Skip to main content
Normal View

SELECT COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT debate -
Tuesday, 15 Dec 2009

Accession of Ireland to the Terms of the Bonn Agreement: Motion.

Apologies have been received from Deputy Ciarán Cuffe. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the following motion:

That Dáil Éireann approves the accession by Ireland to the terms of the Agreement for Co-operation in dealing with Pollution of the North Sea by Oil and other Harmful Substances, as amended by the decision of 21 September 2001 by the contracting parties to enable the accession of Ireland to the agreement (the Bonn Agreement).

A briefing note has been circulated to members.

I welcome the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and Mr. Norman Fullam of the Department of Transport. I ask the Minister to make his opening remarks, which will be followed by questions from members.

The background to this motion is that EU Transport Ministers and the Commission have urged member states to ratify international instruments relating to ship-source pollution prevention, response and compensation at the earliest opportunity. Conscious of the vulnerability of our maritime environment and coastline, Ireland has consistently supported measures by the EU and the International Maritime Organisation to bring about improvements in marine pollution preparedness and response.

The Bonn agreement, as amended, will cover the greater North Sea and its Atlantic approaches. The agreement is a mechanism by which the contracting parties will help each other in combating pollution from maritime disasters and chronic pollution from ships and offshore installations. The contracting parties are Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the European Commission.

Ireland currently holds observer status at Bonn agreement meetings. Our access and participation in the co-operative measures available from the Bonn agreement have already assisted Ireland in its ability to prepare, prevent and respond to oil and hazardous spills in our zone of responsibility. It has informed our implementation, through national legislation, of international conventions such as the international convention on oil pollution preparedness, response and co-operation, OPRC, of 1990 and the protocol to the OPRC. In September 2001, the contracting parties unanimously agreed to extend an invitation to Ireland to consider acceding to the agreement, as amended. It was amended to broaden the scope of its application to parts of the north Atlantic and the Irish Sea. Ireland's zone of responsibility under the Bonn agreement will encompass most of the present exclusive economic zone, EEZ. This area extends up to 200 nautical miles offshore. Article 8(2) of the Bonn agreement provides: "(i) in no case shall the division into zones referred to in . . . this Agreement be invoked as a precedent or argument in any matter concerning sovereignty or jurisdiction." The contracting parties implement the agreement by: keeping their zones of responsibility under surveillance for threats of marine pollution, including co-ordinating aerial and satellite surveillance; alerting each other to such threats; adopting common operational approaches, so that they can rely on each other to achieve the necessary standards of prevention and clean-up; supporting each other, when asked to do so, in response operations; sharing research and development; and carrying out joint exercises.

The secretariat is based in London and jointly administers the Bonn agreement and the OSPAR Commission, the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic. The Bonn agreement contracting parties meet once a year. The venue rotates among contracting parties. The 2010 meeting is planned for Dublin Castle on 24 to 26 November. The annual costs of membership and attending meetings will not increase on foot of accession by the State. These costs amount to approximately €10,000 per annum. It will be necessary to host two annual meetings every nine years and some occasional workshops, which will give rise to additional costs. The activities of the Bonn agreement organisation are considered to be "cutting edge" in terms of worldwide marine pollution prevention, preparation and response. Accession to the agreement by Ireland will significantly increase our capacity to protect and preserve our marine environment.

I welcome the Minister and thank him for the briefing. When it came before the Dáil we received a very short briefing making it hard to know what implications the agreement would have for us, particularly financial. Will it be the case, as the Minister says, that it will cost only €10,000 per annum or will we be responsible for our own zone or for other ships under our flag and so on? Will the navy have a strategic role?

I was involved, as was the Minister, in promoting the idea of a 200 mile exclusive economic zone. Is the Minister absolutely certain that the invigilation of all these countries, the UK, Norway and to a lesser extent Sweden, will not impinge on our future administration? The Minister states that under article 8(2) "in no case . . . [will] this Agreement be invoked as a precedent or argument in any matter concerning sovereignty or jurisdiction". This is significant. When officials from the Minister's former Department, Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, were before the Committee of Public Accounts last Thursday I asked about progress on the Corrib gas pipeline, the absence of drilling over the past season and what will happen in the next couple of seasons. It is a critical asset and is most of our national territory. Can the Minister reassure us that this agreement will not impinge on that?

When the Minister had responsibility for the marine as Minister for Communications, the Marine and Natural Resources we dealt with the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage to try to cut pollution and get double-hulled ships to ensure that disasters such as that involving the Torrey Canyon would not happen again. Are there any implications for the production of CO2 by ships? People often say they are a forgotten aspect of carbon emissions. This refers to major pollution. Is there anything in this agreement that will put us under additional pressure in respect of ships under the Irish flag or other ships in Irish waters?

As far as I can see this agreement is good news. Why did it take since 2001 for this to happen? I have heard press statements about it over the past ten years. It is obviously badly needed.

Surely it will cost us more than €10,000 a year because that appears to be a nominal fee for a huge operation and there will be costs involved that somebody will have to pay. What do the contracting parties have to pay? Do they pay according to the size of their population or to the size of the exclusion order or the area around their shore?

The Minister said "The contracting parties implement the agreement by: keeping their zones of responsibility under surveillance for threats of marine pollution, including co-ordinating aerial and satellite surveillance." Does that happen in Ireland? Are we involved in that operation? Some people tell me we are not.

I thank the Minister. I agree with Deputy Connaughton that this is a good news story. Anything that will prevent, or make us more aware of, and better able to deal with, oil pollution and so on is very welcome.

One of the objectives of the agreement is to share research and development. What exactly does that mean? What does carrying out joint exercises involve? The 2010 meeting will be held in Dublin on 24 to 26 November. There might be an opportunity for Tourism Ireland to build on that because presumably many delegates will come to Ireland for that event. It might provide an opportunity to promote the country to people from the participating countries.

In response to the broad question put by Deputy Broughan and to a lesser extent by Deputy Connaughton, the amounts I outlined in my opening statement for the costs are €10,000 per annum for the membership fee. There will be some extra costs when we hold the meetings here but nothing over and above for that or by way of patrols or surveillance. That is carried on as a matter of course and will continue. We are talking about sharing the information gathered by various people rather than the extra stuff. It has no implications for the national territory, as I outlined in my opening statement.

In response to Deputy Connaughton it took ten years because it was tied up with foreign affairs issues, the EEZ, responsibility zones and overlaps and so on. There were issues that were raised in respect of that matter which had to be teased out. This was to ensure there were not territorial issues or other implications. As regards CO2 emissions in the context of Kyoto or Copenhagen, there is nothing in the agreement which impinges directly on that particular area.

Deputy Connaughton referred to aerial and satellite surveillance. We are mainly involved in aerial surveillance and we have some involvement with satellite surveillance, mainly through the European Maritime Safety Agency.

On the sharing of information, the agreement will give us access to research and information relating to specific incidents, how they are tackled, the lessons learned, etc. It really involves a pooling of information gathered in the aftermath of particular incidents and arising as a result of research carried out.

Was such information not already available? Were we not entitled to such information in the past?

It would not have been provided on an ongoing basis. When we sign the agreement, we will be entitled to the information. Mr. Fullam will probably confirm that whenever there is any kind of incident involving pollution, an incident at sea or whatever, the level of co-operation among nations is extremely high. One does not encounter the same difficulties that would arise in respect of incidents that occur on land.

I must ask the Vice Chairman to take the Chair. I am obliged to attend another meeting. I apologise to the Minister.

Deputy Paul Connaughton took the Chair.

If, God forbid, there was a recurrence of the disaster that happened at Whiddy Island, is the Minister stating that the various international bodies would provide advice and assistance and that Ireland would have access to information relating to similar disasters?

Yes. We have access to such information on an informal basis. However, our signing the agreement will allow us to build up networks and strengthen our relations with other countries in this area. We have provided advice and assistance on an informal basis in the past. Last year, difficulties arose with the Irish Coast Guard and search and rescue services in Northern Ireland as a result of a dispute that was taking place. I do not know whether it was official or unofficial, but the Irish Coast Guard provided cover in respect of the coast of Northern Ireland. That is the level of co-operation that exists among coast guards, etc.

Joint exercises would be to prepare for incidents where emergency towing and so forth might be required. Under the agreement, we will be obliged to share both information and the research that is available in respect of the control of pollution.

I do not know if Tourism Ireland is aware that we are hosting the event to which reference was made in 2010. However, we will pass on the relevant information to it.

Of course that will only be if the Government is still in power. There might be a new Minister for Transport by then.

Regardless of who is in power, it is a good idea to pass on the information.

Hopefully Deputy Dempsey will still be Minister.

It is a good idea, regardless of who passes it on.

Are the Labour Party and Fine Gael going to abolish Bord Fáilte and Tourism Ireland?

I seem to recall similar comments being made this time last year and I am still in office.

The Government's majority is getting slimmer all the time.

I welcome this amended agreement. I do not want to rehearse the points put forward by other members. Would it be possible for members to attend the meeting to be held at Dublin Castle?

We will arrange for members to be informed with regard to the meeting and to be invited to the social event that will take place in conjunction with it.

I welcome Ireland's accession to the agreement. The Minister referred to satellite surveillance. In the past, when debating maritime legislation, we used to engage in lengthy discussions on vessels washing their tanks and discharging bulk oil into the ocean. Is it possible to know about or trace such incidents of pollution?

The agreement refers to other harmful pollution. One of the signatories, Norway, is not a member of the European Union. Do all of the signatories adhere to the EU directive on the discharge of sewage? The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley — Deputy Dempsey was his predecessor — is under pressure in respect of the discharge of sewage into our seas, including in my constituency. In that context, the Dublin Bay project, as it relates to the Howth Peninsula, has still not been completed. Are all states obliged to adhere to the relevant standard in respect of discharges of sewage or other materials which cause pollution?

It is impossible to say that we would be 100% certain with regard to every incidence of pollution. Due to the network that is in place and the surveillance that occurs, there is very little that escapes attention. The most recent incident which gave rise to problems was one which occurred last March. In that instance, there was a discharge into the sea by a Russian ship. We tracked the vessel in question and informed other jurisdictions with regard to what was occurring. While it is difficult to say that we are 100% aware of everything that happens, there is no doubt that we know a great deal about what is going on. Marine pollution can become very visible, particularly that caused by oil and similar materials.

With regard to discharges of sewage into the sea, all of the parties to this agreement, regardless of whether they are member states of the EU, are obliged to adopt common set standards. All of them are members of the International Maritime Organisation, which also sets standards. It is not a case of different standards being applied.

Do members have any views on whether there should be a further debate on the motion in the Dáil?

A Dáil debate is always extremely valuable. At present, we have such a backlog of business and many Deputies did not have an opportunity to contribute to the debate on various financial motions and items of legislation. The motion tabled by the Vice Chairman's party for Private Members' time this evening will give people the opportunity to make some comment on matters relating to social and family affairs. However, we are aware of the key issues relating to this matter and, therefore, I am easy with regard to whether a further debate is held in the Dáil.

Is it agreed, therefore, that the committee recommends there should be no further debate on the motion in the Dáil? Agreed. The clerk to the committee will send a message to the Clerk of the Dáil acquainting the House accordingly. A report on the select committee's consideration of the motion will be laid before Dáil Éireann. The clerk to the committee has circulated a draft report on the motion. Is it agreed that the clerk will complete the report in respect of the start-finish times and also of the names of the contributors to the debate? Agreed.

I thank the Minister and his official, Mr. Fullam, for their attendance.

Top
Share