My question relates to money. Each harbour authority must have in place an emergency plan. That should be a simple operation but the equipment to deal with pollution, even a small amount of detergent, is very expensive. I would like our harbours to have supplies of detergent for small spillages in the harbours. Will any money be forthcoming from the Department or the EU for small amounts of equipment in accordance with the plan?
Sea Pollution (Amendment) Bill, 1998: Committee and Remaining Stages.
Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.
SECTION 3.
Question proposed: "That section 3 stand part of the Bill."
The Department is already doing this in a strategic way. It is covering the coastline and main areas which may be affected. The Senator's suggestion is valid but it concerns micro-treatment. We would like to ensure all small harbours are adequately prepared to treat not only bigger spills but also small spills. That work will take place following this legislation. When each harbour prepares its plan, it will identify weaknesses, areas of difficulty and its needs. Those needs will then have to be addressed. That is the reason there is a cost element, as Senator Caffrey and others mentioned. At present, IMES has equipment and detergent ready in strategic locations. I mentioned that in Howth it was able to move the appropriate materials in to stop the spread of the oil. The same happened in Cork – it moved in quickly when a pipe in Whitegate had a leakage and there was a substantial spill. It contained it from the rest of the harbour by making use of strategically placed equipment. Needless to say, helicopters can also help in this regard. In addition to this, housekeeping in each harbour must be considered with this legislation.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 4.
Question proposed: "That section 4 stand part of the Bill."
Will the Minister elaborate on the persons who would be "authorised officers"? I note that in the following section the powers of harbour masters are being extended. In a busy port such as Killybegs, the harbour master is on the ball. However in smaller ports where there is not much activity, harbour masters are inclined to be lax. Will the Minister clarify what is meant by, and who he intends to have as, "authorised officers"?
Section 4 sets out the functions of the authorised officers and states that the Minister may appoint such persons or classes of persons as he or she considers appropriate to be authorised officers for the purposes of the Act. Different kinds of officers are involved. An authorised officer is defined as a person appointed by the Minister under section 4 or section 11 of the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1995. The Irish Marine Emergency Service will carry out training courses. As Senator Bonner has said, some harbour masters are very vigilant and energetic and they will arrange seminars and courses to ensure that their knowledge is completely up to date. Harbour masters who are not so well informed will be provided with training courses. The Minister will be empowered to designate people as authorised officers. The Minister's power in this regard is quite broad.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 5.
Question proposed: "That section 5 stand part of the Bill."
The Minister has said that section 5 gives extensive powers to harbour masters to carry out inspections in relation to oil pollution incidents. Does the section extend a harbour master's jurisdiction beyond his present jurisdiction? Does this Bill give additional powers to harbour masters which might, for example, extend the jurisdiction of the harbour master in Dingle to Ventry?
A harbour master will deal with the area over which he has authority. The Bill gives each harbour master mandatory powers in the area over which he has authority. The Irish Marine Emergency Service will deal with the open sea. It will always be possible to revise the designation of a harbour if it is felt that incidents which are damaging to the harbour are occurring with some frequency close by. There is no reason the limits of a harbour cannot be extended. Each harbour master will have new mandatory powers with regard to vessels using the harbour.
Problem incidents may occur beyond a harbour master's jurisdiction. Would it not be advisable to extend a harbour master's authority beyond the actual harbour?
The Irish Marine Emergency Service will have the power to deal with incidents outside harbours. If IMES recommends that, in particular circumstances, a harbour master's power should extend beyond the harbour the Minister would be empowered to make him an authorised officer in that area.
At the time of the incident?
At any time. The Senator cited the example of minor incidents occurring with some frequency. In such a case, the harbour master could be given authority in the area in which the incidents occur. In general, IMES officers will have responsibility for the sea beyond harbours.
The Minister has answered my question to my satisfaction. However, I have seen boats pumping their bilges as soon as they have left the harbour and are out of the harbour master's view. Such boats may have had their oil changed a couple of days previously and, when the bottom of the engine is opened, the oil flows into the bilge and is pumped into the sea. Although these incidents occur outside the harbour, the oil is carried by the incoming tide and pollutes the harbour.
This is a question of harbour management. I am concerned with providing powers to deal with such activities. In a situation such as Senator Fitzgerald describes, the harbour master would co-operate with IMES who might perhaps, designate him the authorised officer for the area in which the pollution is taking place and give him the power to control the activities of the skippers concerned.
Would the harbour master be designated to deal with that specific activity?
He could be authorised to deal with that alone.
I support Senator Fitzgerald. It would be advisable to give IMES greater power, including control of some of the smaller harbours. The harbour masters of smaller harbours are sometimes lax.
If IMES is not satisfied with the way a harbour master is implementing his power, the service will have the power to bring about a situation which will meet the requirements of the legislation. The service does not yet have that mandatory power. I envisage IMES taking on an educational role, organising seminars for harbour masters, examining the problems and finding ways to deal with them. Problems can be dealt with by harbour masters but where this is not possible, other arrangements must be made. The Bill gives IMES the statutory power to make such arrangements.
Does the Bill give all harbour masters the same power, irrespective of the size of the harbour? I referred earlier to small harbours, particularly on the west coast, whose authorities exist on paper only. What new powers does the Bill confer on harbour authorities of that sort?
Section 5 amends section 25 of the principal Act to increase the powers of a harbour master to carry out inspections of any oil handling facility within the harbour in respect of which he is harbour master. The same applies to any small harbour. In a small harbour, where there is no harbour master, an authorised person will be designated to take control.
Section 6 deals with directions to harbour masters. The purpose of section 6 is to provide that the Minister may give directions to a harbour authority, an operator of an offshore unit or oil handling facility or a local authority in relation to the modification or alteration to an oil pollution emergency plan or in relation to a response to an oil pollution incident. The Bill gives comperehensive powers to all harbours, including those under the control of local authorities.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 6 and 7 agreed to.
SECTION 8.
Question proposed: "That section 8 stand part of the Bill."
Section 8 states: "The Minister shall prepare a plan . . . ". I assume no plan has yet been prepared. Will the Minister be preparing a State oil pollution emergency plan? Will consultations on the plan take place with harbour boards and other community bodies?
Yes. This section requires the Minister to prepare such a plan. It does not say he "may" prepare one, rather "The Minister shall prepare a plan specifying the measures to be taken to prevent and minimise damage . . . ".
This brings us back to Senator Norris's point about pre-emptive prevention being included. The Minister does not have an option. He is required to prepare such a plan. It enables him to give directions as to who should comply with the provisions of the plan. As in the preparation of any plan, a great deal of consultation will be involved. We will begin with that process and it will come together in a national plan.
I know Senators are concerned about the micro-environment at local level. That will also be a part of the wider picture. If we decide to put such powers in place everything else will follow. The Irish Marine Emergency Service is a first class emergency rescue service serving the whole country. It has co-ordinated various different elements, bringing together the RNLI, the Air Corps, the Navy, the Civil Defence and others in a great deal of consultation, involving groups at all levels. It is working in an overall national capacity as our emergency rescue service. What it has done in a relatively short time has been quite extraordinary and has been very valuable to the country as a whole.
From a financial and resource point of view, as mentioned by Senator Caffrey, Governments have seen that this is effective and have continued to provide resources, resulting in a first class helicopter service and state-of-the-art rescue service. The Irish Marine Emergency Service is already doing a great deal of this work and has undertaken pilot studies as to its future direction. It is not standing still or awaiting legislation. This Bill will be a great fillip to its work in the area of pollution control. Senators need not have any worries in that regard. It will bring forward its plans quickly and it will engage in wide consultations in devising them. That process will lead to a much improved position, especially at the micro level. While we are inclined to dwell on major disasters, which we must avoid as they have great detrimental effects, local problems cause great difficulties around the coast.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 9 and 10 agreed to.
SECTION 11.
Question proposed: "That section 11 stand part of the Bill."
The provisions in the Bill extend the area covered by the State to the 200 mile limit. Section 11 deals with providing assistance to other states. Funding is an important issue in this regard. Is the Minister in a position to advise us if any particular funding is being provided? We are surrounded by a great volume of sea, for which we are fortunate in one regard but unfortunate in others because we have lost so much of our fishing rights. I speak of other services provided by the State in relation to the fisheries protection. It is Irish small fishermen which the corvette hunts on many occasions. To supervise such a large volume of sea would require substantial funding. Can the Minister advise me on this matter?
Provision has been made in the Estimates for the funding of emergencies. Not a great deal is provided and extra money would have to be added when an emergency arises. Local authorities may, for instance, be involved in the clean-up. The Irish Marine Emergency Service will do all it can. The Exchequer, in the short-term, will be required to provide the necessary resources.
Dealing with incidents outside the 200 mile zone would require us to consult with other countries. The new limit is set at 200 miles. Section 11(1) reads:
The Minister may, pursuant to a request from a party to the Convention or the maritime administration thereof, provide assistance in preventing or minimising damage outside the State resulting from a discharge of oil from a ship, offshore unit or oil handling facility, including the provision of equipment, materials or technical advice, or the carrying out of operations to prevent or minimise such damage.
This section deals with problems outside our limit, to be the 200 mile limit. It empowers the designated body to give assistance outside that limit.
I should have asked this question before passing section 9. With such a large area being covered, even within the 200 mile limit, there could be substantial cost to the State. Have we requested substantial funding from the EU to enable us to deal with this task?
That would only happen on a joint EU country-to-country basis and would be a question of sharing, assisting and being compensated for such assistance. The Bill has a wider application than the EU. The Senator is talking mainly about compensation. Any action required is recoverable. It binds all countries to make those payments. One may have to provide assistance in the short term so that the problem does not come near us. That has happened with a number of vessels travelling to Donegal. We have had to give assistance to the UK authorities and that has been very successful. Ailing vessels listing in stormy weather have been assisted past Ireland's coast to a safe haven on the south-west coast of England. It gives us the power to do that and enables us to become involved. In this case, however, we are talking about an area outside the 200 mile jurisdiction where one is dealing with matters on an international rather than an EU basis. In other areas one could be dealing with the UK or with France, in which circumstances we would share the costs and then recover them, making some arrangement on the spot.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 12.
Question proposed: "That section 12 stand part of the Bill."
Section 12(1) states:
The master of a ship at anchor at a place in the State other than a harbour shall immediately notify the Minister of the fact and of the place at which it is at anchor.
I do not know how that can be done. There are so many bays and inlets around our coast where ships shelter during storms, but who are they going to notify because they are totally isolated? I have often seen massive ships at anchor during storms in the bay outside Dingle harbour. How will they know that such a regulation exists obliging them to notify the Minister? I find it hard to see how this provision can be implemented.
The Senator is talking about a situation where a vessel seeks shelter during a storm. They will be notifying the Irish Marine Emergency Service which knows where most ships are most of the time. The IMES is in radio contact with them and during storms the IMES is in instant contact with Malin Head, Valentia or Dublin.
Is that sufficient? The section states: ". . . shall immediately notify the Minister".
The Minister in that case is represented by the IMES, even though the Minister is in contact with them normally during operations. The section places restrictions upon vessels which anchor in Irish coastal waters outside areas of harbour jurisdiction. That is the area the Senator is concerned about. The purpose of subsection (1) is to facilitate response operations. This should close a loophole in the existing reporting arrangements under which vessels anchored outside harbour areas are not required to notify the IMES of their location but, once the legislation is enacted, there will be a requirement to report to IMES and in that way the Minister will be informed.
There have a been rumours recently that the marine radio stations at Valentia and Malin Head will be closing and that everything will be operated through a central station in Dublin. Will the Minister clarify the situation for my friends in Malin Head?
Under the new management procedures, Secretaries General are required to look at all the different elements of any Department and see where they can increase efficiency. In line with that, a consultancy study was undertaken on the service to see what could be done. That matter has not come to me but in the new situation the Secretary General of the Department has an obligation to examine these matters. Up to a few years ago the Minister would have been directly involved all the time but under new legislation passed by the Oireachtas, the Secretary General has these specific powers and responsibilities concerning the new strategic management code for the service.
Any report that comes forward is considered by the Secretary General, but policy decisions still rest with the Minister. Thankfully, democracy still comes into play. We all have to be as efficient as we can. The staff at Valentia and Malin Head do an excellent job. I find it hard to see how anyone else could do the job they are doing on a remote control basis. Nevertheless, I and my Government colleagues would have to consider any proposals that may be brought forward, and I would do that. That does not take away from the fact that we must ensure what we are doing in any area is done as efficiently as possible.
As far as possible, the Government's approach would be to decentralise rather than centralise. I want to ensure that facilities are situated as near as possible to the people using them, especially in fishing communities. Obviously the interests of the staff will be paramount. The Senator mentioned a rumour to that effect.
A study was undertaken by a consultancy group which examined 60 or 70 recommendations. They are matters which the Secretary General will be examining but no proposals have come to me. If any proposals come to me I will have to look at them as part of my policy in that regard. Sometimes the people who carry out these studies are not necessarily there on a stormy night when people are panicking at sea. In such circumstances, there is certainly a need for alert ears around the coast and having all those ears in Dublin might not necessarily be the best thing, for any number of reasons. I hope that will reassure the Senator that nothing will happen there without it first being considered both by the Minister and the Government.
Our general policy is to decentralise rather to centralise but we must make sure that any decentralised operation is an efficient one. That may also mean looking at the kind of things that are done from a centre like that, and whether we should do other things from there also. We have to examine those matters all the time. The current system is very effective and the stations at Valencia and Malin Head play a very important part in it.
Section 12(1) refers to "The master of a ship at anchor. . . ". What is the position in a tidal estuary where a ship may have to anchor for 12 hours? We had a recent experience in our area where the harbour master and the captain of a ship had a disagreement about what procedure to adopt while going up the estuary. The captain proceeded to bring the ship up of his own volition, irrespective of anyone else's views. I am sure the Minister was not aware of that, but will he become aware of such situations in future?
I could not expect to be aware of every conflict – nor would I want to be – that will occur between harbour masters and the captains of ships. If it becomes a serious problem I am sure the harbour master will make it known to us and we will seek broad remedies to help him deal with the situation. He would have certain powers if he wished to exercise them. Very often these conflicts occur in the heat of the moment and after a time people do not consider that a federal solution is needed. They might be happy to have a jorum in the local pub and sort it out there. One would hope the harbour master would be able to deal with the issues locally but, if not, he can call on further powers.
We are delighted with the Minister's response to the question raised by Senator Bonner. We do not wish to add to the problems in Dublin. In fact, we would be much better off if half the people moved to the west coast. That either station should be run from Dublin would be totally nonsensical. Senator Bonner and I are pleased with the Minister's response and his opinion that these two stations are doing a very good job. It is no harm to fire a shot across the bow.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 13.
Question proposed: "That section 13 stand part of the Bill."
In relation to the 200 mile limit, how is it proposed to define the demarcation line?
Those at sea are not as much at sea as one might think. They know exactly where they are and can tell when they are at the limit. The limit is set out in section 13(b)(2A)(c):
any area lying within a line, every point of which is 200 nautical miles from the baselines for the purposes of the Maritime Jurisdiction Acts, 1959 to 1988, and the waters above it, provided that this paragraph shall not be construed as constituting a claim by the State to any area that–
The limits are clearly defined. There is always an argument about whether someone was on one side of the line or the other when an incident occurred. Sometimes this is hard to tell. Senators dealing with pelagic boats will probably say there is sometimes an argument as to whether the vessel was east of 4º or west of 4º and they know exactly what they are talking about although we might not be so good at it. There can be a difficulty about whether somebody is just inside or outside the line. Everybody knows where the line is and there is no problem with it. The question is whether they are a couple of miles inside it or outside it at the time the incident occurs. That is the more difficult side of it.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 14 to 19, inclusive, agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment and received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I thank Senators for dealing with the Bill so expeditiously and so thoroughly. The Committee Stage debate highlighted the detail of the Bill and showed that it is designed to ensure there are powers to deal with pollution incidents. It is then a matter for the Minister and the Department to proceed to put these powers into operation. The designated body will be Irish Marine Emergency Service. It may take some time before all aspects are in operation but I am confident it will do an excellent job. I thank Senators for their co-operation in passing this Bill.
I thank the Minister for bringing the Bill before the House. I thank also Members on the other side for their co-operation in having all Stages taken today. I thank especially the Minister for his comments on my question about the radio stations.
Question put and agreed to.
When is it proposed to sit again?
At 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.
The Seanad adjourned at 5.35 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 23 June 1999.