarded for it.
The contentious issue of jet skis was raised by a number of members, including Deputy Glennon. The Department owns the foreshore up to the high water mark, but local authorities, to which I referred, are responsible for introducing by-laws for good order. In the past, when holistic planning was not an issue, local authorities were so pressed that it was difficult to add another weight to their already burdened shoulders. Successive Ministers in the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and its predecessors have shied away from introducing primary legislation. Departments cannot be responsible for jet ski management, as such arrangements have to be agreed locally, as the Chairman alluded to earlier. The Department can lay down framework legislation, but the planning Acts already contain provisions that allow by-laws to be made.
The first part of controlling jet skiing and enforcing the laws that relate to it is zoning. Deputy Deenihan will be aware that popular beaches in County Kerry have been effectively zoned. One can build legislation on such experience. There was a huge outcry about jet skiing some years ago, but people are beginning to understand that the way forward is to wear lifejackets. Zoning has helped considerably, especially along the east coast, but such arrangements have to be managed on a local basis. If we can identify a measure that will help to promote safety, we will implement it.
I welcome the suggestion that the Maritime Safety Directorate should meet the local authorities. It is critical that members of the staff of such a new body are seen to meet the relevant parties and to present documents to them on a regular basis. I assure the Chair that I intend to organise such meetings and to follow through on the objectives I have outlined.
I appreciate the time Mr. Mullen has taken to address the committee. Many matters have been discussed in a relatively short space of time. I propose that a transcript of today's proceedings be placed before the House and made available to the Department, as a reaction to the directive before the committee. I thank Mr. Mullen and his official and I look forward to advancing the safety issues faced by coastal communities, as well as the holistic issue of cross-departmental support and co-operation.
Would it be possible to get from the directorate a copy of the correspondence from the focus groups?
Mr. Mullen
All bodies that made submissions were informed that all the documentation would ultimately be made available. They genuinely want to see a dialogue on this matter, so the Maritime Safety Directorate intends to make all information available in whatever form.
I thank the committee for inviting me to speak. It is an important initiative, particularly as the directorate is so new. I am pleased to have been able to speak about this matter and to feed into the discussion on it. As the debate continues and we begin to harden our proposals for the Minister, we will be delighted to explain them to the committee at any stage.
Go raibh míle maith agat. We will now move onto today's second delegation.