The joint committee will consider SI 395, Continental Shelf (Protection of Installations) (Corrib Gas Field) Order 2006, and SI 483, National Salmon Commission and Standing Scientific Committee (Terms of Reference and Procedures) Order 2006. With the agreement of members, the committee will take both statutory instruments together. Before inviting the officials in, members should note that the statutory instrument relates to the protection of the waters around the Corrib gas platform. It does not refer to anything on land. Therefore, I ask members, when questioning the officials, to stick to the statutory instrument, as I will not allow discussion of any other matter.
Statutory Instruments: Presentation.
Can members refer to something that might be unsafe?
As we consider the statutory instruments, I will decide what the Deputy can or cannot ask about.
Things could get rough.
I know.
Matters could degenerate into hand-to-hand combat — again.
That is a terrible thing to say when the officials——
This is a pre-emptive strike
Members should remember that I am as good a street fighter as they are.
I am glad to hear that because the Chairman will get plenty of practice.
The joint committee is still in public session and all the remarks passed between members will appear on the record.
I welcome Mr. Ciarán Ó hÓbáin, Mr. Martin Brennan and their officials before the joint committee which has decided to consider both statutory instruments together. I ask Mr. Ó hÓbáin to start by explaining to the committee what is involved in SI 395.
I draw everyone's attention to the fact that while members of the joint committee have absolute privilege, this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee which cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses appearing before it. Furthermore, under the salient rulings of the Chair, members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person or an official outside the Houses, by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
Mr. Ciarán Ó hÓbáin
In July the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources signed the Continental Shelf (Protection of Installations) (Corrib Gas Field) Order, creating a safety zone of approximately 6 sq. km. in total around the sub-sea structure in the Corrib gas field. The creation of this safety zone was recommended by the marine licence vetting committee in its report to the Minister on the environmental aspects of the Corrib gas field development.
The creation of an exclusion zone of the nature provided for by the statutory instrument follows an established practice in the case of existing gas fields. For example, safety zones have been created around the Kinsale Head and Seven Heads gas fields. The creation of a safety zone has two objectives, namely, protecting the safety of fishing vessels and the installations concerned. In arriving at its recommendation the marine licence vetting committee recognised the safety aspect and noted that wellhead structures were a potential hazard to fishing operations. It recommended that there be a safety zone of 500 m from any sub-sea structure in the gas field for vessels engaged in fishing. SI 395 of 2006 gives effect to this recommendation.
I thank Mr. Ó hÓbáin. I ask Mr. Brennan to deal with SI 483 which pertains to the National Salmon Commission.
Mr. Martin Brennan
I am pleased to come before the joint committee again to explain this statutory instrument to members.
Members are delighted to have Mr. Brennan appear before them.
Mr. Brennan
As they are aware, the National Salmon Commission is a statutory body established under the Fisheries (Amendment) Act 1999. Its functions are to assist and advise the Minister on the conservation, management, protection and development of the national salmon resource. It includes representatives of the relevant stakeholders in the salmon fishing sector, as well as scientific representatives. Its standing scientific committee advises it on all technical and scientific matters relating to its functions. The scientific committee is comprised of scientists from a number of agencies, including the Marine Institute, the Central Fisheries Board, the national parks and wildlife service, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development of Northern Ireland, the Loughs Agency, a North-South institution, and Bord Iascaigh Mhara.
In 2004 the European Commission received complaints about Ireland's salmon management regime. The Commission considered that in respect of its management of drift-net fishing for salmon, Ireland had failed and was failing to fulfil its obligations under the habitats directive. The European Commission issued a reasoned opinion in June 2006.
Officials from the Department met DG Environment and DG Fish to discuss the measures Ireland proposed to take to comply with the directive. In terms of formal compliance, the Commission considered that the terms of reference for the National Salmon Commission should be amended and that terms of reference should be established for the standing scientific committee. The Commission considers that the reference in the 2005 terms of reference to compliance with EU obligations was not sufficiently precise. The Commission requested that the terms of reference should incorporate references to the Minister's obligations under the habitats directive, as implemented by the European Communities (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1997. In addition, the Commission required that the terms of reference incorporate the precautionary approach and the conservation principles enshrined in the directive. Revised terms of reference were drafted in accordance with the Commission's advice and were subsequently attached to Ireland's response to the reasoned opinion.
Members will see from the briefing note for this committee that it refers to the terms of reference being part of a series of measures that the Commission requires Ireland to adopt to comply fully with the directive. In terms of formal compliance, the Commission has requested that the regulations to be adopted this year establishing the quotas and management regime for salmon for 2007 should contain a reference to the Minister's obligations under the 1997 regulations. In so far as substantive compliance with the habitats directive is concerned, the Commission requires that the quotas and management regime adopted for 2007 comply with the scientific advice. I understand that the scientific committee will furnish its advice to the National Salmon Commission shortly and the Minister expects to receive the National Salmon Commission's advice on the management regime for 2007 in early November.
One could not argue with the first statutory instrument. If it is normal practice, it is a formality so we do not need to deal with it.
I have certain queries about the statutory instrument relating to the National Salmon Commission. I am aware that the report is with the Government for any future indication as to what is happening with drift netting. Can Mr. Brennan give us any indication? Is it slightly premature to be doing something with this statutory instrument when we are awaiting a very important decision on the part of the Government which is due within the next week or so?
I wish to clarify some matters in respect of SI 395. How will the reservation area be enforced and policed? I presume it will be through markered buoys but I would like to know how incursions into this area will be prevented. The safety element of it is obvious. If a runaway oil tanker registered in Panama or somewhere like that with a crew on a spree ran amok in this area, it could create problems of a safety, health and environmental nature. I am not saying that Panamanian-registered oil tankers necessarily have crews on a spree but there have been cases in the past where oil tankers registered abroad ran into difficulties. It is particularly important because the degree to which safety and environmental issues could arise would be severe at that stage. I see nothing here about the policing or enforcing of the area. It is simply an order that is made. I agree with the order; it must be carried out for everyone's safety and the safety of those operating the well heads.
I do not know if my next question is relevant. I am not so sure about the piping that goes to the manifold. There are five or six well heads that are brought to a central manifold, which takes the gas from that point onwards. What strength or gauge of pipe are we talking about and what are its dimensions?
In respect of the directive on the National Salmon Commission, obviously, the non-compliance with the habitats directive and the fact that it is very much setting the tone of what the outcome will be has afforded very little discretion. Up to now, the Minister could completely ignore the scientific advice, which was possibly the case up to now. It is quite clear that the action has been taken by the EU. Is Mr. Brennan saying that regardless of the recommendations made by the scientific commission, the Minister will have little or no derogation to deviate from that opinion?
The witnesses are permitted to share questions. We will deal with Deputy Fiona O'Malley's questions first.
Mr. Brennan
I have a slight dilemma in respect of the independent group's report which I am sure members will understand. The report was only received in the Department on Monday afternoon so we are still getting to grips with its content. Clearly, it goes first to the Minister and then to the Government. That leaves me seriously constrained in anything I might say about it.
I am sure the Deputy accepts this.
To which report is Mr. Brennan is referring?
Mr. Brennan
The report of the independent group on salmon.
Is that report on the Minister's desk?
Mr. Brennan
It is in the Department. It only arrived there late on Monday evening and will be on the Minister's desk before long. A quick decision will be needed in respect of the report simply because of the timeframe required to deal with the setting up of the regulations for next year and the need for a 30-day public consultation and so on.
Is it a priority in the Department?
Mr. Brennan
We do not have much choice in respect of it.
Great.
Mr. Brennan
We must make regulations effective from 1 January 2007 and we must have a 30-day consultation period so we must have our part of it carried out, including the technical advice of the fisheries management executive, in place and published some time in the first half of November at the latest. It is not a matter that can be allowed to run on.
That is encouraging.
Mr. Brennan
The Deputy asked why we were amending the terms of reference in advance of all this. We did not have much choice. When one receives a reasoned opinion and one does not want it to move on to the next stage, one must deal with the Commission. Where we had general references to the State's obligations under EU law, we had to make more specific references. This is really all we are doing.
I will address Deputy Perry's question because it also relates to salmon. The same consideration applies here. The Commission issued a reasoned opinion and we had two months to respond. We spoke to the Commission and then responded. The Commission has not closed the file and we have the clearest indications that it is awaiting developments in the evolution of the Government's position in respect of 2007. I am not in a position to say whether this means the Minister has no flexibility whatsoever in respect of what emerges from the independent group and the National Salmon Commission until I see the advice. However, he is constrained by the fact that the reasoned opinion will inevitably move on to the next stage unless we do what we have indicated we are likely to do, which is to comply with the advice.
Mr. Ó hÓbáin
A number of questions concerned SI 395. In respect of the area and notification, it is an issue that is given effect to by the maritime safety division of the Department of Transport. It is communicated through the issue of a marine notice. Many marine notices are issued from time to time which, in turn, feeds into the preparation of new admiralty charts where it will be shown on the chart if there is a safety zone.
In respect of the question of the connections between the well heads, the committee's report recommended it would be the sub-sea structure that would encompass the wells and the connections between them. This does not add a considerable amount to the safety zone. If one was to take a 1 km area around each well head, one would have very little left in between, but it covers the entire sub-sea structure. As I do not have the required information on dimensions and strengths, I will revert to the Deputy on the matter.
Is there a visible marker to delineate the safety zones for an amateur seafarer who may not be well versed in the use of navigational charts? Has GPS mapping been extended to the area?
Can one enter the safety zone freely?
Mr. Ó hÓbáin
One can. In the report the marine licence vetting committee is clear that the zone is for the safety of fishing vessels. The installations in question are at significant depths. While other shipping vessels are excluded from the safety zone, the same issues would not arise. I understand there are no physical markings, but this is not an area of responsibility with which I am familiar.
Does Deputy Broughan have additional questions?
Is the Department working on a foreshore protection zone? During the last Dáil Deputy Sargent often asked about the foreshore Bill, the continental shelf Bill and so on. The matter was on the Dáil's agenda for some time before it dropped off the clár a year and a half ago. These issues could be teased out, as they might have implications for future legislation. Has all of the preparatory work on foreshore and continental shelf protection been abandoned?
Mr. Brennan
I apologise that none of us is familiar with what takes place in the foreshore and coastal zone management section of the Department. We can find out for the Deputy and communicate with him or the Chairman.
Will Mr. Brennan send information to the Deputies who raised the issue?
I also asked about GPS mapping.
I thank the officials for appearing before the committee and explaining the two——
In regard to the "three wise men", when will we receive the report?
It is on the desk, but the Minister does not have it yet. Our guests have indicated that it is a matter of importance.
Is it hidden in the Department?
No.
Is the Minister not allowed to see it?
Will the Minister present it some Sunday for the 1 o'clock news?
We have had this discussion. As the Deputies know, the report is not hidden in any Department. It arrived in the Department on Monday, but the Minister has not yet seen it. The officials are scrutinising and considering it.
Will they let the Minister see it?
Our guests have indicated that it is an urgent matter. Is there any other business?
I have another opinion. I want to inform the Chairman of the procedure when such a report arrives in a Department. I spent some time in a Department and learned about a number of these important and sometimes exhaustive procedures. A senior official will inform the Minister of a report that has been received and will ask what he or she should do with it. The Minister will then give instructions. He or she could ask for a synopsis or précis. However, I have never heard of a case in which a report was delivered to a Minister's office and it was three or four days before he or she learned of it.
I do not know where the Deputy is going with this line of questioning. Mr. Brennan has explained the situation. We are discussing two statutory instruments——
I am informing the Chairman of the procedure. He was the person who stated the report was being hidden.
It must be close to an election. I thank Mr. Brennan, Mr. Ó hÓbáin and their officials for appearing before the committee. I remind members that the select committee will meet at 2.30 p.m. next Tuesday to consider the National Oil Reserves Agency Bill 2006.
The joint committee adjourned at 3.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 1 November 2006.