Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 21 Feb 1996

Vol. 146 No. 8

Merchant Shipping (Liability of Shipowners and Others) Bill, 1996: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am pleased this Bill has been initiated in the Seanad and I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on the matter in the House. I look forward to hearing Senators' contributions.

The purpose of introducing this Bill is to bring Irish law in relation to the carriage of goods and passengers by sea into line with current international standards as reflected in a number of relevant international conventions, namely, the London Convention, the Athens Convention and the Brussels Convention. The intention behind the introduction of the conventions and their Protocols was to remedy a number of deficiencies concerning claims for compensation in maritime incidents that existed in earlier conventions.

This was achieved by: (i) establishing a uniform international regime for determining the limits of liability and the methods by which these amounts would be computed. The special drawing right (SDR) of the International Monetary Fund was adopted as the "currency" for the purpose of stating the limits of liability; (ii) raising the limits of liability to a more realistic level but at the same time making it possible for a shipowner to insure at a reasonable cost; (iii) making the right to limit liability virtually unbreakable unless loss is caused by deliberate negligence or recklessness on the part of the shipowner, ship operator, manager, charterer or carrier — a claimant must prove such negligence or recklessness through the courts; (iv) providing, in the case of the Athens and Brussels Conventions, a uniform means of establishing liability by clarifying the rights and responsibilities of carriers, passengers and shippers. The London Convention deals exclusively with rules in relation to limitation of liability whatever the basis of liability may be.

Shipping is vital to a small open economy such as ours. More than 75 per cent of our imports and exports are carried by sea. Shipping in general, and certainly in so far as it affects us, is an international, even global business. International fora and conventions play an important role in setting agreed standards in respect of ships of different flags. While a small country such as Ireland could not claim to have tremendous power or influence on the international maritime front, it is important that nations large and small contribute towards international co-operation in the common interest.

Essentially, this Bill is a housekeeping exercise and it levels the playing pitch with regard to maritime law. It will introduce into our law the three international conventions and Protocols already mentioned and will enable the State to accede to them in due course. All of these instruments are in force internationally.

The London Convention on the Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims, 1976, came into force internationally in 1986, and to date 26 states, including the United Kingdom, Denmark, Germany, France, Spain, the Netherlands and Belgium, have become parties.

The Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea, 1974, and the Protocol of 1976 came into force internationally of 1987 and 1989, respectively. To date, 22 states, including the United Kingdom, Spain and Belgium, have become parties to the Convention; 18 States including the United Kingdom, Spain and Portugal have become parties to the Protocol.

Regarding the Brussels Convention, the Protocol of 1968 to this came into force internationally on 23 June 1977. To date some 30 states, including the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, have become parties to the Convention. The Protocol of 1979 came into force internationally in 1984 and 28 states have become parties.

Ships which operate in our waters but which belong to countries that have previously acceded to these conventions already enjoy the benefit of their terms. This Bill will extend these terms to the owners of Irish registered ships — currently numbering 73. They will also extend to passengers and shippers using Irish registered vessels, as well as to other parties subjected to damage or loss caused by Irish registered vessels.

At present, the limitation of shipowners' liability is governed by the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894. Shipowners may limit liability in the case of loss of life or personal injury either alone or together with loss of or damage to vessels, goods, merchandise or other things to an aggregate amount not exceeding £15 per ton of the ship's registered tonnage; loss of or damage to vessels, goods, merchandise or other things, whether there be additional loss of life or personal injury, to an aggregate amount not exceeding £8 per ton of the ship's registered tonnage. The right to limitation, however, is subject to the condition that the occurrence takes place without the carrier's actual "fault or privity", that is, knowledge that loss or damage will, or is likely to, occur.

Under the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980, a shipowner is at liberty to disclaim all liability for the payment of compensation to passengers under a contract of carriage. I understand, however, that some of our shipowners have voluntarily incorporated the terms of the Athens Convention into their contracts of carriage.

The Merchant Shipping (Liability of Shipowners and Others) Bill, 1996, will put in place a charter for the providers and recipients of maritime transport services, that is the owners of Irish registered ships and the passengers and shippers using these ships, as well as for those others who may suffer loss or damage caused by Irish registered ships.

I will now deal with the provisions of each of the conventions in turn. The London Convention on the Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims provides for the totality of claims which may arise from any one incident resulting in loss of life or personal injury, loss of, or damage to, property including damage to harbour works and navigational aids — and loss from delay in the carriage of cargo or passengers and their luggage.

Such claims can include damage resulting from the spillage of bunker fuel from a vessel. They cannot, however, include claims arising from damage to or the loss of an oil tanker itself. The Bill does not apply to tankers carrying oil as cargo. Under the Oil Pollution (Civil Liability and Compensation) Act, 1988, oil tankers are already covered for claims of up to £14 million in respect of any one accident.

The Athens Convention deals with the carriage of passengers and their luggage by sea. The convention specifically covers the loss of life or personal injury to passengers and the loss of or damage to their luggage through establishing a uniform international regime of liability.

The Brussels Convention specifically covers the loss of or damage to cargo where goods are carried under a bill of lading. A bill of lading is a document issued by a shipowner to a shipper of goods. It serves as a receipt for the goods, evidence of the contract of carriage and document of title. As a receipt, it contains the description and quantity of the goods. As evidence of the contract of carriage, it contains the terms and conditions of the contract. As a document of title, it is used by a third party to take delivery of the goods from the ship.

The 1924 Convention is known within the shipping industry as the Hague Rules. The 1968 amending Protocol is known as the Visby Rules and the 1924 Convention so amended as the Hague-Visby Rules. Prior to the Hague Rules there was little law in existence that prevented the carrier of goods by sea trading under bills of lading from contracting out of virtually all liability in respect of loss or damage to cargo. The Hague Rules standardised the conditions of carriage set out in bills of lading and have been incorporated into the domestic legislation of most maritime countries including Ireland.

The Hague Rules were incorporated into Irish law by means of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1947. Ireland acceded to the Hague Rules Convention in 1962. The rules were amended through the adoption of Protocols in 1968 and 1979. The 1968 Protocol amended and expanded the rules in a number of important respects with regard to prima facie evidence, time limits for claims, monetary limits of liability, liability in tort and nuclear damage.

The Protocol of 1968 provides that nothing in the Hague-Visby Rules shall affect the provisions of any international convention or national law governing liability for nuclear damage. The Protocol of 1979 substitutes the Special Drawing Right (SDR) of the International Monetary Fund for the gold franc as the unit of account. The texts of these conventions and Protocols are each included in the Schedules to the Bill.

When it becomes law, this Bill will make it possible for passengers to qualify for realistic levels of compensation for loss, injury or damage either to themselves or to their luggage. The Bill will put an end to existing inequities with respect to claims facilities as between travellers by sea and airborne passengers.

For the first time in almost 100 years, shippers may seek and expect to receive realistic levels of compensation for instances of loss, damage or delay in the transit of their goods by sea. Shipowners will enjoy the advantages of knowing in advance the absolute maximum liability of compensation for which they are liable in the event of accidents and/or delays occurring in the course of their operations; most importantly shipowners will be facilitated in being able to arrange the necessary levels of insurance cover.

In the case of a typical vessel of 3,000 registered tons, the absolute limit of liability will now be increased for loss of life or injury from the present ceiling of £45,000 to the more realistic maximum of £1,580,000. Where loss of life or personal injury occurs on a passenger ship, the present maximum possible claim is £45,000. The Bill will increase this figure to £50,000 per passenger up to an aggregate maximum not exceeding £25 million. In instances involving loss of or damage to goods or a vessel, the present maximum claim possible is a ludicrous £24,000. Under this Bill the maximum claim possible will be a more realistic £580,000.

With regard to liability for removal of a wreck, it is important to note that while the London Convention provides for limitation of liability in cases of wreck it permits adhering Governments to opt out of this provision if they see fit. It allows for such adhering Governments to provide for no limitation to apply in such cases. This provision was availed of in section 53 of the Merchant Shipping (Wreck and Salvage) Act, 1993. The Wreck and Salvage Act provided for no limit to the liability of the owner of a wrecked or stranded vessel in respect of the cost of raising, removing or otherwise disposing of such a vessel.

It is proposed to replace section 53 of the Wreck and Salvage Act with section 11 of the Liability of Shipowners and Others Bill and to strengthen the wording to cover "the raising, removal, destruction or the rendering harmless of a ship which is sunk, wrecked, stranded or abandoned". The new wording is designed to take account of experience to date with the enforcement of the Wreck and Salvage Act, 1993.

The London Convention further provides for an absolutely unlimited claim facility for loss or damage in respect of accidents to vessels powered by nuclear power or carrying nuclear materials. Given our position on the Sellafield nuclear processing plant, and the vessels transiting the Irish Sea on route to and from Sellafield, this provision is of particular importance.

This Bill will provide a balanced framework of obligations and rights for shipowners, shippers and passengers and will further facilitate the smooth operation of sea transport services for all the various interests involved, whether providing or availing of sea transport services.

The Bill extends to Irish-registered vessels the benefits enjoyed heretofore only by vessels of countries which have acceded to these Conventions already. Its passing into our law will balance this anomalous exposure. Indeed, prudent owners of Irish registered vessels will have already insured against liability at a rate higher than provided for under our existing law on limitation and in line with the more practical limits which will now be introduced.

Since becoming Minister for the Marine in May 1995, I have become conscious of the need to redress the competitive disadvantages endured at international level by the Irish sector. Simultaneously, I must continue to ensure that reliable and efficient services are available to industry, that we protect our marine environment and that safety standards on our ships meet the most exacting standards. These targets, while attainable, will not easily be met.

My colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Gilmore, and I are bringing legislation through the Oireachtas in relation to the management of harbours and to dumping at sea. I have also been in discussion with the various interested parties and with Government colleagues regarding possible measures to boost our fleet, maintain and expand employment opportunities and secure vital maritime expertise.

I am committed to pursuing all avenues towards achieving a level playing pitch in the international maritime sector. The levelling of the playing pitch implies a commensurate input from small as well as large countries on the international scene. In Ireland's case this includes updating our laws with due regard to our situation.

Concerning cost implications for shipowners and the export industry, the advantages derived from:

(a) a shipowner knowing the full extent of his liability whether he is involved in a marine incident in Irish territorial waters or in waters under other jurisdictions; and (b) the facilitating of the shipping industry by way of ready availability of insurance cover, early settlement of claims etc.,

outweigh the cost implications.

I commend the Bill to the House.

As the Minister has outlined, the purpose of this Bill is to give force of law to a number of maritime conventions and Protocols, some of which date back to 1924. It is an indication of the general lack of political interest in marine affairs that we are only now giving legal effect to these conventions. However, I welcome the introduction of this legislation and I assure the Minister of our support in getting the Bill speedily passed.

The International Maritime Organisation, which was established in 1958 on the basis of a 1948 convention, has the purpose of facilitating co-operation between governments on regulations and practices relating to technical matters affecting international shipping. Such co-operation had been planned from around the time of the Second World War.

Through its dialogue and communication with the various member states affiliated to it, the IMO has made major strides towards putting in place a body of legislation and regulations dealing with this complex sector. The IMO encourages the adoption of high standards in maritime safety, efficient navigation, and the control and prevention of pollution, as well as a wide variety of other technical and legal matters. Ireland has played its part over the years by making a valuable contribution to the various conventions which have been ratified by this welcome legislation.

When I set up the Department of the Marine back in 1987, I drew the attention of the public and of the Government to the large body of regulation, legislation, Protocol and convention that needed to be ratified. At that time, much of our maritime law was either antiquated or, in some cases, did not exist. I am glad to say that in the short time since the Department was established it has made major strides in modernising legislation such as that before the House today. It has also made progress in responding to the challenge which we face as an island nation to face up to and exploit the opportunities to develop our maritime business.

The shipping business has made a valuable contribution to the economy, but that contribution can be further expanded by more positive and active Government support to back the industry's specialist work. Scant Government attention has been paid to the shipping and transhipment business generally. I do not mean this as a criticism of the present Government because it has been a feature of many Governments. For a while, maritime affairs were treated as some type of Cinderella operation. There is little general appreciation of the volume of shipping trade that Ireland is engaged in internationally.

The Government can take some initiatives to further expand and underpin the Irish shipping fleet. In 1987, at a time of strict Government financial controls, I introduced initiatives by way of grant aid to Irish shipping companies to enable them to expand their fleets. The scheme to encourage the acquisition of new ships involved a twin approach of tax incentives and BES expansion schemes. Some of the BES provisions introduced at that time have since been restricted by the Department of Finance. The Minister can be assured of wholehearted support from all sides of the House if he can reactivate that scheme.

Arco Shipping, for instance, as a result of the initiatives at that time, including the grant scheme that was made available, has put an additional 14 ships on its register. These Irish registered vessels are helping to develop the economy in no small way. Arco's fleet now stands at 24 ships and the company plans to build additional vessels this year.

The shipping business has been going through lean times — this is not unique to Ireland but to international shipping generally. In a climate where we have the opportunity to create further employment and to underpin the important companies in the business, the Minister and the Government would be doing a great service if it reintroduced those schemes of grant and BES support for the shipping industry. I urge the Minister to reactivate the schemes so the fleet can be further expanded and so that Ireland can have a greater share of the multi-million pound international shipping business. This would provide stability for those already employed in the business.

I draw the Minister's attention to some of the important initiatives taken by the Danish Government which have increased activity in the Danish shipping business. The Minister should look at the possibility of establishing a maritime industrial development organisation. For some peculiar reason, the IDA concentrates its activities in other areas. From my experience I know it is difficult to get it interested in the possibility of creating jobs in the maritime industry. Perhaps the Marine Institute might look at the possibility of putting in place a small high powered maritime industrial unit which would examine the possibility of creating more employment in the maritime business and which would support pioneers in the business, like James Tyrell in Arklow and others, who have made a major contribution to the development of the fishing fleet. Such an organisation might look at the training of pilots and personnel involved in the shipping business.

The Minister mentioned maritime safety and for many years IMO activities focused on that issue. The tragedy of the roll-on/roll-off ferry, the Herald of Free Enterprise, which went down in 1987 with the loss of 188 lives, brought home to everyone the urgency of dealing with safety issues. The regulations brought forward in 1988 to deal with the aftermath of that tragedy highlighted the need for improved safety measures and vigilance. It is a lesson which we have still not learned. The appalling spate of fishing tragedies further reminds us of the urgent need for strict safety regulations and of enforcing them fully and effectively.

I know the recent fishing tragedies are not relevant to this Bill, but we should not lose this opportunity to draw the attention of those concerned to their obligations as regards safety, which is a priority. Whether vessels are large or small or commercial or otherwise, nobody has the right to take chances with people's lives in unsafe ships and boats. They are death traps and they must be controlled. People must be educated and made aware of the dangers and ways to avoid tragedies.

According to Lloyd's register, ship losses reached an average of one per day between 1970 and 1980 — in 1978, for example, 356 ships were lost. In the majority of cases, 81 per cent, losses were due to human error. I do not have the up to date figures, but I do not believe the situation has improved. Ship losses before World War II were the same as in the 1970s. Even with modern communications and sophisticated electronic equipment, ship losses have only stabilised. This underlines the need for vigilance.

The Minister mentioned insurance in relation to ships plying the Irish Sea. No level of insurance could ever cover the cost of a nuclear accident in the Irish Sea in terms of the loss of life. Despite the provision for more effective insurance in that area, the Government should not lose sight of the necessity to highlight the undesirability of what is taking place in the United Kingdom as regards the nuclear industry. The Minister should use every opportunity to try to get the British Government to see reason in relation to its policy on the nuclear business. This should not only apply to nuclear ships.

We have seen the frantic efforts being made by the British authorities to come to grips with the Sea Empress and the crisis at Milford Haven. I am reminded of the successful efforts made by our marine personnel and the Department in removing oil from the Kowloon Bridge. At the time it cost approximately £1.5 million. Has the Government been reimbursed by the insurers? Technical people in the Department demonstrated that an effective marine pollution operation could be put in place. A highly technical and sophisticated job was done removing oil from the Kowloon Bridge. I am glad the marine services are keeping in touch with developments at Milford Haven.

This crisis brings home to us the fact that we face a similar situation around our coastline. There is an ageing tanker fleet and a likelihood of more accidents and danger to the environment. We are constantly worried about the risk to the environment from oil pollution, particularly in the Shannon Estuary through which tankers sail to Tarbert and Moneypoint. Local and harbour authorities worry about the risk of damage arising from unsafe ships plying the sea, especially ageing tanker fleets which are likely to create further problems in the future. That is why this legislation is so desirable. The volume of ship losses since the 1970s and 1980s has not stabilised. If the situation was similar in the aviation business, where aircraft where coming to grief in the same numbers, there would be an international outcry. It amazes me that so little attention is paid to this by the community.

This is an excellent opportunity for the Minister and the Department to put things right. I take this opportunity to compliment him and his staff on the work they are doing. They have brought much of the legislation up to date and have brought Ireland into the 20th century as regards its maritime policy. The Department has been unfairly criticised because of one issue, but thankfully it is no longer regarded as the rod licence Department. I welcome this technical measure. On Committee Stage we will deal with certain technicalities which require clarification but I will not go into those now.

As an island nation we have a great opportunity to exploit and develop our maritime business. Our efforts to date have been limited. Let us hope that in the forthcoming decade we can make greater use of our marine resources thereby creating further business opportunities, increasing employment prospects and generally enhancing an industry which has been seen for far too long as the Cinderella of the Irish economy.

Irish shipping is a great industry. It can be further strengthened but it needs Government backing to make the contribution it can potentially achieve. I trust the Minister, in consultation with the Minister for Finance, will reintroduce the measures which were beginning to show effects. The single grant that was paid out put 14 additional ships on the Irish register. This shows the benefit that small grants can contribute towards enhancing and developing the Irish shipping industry.

I welcome this legislation and will support the Minister in getting it through the Oireachtas as speedily as possible.

I welcome the Minister. As has been said by Opposition Members, the Minister is doing a good day's work in introducing this Bill. Shipping is a varied and important industry across the world. As this is an island nation it is all the more important that our legislation and regulations are as modern and up-to-date as possible and, in introducing this Bill, the Minister is taking a major step in that direction.

The Minister said that a number of conventions have taken place in recent years and Ireland, to a certain extent, has been left behind. We have not updated our legislation sufficiently to become part of the general trend in regulations as a result of those conventions. It is extraordinary to hear about the huge differences that exist between the aviation industry and the shipping industry with regard to regulations and liability. Perhaps this is due to the fact that shipping is an old industry and mode of transport which has evolved over the centuries rather than having been organised. That is probably why people tend to leave such matters in abeyance. It is important that this aspect of the industry is now being brought up to date.

This legislation will ensure that shipowners will know exactly where they stand and what their liabilities are in the event of accidents. It also ensures that passengers and owners of goods will be aware of their liabilities in the context of accidents, claims and so forth. The Minister has done a fine job with this Bill. In other areas, too, he is making major strides in updating our legislation on marine affairs. This island and its trade depend to a huge extent on shipping — 75 per cent of our trade is transported by sea. It is, therefore, vitally important that our legislation should be in line with modern developments.

I congratulate the Minister and his staff on this important legislation.

My comments on the Bill will be brief. I welcome it; it is important legislation. It is also important that this Bill is initiated in the Seanad. It is always nice to see Bills initiated in the Seanad as we have proved that this Chamber deals with such Bills in a thorough manner.

As an island nation our shipping is of vital importance to us. I am not sure of the statistics but I accept that over 80 per cent of all exports and imports are transported by sea. Regular ferries to England and the continent also play an important role. It is extremely important that not only are passengers protected by proper legislation but that shippers, agents and shipowners also have such protection. Everybody should be protected by adequate legislation.

Nobody can know or fully understand the might of the sea. Who would expect that a huge tanker such as the Sea Empress could be in trouble on the rocks off the coast of England? As Senator Daly said, about 200 ships are lost at sea every year. We never really think about the sea and what it can do to ships until we actually see it. A few years ago a ship called the Ranga got into difficulties off the coast of Kerry. It eventually ended up on the rocks and there was a great hullabaloo about moving it. We need not have worried — the sea took care of it in a matter of two years. It disappeared and there is nothing left. It shows us what the sea can do. We should always beware the sea.

That brings to mind the recent Harbours Bill passed by the House. I regret that I was one of the Members who said that, in certain cases, we should abolish compulsory pilotage. I have changed my mind in that regard, particularly in view of what Senator Daly said. Let us suppose a ship travelling up the Shannon to Limerick or Foynes got into difficulties with a new navigator or somebody who did not know the river. Such a ship could do great damage to the environment; the Shannon Estuary could be wiped out if there were such a disaster. There is a great case to be made for the pilotage of ships. We should continue to have pilotage in all districts with the exception of rare cases where the ship's master is travelling that stretch of water every week. However, it must be the same master at the wheel every week. Accidents can happen.

On a somewhat different matter, I congratulate the Minister on his recent advertisements in the newspapers about a review of safety in fishing boats. Such a review is long overdue and badly needed. The results of that review will be startling. I dare to suggest that up to 70 per cent of fishing boats will be tied up because of safety regulations.

I was glad to hear the Minister mention nuclear power and the accidents that might happen. As Senator Daly said, the ideal situation would be not to have nuclear power and not to have Sellafield operating. The answer would be to close down the Sellafield nuclear power station completely because no compensation could be sufficient. What could compensate the people of Chernobyl for what they have endured? We still see the effects of the accident at Chernobyl on the children born there ten years later. During the passage of the Harbours Act, 1995, which was recently before the House, the Minister of State, Deputy Gilmore, accepted an amendment to ban nuclear powered ships from our ports. In his speech the Minister referred to the nuclear processing plant at Sellafield. We should bring in legislation to make our coast a nuclear free zone.

This is a technical Bill concerning safety, the protection of passengers and their goods, the shippers and the shipowners. We will have some questions on Committee Stage but I welcome the Bill.

I welcome the Minister to the House. This Bill is long overdue; it is frightening to consider that we are but a few years away from the next century yet we are dealing with Acts passed in the 19th century. The Bill is a technical measure to bring Irish law into line with the London, Athens and Brussels Conventions and their Protocols. Whenever we deal with maritime legislation and associated regulations there always seem to be elements from the last century to be considered. We are effectively the only island nation in the EU; 75 per cent of our goods are imported and exported by sea, yet our policy sometimes appears akin to that of Switzerland.

The issues of the cost of insurance and compensation arise daily in relation to motoring. Given the number of people and the weight of traffic that travel by sea it would appear to indicate neglect that our laws in this regard are not up to date. Although it is not within the Minister's ambit, it may be appropriate to examine the regulations regarding air travel.

In his speech the Minister mentioned that ships which operate in our waters from countries which have acceded previously to the conventions already enjoy benefits. Those benefits will now be extended to the 73 Irish registered ships. This is a welcome measure replacing the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, which limited liability of £15 per ton of the ships registered tonnage. This Bill will put in place a charter for the providers and recipients of maritime transport services. Under the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act, 1980, a shipowner may disclaim liability. I am glad to see that is being tightened up as too many people are avoiding their responsibilities at present.

Under the London Convention incidents which result in loss of life will be covered. Claims may not be made for an oil tanker itself and that would seem fair. Under existing laws the absolute limit of liability for loss of life or injury in the case of a typical vessel of 3,000 registered tons, was £45,000 and that is now to be increased to over £1.5 million. This is a welcome change because we do not want to be bound by the last century when we are moving into the next. The increase in the maximum possible claim from £45,000 to £50,000 per passenger is also welcome.

It was interesting to hear the Minister refer to "the raising, removal, destruction or the rendering harmless of a ship which is sunk, wrecked, stranded or abandoned". In west Cork the Bardini Reefer is lying in Castletownbere harbour and it is an eyesore and a danger to shipping. If this law had been in place it would not be there now.

I am glad the Minister has prepared this Bill to provide a balanced framework for shippers, shipowners and passengers. I compliment those who run ferries. The large ferries plying our waters are of great benefit for tourism and travel. The smaller ferries which operate to our offshore islands also do tremendous work. Regulations in this regard were introduced as a result of incidents in Castletownbere and elsewhere. The operators have done a good job and we must be as lenient with them as possible because they provide a necessary service although their service may not be economic at certain times of the year. There are seven inhabited islands off the coast of south-west Cork. They need a proper transport system to keep the people from feeling isolated. I hope the legislation might lead to measures for compensation for Irish fishermen for what they lose to the Spanish fishermen poaching in our waters. The movement of foreign vessels in the Irish box should be better controlled.

I thank Senators for their helpful contributions to the debate. This is a technical Bill which gives rise to a number of legal complexities and it may be a little difficult for the lay person to understand. Nonetheless, it is a desirable measure required to put our marine trade on the same footing as our competitors in the EU and elsewhere. The Bill is a consumers' charter for shippers, passengers and shipowners. I have noted the points made by the Senators and I hope to deal with the issues raised on Committee Stage.

This Bill is different to other legislation from the Department in which we introduce regulatory measures. This Bill deals with civil liability between various participants in the maritime trade. In effect, it provides the Irish citizen with an opportunity to invoke the terms of the various conventions I mentioned. The House will notice that the Bill does not contain enforcement provisions as a result. It deals with civil liability and the rights of individuals, whether one is a passenger, a shipper or a shipowner.

I thank the Opposition spokesperson, Senator Brendan Daly, for his positive contribution and support for a speedy passage of the Bill through the Seanad. Indeed, I take this opportunity to pay tribute to him because he was the first Minister for the Marine when the Department was established in 1987. I share his grave disappointment that it took so long for this country to recognise the full value of the marine resource. We have concentrated on fishing down through the years but we have ignored the other potential, whether it be marine leisure and tourism, shipping or marine vegetables, such as the cultivation and processing of seaweed. All these opportunities had been ignored for years and at long last, as a result of the establishment of the Department, an awareness has been created.

Having said that, we must also understand that the Department is only seven or eight years in existence and we have not, as yet, really got the message of this potential across to other Departments, my colleagues in Government and our colleagues in Opposition. Often, we must fight twice or three times as hard to get movement as compared with other Departments. It is an uphill battle and I welcome, therefore, the opportunity to come to this House or, indeed, Dáil Éireann, to discuss marine matters, because every time we do so we create an awareness of the marine environment, the investment opportunities, job opportunities and, in particular, the benefit to peripheral parts of this island where job opportunities are limited. It gives us the opportunity to be realistic, to face into the 21st century, to recognise there will be change and that we must prepare for it. One cannot wipe out opportunities for people living on islands or coastlines where, as I said before, job opportunities are limited. We should be preparing now to replace jobs we know will disappear with onshore related maritime jobs which are there for the asking. For that reason I assure Senator Daly that I join with him in trying to persuade colleagues of the need to provide the sort of incentives — for example, in shipping — which are necessary to build up a shipping sector which is capable of competing in today's world. I will continue to pursue those targets.

I also take on board the points made about nuclear ships. Of course, there should be unlimited liability in this respect, but even that is not sufficient if an accident occurs. We are conscious of this and are leading the charge in Europe to outline the dangers of nuclear activity on our seas and the danger this poses to the citizens of Europe.

I share Senators' interest in the whole issue of safety. Like others and as a new Minister for the Marine, it frightens me to see what people are prepared to do when dealing with the sea. Senators have given various examples of how vicious and unforgiving the sea can be in terms of the horrific accidents which result in loss of life. I have set up the fishing vessel review group with an eye to taking on board some of the unpopular recommendations which, I have no doubt, it will produce. Either we close our eyes to the ongoing loss of life resulting from a lack of maintenance, the age of vessels, carelessness, unawareness of safety, etc. or we establish an awareness of the need for safety and precautions. I am not saying these are the causes of the most recent accidents, but there is evidence that people do not take proper care and attention when it comes to dealing with the sea. This concerns the fishing industry, the shipping industry, where we have had some disasters with roll on, roll off ferries, and the leisure area, where people are being taught canoeing or other seagoing leisure activities. Of course, the Department will do all it can to save life and establish the cause of an accident when a tragedy occurs, but that is not much use to a widow, a family and children who have lost a husband and father. Tragedies can be prevented through better facilities, a better awareness of safety, etc. and that is why this review group will be important in determining the causes of accidents to date and how we can improve matters for the future.

Reference was made to the Kowloon Bridge and whether we had recovered the costs. Efforts are continuing to recover the costs of the oil removed and of the clean up. Frankly, I find this distasteful. We should find it easier to collect the moneys which are due to us. There is a liability on those who cause damage and pollution to other people's property on shore or at sea. If you cause damage to other people's property, you should be liable and should pay up. International rules and regulations should be such that we insist, through the IMO or other organisations, that, first, there is liability and, second, that there is cover to meet the possible liabilities which may arise in the event of an accident or disaster. The Irish taxpayer should not be expected to fund these cases and the Department, through the IMO and international fora, will continue to press for changes. Often we are on our own or in a minority, but that is not to say that we are afraid to express our view. We will continue to express our view and to try to achieve change.

Senators referred to the number of accidents and our failure to update legislation. There is a huge concern when there is a pileup on a motorway or an air accident, but the sea seems to be a topic which comes and goes. We do not have the same sense of urgency or concern when something happens at sea. It is like creating an awareness of the marine resource; for some reason it is a slow process. Maybe too few people know about the sea, whereas people drive their cars or use trains, buses and aeroplanes frequently. Perhaps that is the reason, but it is difficult to seek change in this regard.

I have enjoyed this debate. I thank all Members for their contributions, particularly those on the Government side of the House, for whose support I am grateful. I also thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach, with whose permission we strayed slightly from the main principles of the Bill. This was done in a positive manner and we have hopefully grasped the opportunity to spread the gospel with regard to the potential of marine resources, etc. I thank those Senators who took part in this debate and also the Cathaoirleach and his officials for their assistance.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 28 February 1996.
Sitting suspended at 11.55 a.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.
Top
Share