Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy debate -
Friday, 17 Jun 1994

SECTION 4.

Mr. Sheehan

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 4, to delete lines 42 to 46.

While I agree the Minister should be in charge of the registering of fishing boats, I cannot agree with the unlimited scope being proposed in subsection (4) (b) as this gives the Minister uncontrolled power to dictate the category to which a vessel should belong and the regulations applicable. I cannot understand why power should be given to the Minister to exempt boats from regulations. The subsection is contrary to the thrust of general policy, which is to clean up the register and identify vessels engaged in commercial fishing. All commercial fishing vessels should be registered.

Mr. Andrews

Deputy Sheehan seems to be concerned about the question of uncontrolled power for the Minister. This is to suggest that the Minister might be arrogant and would not exercise his statutory power properly.

Mr. Sheehan

Every Minister might not be as co-operative as the present Minister.

Mr. Andrews

I was not inviting that comment. I am certain that if Ministers went outside their remit or power Deputy Sheehan and others would be the first to raise it in the House. The purpose of the section is to amend section 373 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, by replacing subsection (5) by a new subsection which gives the Minister, rather than the Government, the power to make and amend regulations under the Act. The Deputy's amendment proposes to delete the words from "or any of them are to apply" up to and including "them". Is that what the Deputy has in mind?

Mr. Sheehan

Yes.

Mr. Andrews

The amendment would remove from the Minister the power to exempt certain boats or classes of boats from regulations relating to the registration. Deputy Sheehan, and indeed most of us, may be unaware that these powers have existed since 1894 and have not been abused. The purpose of the amendment is to avoid having to get Government approval of any regulatory change, however minor, in respect of the registration. The purpose of the existing provision is to enable the Minister of the day to exempt boats or classes of boats from the obligation to be registered. The type of vessels to which such exemptions apply are set out in the Merchant Shipping (Registry Lettering and Numbering) Regulations, 1989, which are as follows: (a) vessels registered under the law of another state; (b) vessels engaged in fishing or dredging for scientific research or training purposes and (c) open and undecked vessels propelled by oars only.

I speculate that the Deputy put down this amendment because he may see these powers as excessive, potentially allowing the Minister to selectively exempt commercial fishing boats from the obligation to register. I respectfully ask the Deputy to reconsider his amendment on the grounds that the powers have existed for almost a century and have not been abused or applied anomalously. The absence of such powers would mean that all vessels, even rowing boats, would have to be registered. As long as the Minister retains the power to make regulations under subsection (5), exemption of boats or classes of boats could be effected by specifying the classes of vessels to which the regulations apply. In a strange way the Deputy's amendment is met indirectly in the section. It would confer such extraordinary powers on the Minister to include rowing boats, punts, currachs and every known vessel.

Mr. Sheehan

One could not describe a currach or a rowing boat as a commercial fishing boat.

Mr. Andrews

No, but my advice is that the amendment would require me to include these vessels under this subsection. If the Deputy wants to push the amendment there is no problem, but I simply cannot accept it.

Mr. Sheehan

My concern is that future Ministers who may not be as broadminded may insist that a commercial boat would be confined to one category of fishing, and that would not be very satisfactory for fishermen off the south-west and west coast of Ireland.

Mr. Andrews

It would be very unsatisfactory, but I cannot see it arising.

Mr. Sheehan

The provision gives the Minister uncontrolled power to dictate the category to which a vessel should belong and the regulations applicable to it, a very wide ranging power.

Mr. Andrews

There are fail-safe methods of ensuring that Ministers do not go outside their statutory authority. Using a word such as "dictate" presumes dictator and "uncontrolled" presumes that the Minister will abandon a particular matter. There is always the control of the Dáil, the courts and the Ombudsman. A Deputy or citizen who is concerned about what would be described as an abuse of power by the Minister of the day has these outlets.

Mr. Sheehan

Would it not be better to provide that this section deals with commercial fishing boats only?

Mr. Andrews

No, it would be too narrow.

Mr. Molloy

As the Minister is aware, the Irish Fishermen's Organisation expressed concern about this section by way of correspondence, to which I understand, it had not received a reply up to a few days ago.

Mr. Andrews

I understand from my official to whom I addressed the query that he recently spoke to Mr. Frank Doyle of the Irish Fishermen's Organisation and arising from that conversation, without giving anything away, the matter was fully addressed. Mr. Doyle left the meeting satisfied that the section did not imply any sinister implications for his organisation or the fishermen he represents within that organisation.

Mr. Molloy

The Minister is aware of the concern of the fishermen about the Department's proposals for categorisation. Any provision in this area would ring alarm bells with the fishermen. What assurances were given to Frank Doyle in the last few days?

Mr. Andrews

An assurance was given that the concerns raised by him do not apply under this section and he was satisfied with that assurance. I would have thought that categorisation is a separate issue. As the Deputy quite properly says it is an issue of concern to the fishermen and one I am addressing in light of the whole question of categorisation. It has not yet been resolved within the Department and I have no doubt that there will be ongoing discussions with the Irish Fishermen's Organisation, the Killybegs Fishermen's Association and all fishing organisations interested in this problem. Categorisation in the sense the Deputy envisages is a separate issue. Boats such as beam trawlers are already subject to a geographical exclusion from certain areas. Categorisation arises from the licensing of fishing boats, not from registration.

Chairman

Is the amendment being pressed?

Mr. Sheehan

The subsection is contrary to the thrust of the general policy which is to clean up the register and identify those vessels engaged in commercial fishing. Is it possible to write into section 4 (b) the exemption for crafts that are not commercially engaged in fishing?

Mr. Andrews

With great respect, if the Deputy looks at the first part of section 4 (b) he will see that what he seeks to achieve is achieved- it states: "define the boats or classes of boats to which the regulations or any of them are to apply, and provide for the exemption of any boats or classes of boats from the provisions of this section, and from the regulations or any of them." In those circumstances I see no reason to accept the Deputy's amendment, but I sympathise with his view about the exercising of ministerial powers. I see no reason to fear because there are many ways in which that can be scrutinised, in the Dáil and Seanad, by the courts and by the Ombudsman, to ensure the Minister does not have unfettered control or that he does not abuse his statutory powers.

Mr. Sheehan

While it is of paramount importance that the Minister be in overall charge, giving him carte blanche to do what he wishes might mean that no matter how strongly a Member of the Dáil put forward a grievance he would not get much of a hearing from the Minister when that Minister has absolute power to implement the regulations. I do not foresee problems while the present Minister holds office but future holders of the office may not be as co-operative. The legislation should incorporate safeguards for people who may be victims of this legislation in years to come.

Chairman

The point has been well made. Is the amendment being pressed?

Mr. Sheehan

It is ludicrous to give the Minister such powers over the fishing industry but perhaps that is not the view of other Members.

Mr. Andrews

I am not suggesting that the Deputy should not press his amendment, quite the contrary. However, these powers have been in existence for over 100 years and there have been no abuses in that time. What the Deputy is presuming is that there may be naughty Ministers in charge of the Department of the Marine in the future. Although I would not make any predictions, I would not like to think there would be such people in charge of the Department.

Mr. Sheehan

Could the Minister give me an assurance that there would be a way out of an impasse if anything contrary to this legislation were to happen?

Mr. Andrews

I have already given that assurance.

Mr. Sheehan

Can it be written into the Bill?

Mr. Andrews

That would not be appropriate in the circumstances because it would not stand scrutiny in the context of continuity and of what that section seeks to achieve.

Chairman

For the fourth time, is the amendment being pressed?

Mr. Sheehan

In view of the promise I have got from the Minister, I withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed: "That section 4 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Molloy

When the regulations are made, are they generally available to Members of the House?

Mr. Andrews

Yes, if the Deputy has any difficulty in that regard I would be glad to hear from him.

Question put and agreed to.