Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 4 Nov 1993

Vol. 435 No. 5

Merchant Shipping (Salvage and Wreck) Bill, 1993: Second Stage.

Minister for the Marine (Mr. Andrews)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

In June 1990 the Government authorised the Minister for Foreign Affairs to arrange for signature, subject to ratification, of the International Convention on Salvage, 1989. This required that new domestic legislation be enacted to give effect to the Convention. This offered an ideal opportunity to carry out a thoroughgoing review of existing legislation in respect of salvage and wreck and to address in particular the question of the removal of wrecks which constitute an obstruction to navigation or a blight on the environment. It was also decided to avail of the opportunity to strengthen and formalise the powers and duties of persons authorised to take charge of attempts to rescue vessels in distress.

Marine casualties in Community waters in recent years, culminating in the Braer incident last January, provided the impetus for the European Community to identify and act on measures to minimise the risk of further such catastrophies and resultant ecological damage. The Commission document A Common Policy on Safe Seas lays down the policy objectives for the elimination of substandard vessels, operators and crew from Community waters. A number of measures were targeted for priority action when the Council of Transport Ministers endorsed these objectives last June. In this regard I wish to express my appreciation of the input made by the Minister of State, Deputy Gerry O'Sullivan, to these measures. He made a very important contribution.

The priority measures include: (1) the setting up of a ship traffic control system at Community and national level; (2) the creation of environmentally-sensitive areas from which high-risk shipping must be excluded; (3) the need for shipowners to contribute to the costs of management, prevention and intervention where accidents occur; (4) more intensive port state control inspections of foreign ships entering Community ports; (5) comprehensive reporting systems for ships carrying dangerous or polluting goods into or out of Community ports as well as transiting along European coasts. Each of these measures is important in protecting our coastline. Ireland is actively involved in the Community work programmes to translate these measures as quickly as possible into concrete action.

I welcome this Community action to minimise the risks of marine pollution and to improve safety. Ireland must, however, be ready and equipped to deal with maritime casualties and pollution incidents which can and inevitably will continue to occur. We have already taken steps to improve our capability in this regard. Slanu, the Irish Marine Emergency Service, was established by the Government as a division of the Department in May 1991 in line with the recommendations of the Review Group on Air-Sea Rescue Services. IMES is responsible for the operational control and co-ordiantion aspects of all types of marine emergency response, including search and rescue, sea and coastal pollution, shipwreck and casualty response.

IMES is equipped with state of the art communications and computer equipment to enable it to respond immediately to the needs of seafarers in distress. The provision earlier this year of a new headquarters for IMES has considerably enhanced the support provided to our search and rescue and pollution prevention and response facilities. IMES has its own Sikorsky helicopter based at Shannon on a 24 hour basis. Since its acquisition the helicopter service has been responsible for the saving of 197 lives.

The establishment of IMES reflects the Government's commitment to provide the necessary resources to ensure, in so far as it is possible, the safety of life at sea. The creation of IMES is a major achievement of which we should be proud and puts our service on a par with the best in other European maritime jurisdictions.

I would like to take this opportunity to pay warm tribute to those other agencies which do such marvellous work in the area of search and rescue such as the Air Corps, the Naval Service, the Garda, the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, the National Safety Council and the many voluntary inshore lifeboat organisations. I would like also to express my gratitude to the many organisations who make their officials available to IMES to serve as members of the Marine Emergency Advisory Group, the Irish Marine Search and Rescue Committee and the Marine Pollution Response Team. Their work with IMES is very much appreciated and not taken for granted.

Against this background the Bill provides a new statutory framework for dealing with marine emergencies and their aftermath. Marine casualties can have three phases: a ship can be in danger or distress due to a technical failure or heavy weather; the ship is subsequently wrecked, abandoned or stranded; and the ensuing wreck may pose a threat to navigation, public health or the environment. The Bill fundamentally strengthens the powers of relevant authorities in each of these situations.

A number of the provisions in this Bill are designed to enable IMES to discharge its functions even more effectively. Part II enables the Minister for the Marine to appoint authorised officers, who will normally be drawn from IMES, to save lives and to assist vessels in distress. The Bill assigns to authorised officers a number of important new powers to enable them to discharge their functions effectively in the course of rescue operations. The authorised officer is given a general power to take such steps as he thinks fit to save the lives of persons on board the vessel at risk, the vessel itself and its cargo. The generality of the powers proposed will ensure flexibility and prompt response in order to deal with the specific circumstances of unpredictable emergencies as they arise.

An authorised officer may enlist assistance in the context of rescue efforts from any relevant persons. These include the master of the vessel in distress, the master of any other ship in the area, the crew of any vehicle or aircraft and any other person in the vicinity whom the authorised officer considers could be in a position to help. An authorised officer may demand the use of any vehicle, vessel or aircraft close by and which is suitably equipped for the rescue operation.

An authorised officer and others involved in the rescue operation will also be empowered to cross adjoining lands, should this be necessary, and a landowner is obliged to co-operate in this regard. Failure to comply with an authorised officer's requests in these matters is an offence under the Bill.

The Bill also permits an authorised officer to requisition all relevant information from anybody on board or any other person in relation to a vessel in distress. Such information includes, for example, details of the owner of the vessel, the master and crew, the cargo and its owner, the damage done, lives lost.

If the vessel in distress is located in a harbour the Bill provides for the harbour master to assume the functions of the authorised officer. The Bill also gives the Garda powers to search and detain persons suspected of plundering a vessel in distress or its cargo. I regret to say that experience has shown that unfortunately unscrupulous individuals may try to take advantage of an emergency by looting a stricken ship. The State must protect as far as possible shipowners and crew against such an eventuality.

This enhanced ability of the rescue services and other agencies to intervene will help to ensure that most incidents do not progress beyond the distress stage. In the event, however, that the vessel becomes stranded, abandoned or wrecked, a salvage operation may be attempted. The existing law on salvage — contained in the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 — requires to be updated to ensure that salvage operations are encouraged and undertaken in a responsible manner. The Bill will, therefore, give effect in Irish law to the provisions of the International Convention on Salvage, concluded in London in 1989. This Convention prescribes the internationally accepted duties of shipowners, shipmasters and salvors during and after salvage operations. It also places on all concerned a clear responsibility to prevent or minimise damage to the environment. Criteria are also laid down for determining the amount of reward to be paid to salvors with a view to encouraging responsible and bona fide salvage operations.

Before going into more detail on this part of the Bill, I would like to address Deputies briefly on the underlying approach to salvage. Salvors have traditionally worked in a high-risk business, with large rewards for those who conclude successful salvage operations but nothing for those who fail. There is a great deal to be said for this approach as it would be unreasonable for an owner of a stranded vessel or its cargo to pay a salvor who fails to rescue any of the endangered property. However, the International Convention on Salvage makes one critically important change to the traditional principle of "no cure no pay".

Under existing law there is no incentive for a salvor to protect the environment when undertaking a salvage operation. The salvor's reward comes purely from saving the ship, crew and its cargo. Under the provisions of the Bill owners will be required to compensate salvors who have taken steps to minimise damage to the environment, even where the salvage operation itself has been unsuccessful. In view of the number of serious marine pollution incidents and threats to which Ireland has been exposed in the past and our increased awareness of the need to protect the marine environment this represents a timely and vital change in the law of salvage.

The Bill lays down the various duties owed by a salvor to the owners and masters of ships and, conversely, the duties of owners and masters to the salvor. It provides for the making of contracts to undertake salvage operations and lays down the criteria for deciding the amount of reward to be paid for the successful undertaking of a salvage operation. These criteria will also apply to compensation to be made for minimising or preventing damage to the environment. The duty to protect the environment is, therefore, placed centre stage under the provisions of the Bill.

In all maritime casualties the saving of the lives of the crew and others on board is the paramount concern. It is only when a rescue has been effected that salvage operations may commence. At that stage the vessel is usually stranded or wrecked. However, lest lives be still in danger, for whatever reason, when a salvage operation gets under way, the Bill provides that payment to the salvor by the owner for the saving of life will take priority over claims for payment in respect of property. While not specifically provided for in the International Salvage Convention, this is a principle in our law which, I am sure, Deputies agree must be retained. The Bill also reiterates the general duty of a master of a ship to come to the assistance of any person in danger of being lost at sea provided that, in doing so, he is not seriously endangering his own vessel, crew or passengers.

The Bill also addresses the question of salvage services rendered to or undertaken by State owned vessels; the criteria for fixing a salvage reward; the apportionment of rewards between salvors when two or more are involved in salvage operations; the need for co-operation between salvor, public authorities and other interested parties to ensure the successful performance of a salvage operation and the rights of salvors to payment.

Part IV of the Bill comprehensively addresses the question of wreck removal. The existing law on wreck, in the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, is being updated, strengthened, improved and consolidated. Receivers of wreck appointed by the Minister for the Marine have usually been officers of the Customs and Excise Service. Other persons may also be so appointed where necessary. Receivers of wreck have undertaken a necessary and valuable function over many years in protecting the interests of owners and salvors of wrecks. I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to their work which does not often come to public notice. They carry out their work without fuss and often do not get credit for it. Under the Bill, receivers of wrecks will retain their function as "honest broker" between the owner and the salvor or finder of wreck.

The first duty of a receiver is to take possession of a "wreck" the ownership of which has not been established. The Bill provides that anybody, other than the owner, finding or recovering a wreck must deliver it into the possession of the receiver. The receiver must then give notice of taking possession of the wreck. with a view to establishing ownership and ultimately handing it over to its rightly owner, provided of course security for any salvage fees has been forthcoming from the said owner. In the event of an owner not being found, the Bill provides that the Director of the National Museum, on behalf of the State, may claim the wreck if it is of archaeological, historical or artistic merit. While the National Monuments Act, 1987, is the principal legislation covering the safeguard of wrecks of historic importance, I am proposing this provision to further strengthen our powers to protect our national heritage. In the event that the director is not so disposed, the receiver may sell the wreck.

New powers are also proposed for the Garda Síochána to deal with those who conceal or wrongfully take possession of a wreck. These powers tie in with the powers to be given to the gardaí to prevent looting of a vessel at the "vessel in distress" stage.

I am pleased that the Bill will firmly place the onus on the owner to remove the wreck if it constitutes a hindrance to navigation, a threat to coastal communities or the marine environment. As matters stand, wrecks can be and indeed have been abandoned by their owners over the years with impunity. We are all familiar with the phenomenon of unsightly wrecks around the coastline. I am sure this is a matter that Deputy Sheehan will address as he raised it at a committee recently.

Mr. Sheehan

Yes.

Mr. Andrews

The Bill will help to ensure that this does not happen in future, it will take account of the Deputy's fears and those expressed by other Deputies at committees.

Provision is also being made to deal with circumstances where an owner refuses to remove such wreck within a reasonable timescale. In such circumstances, harbour authorities, local authorities of the Commissioners of Irish Lights are empowered to remove vessels or otherwise render them harmless and, most importantly, to recover the expenditure incurred by them from the owner.

I am taking the opportunity also to safeguard property on board a wrecked or stranded vessel by making it an offence for an unauthorised person to board such vessel without the permission of the master. The provision will not, of course, apply to the emergency services of the State.

Finally, the burial of human remains at sea is addressed in Part V of the Bill. Unauthorised burials at sea can pose a risk to public health or cause a navigational hazard, and can also give rise to personal distress in the event of a body being washed ashore. Accordingly, the Bill provides for an enabling power to make regulations for a suitable regime under which burials at sea may take place.

I am sure my introductory remarks in relation to the burial of human remains at sea will raise some eyebrows. Burial on land is governed by the Local Government Sanitary Services Act, 1948. Under section 47 of that Act the Minister for the Environment may make regulations in relation to the disposal of human remains other than by burial. However, those powers do not cover the general regulations for disposal of remains at sea. Power is granted under this Bill to address that deficiency in view of a steady trickle of requests, approximately six annually, for guidance in relation to burial at sea. At present cremation is recommended and the scattering of ashes at sea is the preferred option. Unapproved burials do take place at sea. It has been known that bodies, coffined or otherwise, have been disposed of at sea without meeting weighting and depth of water requirements. In those circumstances, much to the grief of family, relatives and friends, some of those bodies may come ashore, posing a risk to public health or a navigational hazard.

Under the Bill I am providing for a maximum level of fine of up to £10 million, five years' imprisonment or both, for conviction on indictment. People may wonder about a fine of £10 million but that fine is covered under the Sea Pollution Act, 1991, and is being carried over to this Bill. This concept has been carried over from the Sea Pollution Act, 1991, where offences with potential catastrophic environmental consequences are similarly dealt with. In that context Deputies will see the wisdom of retaining that section. That fine would be a maximum one and imposed on indictment. The financial penalty for such offences must be commensurate with the enormity of the environmental threat which they can pose.

I am satisfied this Bill provides a comprehensive legal framework to deal with the various critical phases of a marine emergency by assigning concrete intervention powers where vessels are in distress; by putting in place the internationally accepted regime on salvage operations and by strengthening the law on removal of wrecks which constitute a threat to the marine environment or a hazard to navigation.

The Bill underlines my commitment and that of the Minister of State at the Department of the Marine, Deputy O'Sullivan, to protect our vulnerable coastline and marine environment. The national response capability to marine casualties and pollution emergencies has, as I said, been greatly enhanced with the establishment of the Irish Marine Emergency Service as the overall co-ordinating agency. Further practical improvements will be put in place as necessary to ensure that the human and technical resources at our disposal in such emergencies are sufficient for the task. This Bill will enable us to put in place and to enforce a comprehensive legal framework to underpin those practical contingency arrangements.

If Deputies consider they can improve the Bill by way of technical or other amendments on Committee Stage, my mind is open to such proposals. This is my first opportunity, as Minister for the Marine, to introduce legislation. I thank the officials in my Department for the work that went into the preparation of very important legislation and I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Barrett

There is little in this Bill that one could disagree with. However, in this legislation which enables Ireland to give effect to the International Convention on Salvage, I would have thought we could have used the occasion to tidy up a number of other issues that should be dealt with in this type of legislation. During Question Time recently the Minister of State, Mr. O'Sullivan, was questioned about the Havelet report which was published recently. I accept that the inspector involved acted in accordance with existing legislation which clearly outlined that he had not the authority to apportion blame or liability. However, it is time we looked at this legislation and gave additional powers to such inspectors to suggest new rules and regulations to deal with the ongoing changes particularly in the car ferry business. I would like to have seen an amendment to the Merchant Shipping Acts 1894 to 1992 used to introduce new measures in that area.

I note that the Minister is making recommendations to the National Ferry Safety Committee in regard to some very important measures but, nowadays, that is not sufficient. The Minister should take powers to instruct that various changes take place particularly in regard to the safety of passengers, the safety of our seas and protection of the environment. I am disappointed that the Minister has not used this occasion to add to existing legislation.

I note the Minister is making provision for burial at sea. I did not hear him say anything about marriage at sea. I wonder if there is a need for change in that legisaltion in the light of ongoing events. I am sure we will deal with that matter on Committee Stage.

Mr. Andrews

If the Deputy would like to introduce an amendment on the marriage laws on Committee Stage, I will be delighted to address it.

Mr. Barrett

Existing legislation does not address the real problems which lead to the sort of situation this Bill is endeavouring to cover. It would be better to prevent disasters rather than having to deal with them afterwards. Ireland should press the European Community to introduce legislation which would have the effect of eliminating substandard vessels which create a serious problem. We all remember the Kowloon Bridge disaster. In that regard I looked at some old papers in the Library and I was appalled to read that that ship had spent four days in Bantry Bay during which cracks to its superstructure were examined by Lloyd's and officials of the Department of Transport in Britain. Despite the fact that stormy winds had been forecast, that ship left Bantry Bay and, shortly thereafter, got into serious difficulties and was eventually abandoned with 900 tonnes of fuel on board. The resulting damage cost a considerable amount and great difficulty. The fact that a substandard vessel can be allowed go to sea, endangering the lives of people and damaging the environment should be tackled urgently. We have road traffic regulations and laws in relation to the use of vehicles and we are trying to keep bangers off the road. We pay a great deal of attention to road traffic legislation, and rightly. We pay a great deal of attention to aviation legislation and take measures to prevent accidents. However, in regard to the seas, legislation is very woolly, yet we are talking about making recommendations to committees. If we can have legislation to cover safety on our roads and safety in the air, it is time the European Community addressed the need to deal, in particular, with substandard vessels at sea.

We should also seek measures to improve the effectiveness of State port control and introduce preventive measures vis-a-vis routing of ships, reception facilities, vessel traffic services and training of seafarers. In recognising the need for and seeking to implement improved standards, very often the problems we face are caused by the non-implementation of existing rules. Many accidents at sea are caused not as a result of a lack of existing rules but rather by inadequate compliance with existing measures. It is in the area of enforcement that there is a great deal of weakness. As a country we cannot singularly enforce rules and regulations in relation to safety and pollution prevention. We need the assistance of EC member states and international organisations in bringing about the necessary changes to ensure safety at sea and avoid pollution.

It is an established fact that it is the proper operation and maintenance of ships which is the key factor for safety and pollution prevention. It is vitally important therefore to eliminate substandard vessels. We must also seek improved data interchange on vessels on a worldwide basis and the provision of resources to ensure that sufficient numbers of inspectors are trained to a similarly high standard throughout Europe. The EC must use its economic and political strength to encourage those Third World countries with inadequate arrangements to rectify that position. Many of the problems that arise as a result of disasters at sea unfortunately originate in countries who do not seek to apply the same standards as are applied here and in Europe as a whole. Ireland should support the European Community Shipowners Association's suggestion that vessel traffic services should have an enhanced role in avoiding accidents in congested waters and that action in the areas of policy planning and promoting standards for qualifications of personnel should be taken in the context of such vessel traffic service systems.

Directly related to protection of the marine environment is the need to provide adequate waste reception facilities in ports. Regrettably, this is a matter that has been totally neglected in many circumstances. It is important that member states fulfil their obligations in this regard. As a result of the lack of proper facilities at ports, a lot of dumping is taking place in our seas. This can be seen from pollution of our beaches. There is regular pollution of the beaches of north County Dublin and it has been established that much of this pollution results from indiscriminate dumping at sea due to the lack of proper facilities at ports to deal with this problem. The problem will not go away. If facilities are not provided at ports the rubbish will continue to be dumped at sea. Every opportunity must be taken to strengthen legislation to encourage and promote greater environmental awareness and protection of our seas. It is time we called a halt to the obvious acts of vandalism leading to pollution at sea.

As I said at the outset, the purpose of this legislation is to give effect to the International Convention on Salvage and to strengthen the law on the removal of wrecks which constitute a threat of harm to the marine environment or a hazard to navigation. Nobody could disagree with that. It is important that authorised officers have the necessary powers to deal with cases of vessels in distress. I welcome the provision in the legislation which extends the protection to wrecks of historical, archaeological or artistic importance. That is a measure that I and my party support.

I would like to take this opportunity to support the Minister's remarks of congratulations to those who engage in search and rescue operations. Many people put their own lives at risk when assisting vessels in distress at sea. All those engaged in the rescue service are to be congratulated and respected for the work they do, whether it be the Irish Marine Emergency Service, the RNLI, the Naval Service or the Air Corps. All these people and many others who give assistance do a tremendous humanitarian job to save other people's lives and all of us fully recognise the valuable contribution they make.

Another notable fact is that countries are always ready to assist each other. Prior to the setting up of our helicopter rescue service it was a great source of encouragement to see the co-operation between Britain and Ireland in terms of assisting each other in dealing with a vessel in distress at sea. Such co-operation is necessary in these circumstances. I welcome the provision in the legislation which renders the owner of a vessel liable for expenses incurred in a rescue service. Presumably this will be part and parcel of the insurance cover on the vessel. Those who incur expense in helping vessels in distress should recoup the expenses incurred.

As the Minister said, it is unfortunate that legislation is necessary to give the Garda Síochána powers to search persons suspected of plundering a vessel in distress. Unfortunately, people will use any occasion to get what they can for themselves and it is necessary to extend these powers to the Garda Síochána. On the question of salvage, I will be dealing with some of the provisions in this regard on Committee Stage. The legislation tidies up affairs in this area and provides that costs incurred in dealing with salvage be recouped. I hope that if amendments are put down on these matters on Committee Stage, the Minister will favourably consider them.

In respect of wrecks, local authorities are empowered under this legislation to remove a wreck if there are reasonable grounds for believing that it constitutes a threat of harm to the marine environment or to related interests. This is a wise decision. I hope that, once again, in circumstances where power is given to local authorities we do not find that they have not adequate resources to carry out the functions given to them.

It is important that local authorities be given the power to remove wrecks if they pose a threat to the marine environment, endanger life or affect our tourism industry. Local authorities have the power to move crashed vehicles from our roads and I do not see why they should not have the power to remove ship wrecks from the waters around our coast if they are causing damage or are likely to do so. I sincerely hope local authorities will be given the resources to enable them to carry out the functions given to them under this legislation.

I will deal with the provisions of the Bill in more detail on Committee Stage. The one criticism I have is that when we are amending legislation we do not avail of all the opportunities afforded to us to deal with issues which are a problem. I am referring in particular to marine pollution, damage to the environment and the safety of vessels, particularly ferries. In view of the number of people which can now be carried on board new super-ferries, it is vitally important that the legislation in this area is looked at. Referring a matter to a committee with a recommendation is not adequate. There are ongoing problems in regard to ferries, for example, the employment of staff who do not speak the same language as the passengers. As the Minister is aware this was a problem in the case of the mv Havelet. There were also problems in regard to the Celtic Pride where two children lost their lives.

Many ferries, including ferries from other countries, are unsuitable to carry large numbers of passengers. Very often one would not be too sure of the number of people on board a ferry, especially during peak periods. A number of questions in regard to the mv Havelet incident, which was not a disaster, still remain unanswered. Many trucks can overturn while on ferries, thus causing major problems. Consideration needs to be given to the number of vehicles which can be carried by ferries and also to safety precautions and the language used by ferry companies. I am sure very few people understand the term, “muster station”. Passengers on board planes are given detailed advice in regard to safety precautions, for example, the location of the exits and life jackets. I accept that most ferries make an announcement about safety precautions but I suggest that very few people pay any attention to it, mainly because of the size of the vessel.

Ferries are getting bigger and are carrying more passengers. I was never one to suggest the introduction of legislation merely for the sake of it — sometimes Governments tend to interfere too much in people's lives and we should not have so much legislation — but when it comes to the safety of individuals, obvious neglect by some ship and ferry owners and a lack of respect for our environment legislation is necessary. Unfortunately, little Ireland cannot solve all the problems in this area on its own, but we can play a major part in encouraging the European Community to lead the way in insisting on standards of safety and the protection of the environment.

Many of the large tankers which use the seas on a regular basis have very few personnel on board. It should be remembered that machines and technology can only do so much and such large tankers could cause a major disaster if they are not properly manned. I do not know if it would be possible — it may be possible in some instances — to use this legislation to provide additional protective measures in this area. I ask the Minister between now and Committee Stage to look at the position in regard to ferries and consider the introduction of amendments which would strengthen existing legislation and give more powers to inspectors, such as the inspector who reviewed the mv Havelet incident. The inspector in that case reported on the incident and made recommendations. The Minister should consider whether some of those recommendations could be made into regulations. It is more important to have regulations in this area than regulations governing burials at sea — very few people are buried at sea. While I accept the Minister's point that more people are being buried at sea, there are more major problems, for example, damage to the environment and pollution of the sea, which require to be regulated.

We could do much more in terms of tightening-up legislation and recognising that times have changed and the legislation enacted many years ago never dealt with the sort of problems we now face — the size of ferries, the frequency and distance they travel, the hiring of ships with crews who do not speak the same language as the passengers, etc. These major problems need to be addressed. Likewise, consideration needs to be given to the provision of facilities at ports for taking waste from ships. If these facilities are not provided then waste will be dumped at sea. Very few ports have the recommended facilities for the taking of waste from ships. As a result more waste is dumped a sea, thus giving rise to pollution of our beaches. It is frightening to think what has been dumped at sea, particularly having regard to the reports which have been issued since the fall of the Soviet Union about the continuous dumping of nuclear waste at sea. We have closed our eyes to this issue up to now; it is time we opened them. As a member of the European Community we have an opportunity to use our influence to ensure that change is brought about in this area.

Mr. Clohessy

I agree with the points made by Deputy Barrett about the state of many ships which sail the seas. Some of these ships, which are registered in ports many thousands of miles away from here and which transport cargoes of ore, etc., can often find themselves in difficulties in mid-Atlantic and have to off load their poisonous cargoes. I have a friend in Cork, P.J. Lawless, who sailed the Atlantic on a number of occassions and he told me he was frightened by what he encountered at sea with regard to waste. There is often a large number of barrels floating on the surface and, as Deputy Barrett pointed out, many ships are not sufficiently structurally sound to transport substances across the Atlantic and other seas.

I welcome this Bill on behalf of my party. For too long we as an island nation have taken a somewhat indifferent attitude to merchant shipping and marine affairs. As an island off Europe we must take a special interest in the current international developments in our marine sector.

The fact that this Bill will give effect to the International Convention on Salvage is to be welcomed. We must become part of the international community when matters of merchant shipping and marine affairs are debated. For too long our laws have not been clear-cut in relation to salvage and marine distress at sea in general. The fact that most of our current legislation has a basis in the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, is an indication that we need to update our approach to take into account developments of recent decades.

We have all seen the tragic consequences of accidents at sea and I welcome this Bill because it puts in place a streamlined package to ensure that rescue and salvage is carried out in a structured and legal manner under clear guidelines.

The updating of merchant and marine legislation is a vitally important task for this House. In the past few years we have seen dramatic changes in sea transportation as larger and larger ships are introduced to achieve economics of scale for their owners. The busy shipping lanes ferry millions of tons of cargo every year. While most of the large shipping companies operate within the industry safety guidelines, there are always exceptions and in recent times we have seen dreadful accidents where ships carrying sensitive cargoes have run around and caused massive pollution.

One of the worrying aspects of the international shipping sector is the number of oil spillages where vast areas of natural beauty and valuable fish stocks have been damaged by pollution as a result of shipwrecks. It is only fair and proper that the owners of such ships shall be obliged to pay for the clean up costs. I welcome the provision whereby those engaged in salvage operations, who pay special attention in their work to preventing pollution, will be rewarded. We are all aware of the huge ship that ran aground in Ballyvaughan Bay and the subsequent lengthy operation to salvage it. While the threat of pollution was dispersed in that instance I see no reason for not carrying out follow-up surveys to ensure that no long term damage has been done to vital shellfish grounds.

Looking more closely at this Bill, there are some areas of concern. For example, in relation to vessels in distress, the new provision states:

... any person may, for the purpose of rendering assistance to the vessel, saving the lives of the shipwrecked persons or saving the cargo or apparel of the vessel, pass and repass, either with or without vehicles, over any adjoining lands... without being subject to interruption by the owner or occupier,...

In the heat of rescue or in the rush to attend a vessel in distress, this is a reasonable and straightforward action by the designated officer acting on behalf of the Minister. However, let us pause for a moment and consider the implications of the new provision. We are all aware of the current debate in farming circles about the high cost of insurance and in particular of public liability in some cases. Will the Minister state the possible or probable repercussions of a landowner raising this insurance issue in relation to such a rescue?

While I acknowledge that under this Bill any damage sustained by the owner or occupier as a consequence of the new right of pass being exercised, shall be a charge on the vessel, there may be the further question of an extension of insurance cover. I would like the Minister to respond to this point.

It was more acceptable in olden days, when pirates and smugglers roamed the clifftops of our coastline seeking vessels in distress, to clamber down a cliff face and steal whatever cargo had been washed ashore. Landowners perhaps even connived in this terrible trade. Today, because of the extension of our laws to protect the rights of offenders, it would not be beyond the bounds of possibility for the smuggler to sue the landowner if he fell down the cliff face.

However, I am also somewhat alarmed that the landowner or occupier may be held guilty of an offence if he or she impedes or hinders any person engaged in the exercise of these rights as now outlined in the Bill. The Minister should clarify that aspect of this section and ensure that the landowner is made fully aware of the powers being given to designated officers under the Bill.

I welcome the provisions in relation to giving the Garda increased powers of detention without warrant where a person is suspected, with reasonable cause, of plundering a vessel in distress. There is no greater maritime crime than to steal the cargo of a ship in distress; it is akin to grave robbing and the fact that the Garda are being given powers to search suspects is a step forward.

In Part III of this Bill I welcome the guidelines under the new salvage procedure and I particularly welcome the defining of damage to the environment to include substantial physical damage to human health or to marine life in coastal or inland waters caused by pollution, contamination, fire, explosion or similar major incidents. However, I would like to bring it to the Minister's attention that under the salvage guidelines certain platforms and drilling units are exempted. This part of the Bill shall not apply to floating platforms or to mobile offshore drilling units when they are engaged in the exploration, exploitation or production of sea-bed mineral resources.

While I fully understand and accept that a fixed or floating platform or mobile units could not be classified as suitable for salvage, I am still concerned about the potential for pollution. It is not long since the Piper Alpha disaster in the North Sea and the appalling loss of life incurred in that dreadful accident. We must remember also that considerable pollution was caused to the sea-bed and marine life. Therefore, I ask the Minister to reconsider this exemption, especially in relation to the damage to the environment clause. We all want to see exploration off our coasts in a bid to develop the potential of our natural gas or oil resources, but it should not be at the expense of any possible damage to our marine or sea-bed world.

The provision in this Bill for the Minister to appoint receivers of wrecks is welcome as is the guideline that the Garda and the Director of the National Museum must be notified of the taking possession of a wreck. We are all aware of the wrecks now lying in waters off our coastline which have attracted a long line of treasure hunters in recent years.

Our maritime history is charted by these old wrecks and stories of Spanish galleons lying in deep waters in various locations along the west coast still hold a certain sense of awe and romance. The lure of buried gold is a powerful one and no doubt some of the legends are true but we must balance our sense of deep sea adventure with a concern for valuable items recovered from sunken wrecks.

This is why the proposal providing for the retention of a wreck of historical, archaeological or artistic importance by the director of the National Museum is to be welcomed.

There are also updated fines for offences committed in respect of the provisions outlined in the Bill and one area I must refer to is where people board wrecks without permission. In the past, this unacceptable activity has been a source of major concern not only to the owners of a stranded vessel but to the rescue services.

The tradition of a person boarding a vessel in distress and claiming salvage has its roots in long gone traditions of seafaring when no law was observed and merchant shipping was subject to the unlawful activities of vagabonds. Today, in more enlightened times, we are bringing structure and order to what in the past was a grey and disputed area.

Therefore, I am glad that the provisions of the Bill propose to make it an offence for an unauthorised person to board a wrecked or stranded vessel without permission or to impede the saving of a wreck. This is an area in which some clarification on the part of the Minister may be necessary. For example, in what circumstances would a person impede a rescue? If a landowner raises questions of insurance or compensation with the designated officer could it be held that he did impede, or intended to impede, the saving of a wreck? Overall I welcome the increased penalties proposed for restricting or obstructing an inspector appointed to carry out an investigation into a marine accident. The fine of £15,000 or two year's imprisonment or both indicates how seriously we view such offences.

Of course there are other aspects of merchant shipping and the marine sector which will be included under the provisions of this Bill. Here I might mention the current controversy about super-tankers and the series of accidents in international waters, the cause of ongoing debate in maritime circles.

As an island nation we are dependent on transport links with our nearest trading partners. Since our national resources are limited and, while we have an efficient seagoing passenger and cargo ferry service, we shall be dependent largely on international companies for improved surface transportation in the post-Maastricht era. While the funds and development plans for our transport infrastructure appear impressive, unless our ports are upgraded we will fall further behind our European colleagues in the development of our surface transport links. We must get our produce to export markets quickly and cost effectively. For that reason I am sure that the provisions of the Bill will add enormously to our influence in merchant and marine affairs in the years ahead. Since we will be part of a wider European Community we must face the reality that we are dependent on resources outside our control to compete in international markets. I am glad that the provisions of this Bill will bring our legislation into line with current merchant shipping developments and give effect to the International Convention on Salvage, 1989.

Since very little information has been furnished to us I must refer to section 66 (1) of the Bill which states that the Minister may make regulations in relation to the burial of human remains at sea. At best it is a vague subsection. I take it the Minister is considering the conditions which would apply to the burial of human remains at sea. While the regulations have not been spelled out section 66 (2) states:

A person who contravenes any regulation under this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on summary convention, to a fine not exceeding £500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both.

It strikes me that £500 is a reasonable cost for a funeral and that, in fact, it would be an advantage to be buried at sea and lead to greater competition in the undertaking business. Nonetheless, I should like to hear exactly what the Minister has in mind with regard to his regulations governing burial at sea.

Having outlined my views, I acknowledge the international dimensions of the provisions of this Bill since only through recognising the worth of international agreements and becoming involved in their full implementation, that we can benefit by belonging to the international community.

Finally will the Minister clarify information I received some time ago? For example, if there is a mutiny on board a ship whose port is within the boundary of a local authority I understand that the relevant local authority would be responsible for any malicious damage to the ship.

Mr. Sargent

Ar dtúis ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabhaíl leis an Aire as an mBille seo a thabhairt ós ár gcomhair. I understand that although some legislative provisions obtain already under the National Monuments Act, 1987, for dealing with wrecks and salvage, the provisions of this Bill certainly go much further in dealing with them.

In the title of the Bill, I am slightly puzzled that merchant shipping only is mentioned particularly since, in the case of Ireland, since World War II, I am informed that apart from the many casualties of war, human and material shipping with very dangerous substances on board was scuttled around our coasts. There was a short report in the Irish Independent of 22 October of chemicals having been dumped at sea 80 miles north west of Ireland over a 13 year period — between 1945 and 1957 — which had been confirmed the previous day by the British Ministry of Defence, when ships were sealed before being scuttled in waters more than one thousand metres deep to prevent their toxic contents escaping.

The provisions of this Bill appear to fall short of dealing with what would appear to be a very real danger in the future. Anyone familiar with the sea knows that sea water is a very corrosive element. I fear that our coastline is a veritable time bomb of toxic cocktails, lying in wait, the legacies of wars in which we were not even directly involved. To deal effectively with these maritime and coastal hazards will necessitate the involvement of other authorities, British, American and perhaps German. In that respect I appeal to the Minister to bring his experience gleaned in the Department of Foreign Affairs to bear on the problem, as he has done in his Defence portfolio to date. Indeed it might also be worth reminding the Minister that the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs will be aware of the dumping at sea off the south west coast as it was within his political bailiwick in the 1970s and early 1980s when a sizeable amount of nuclear waste was dumped some distance off the south west coast. However, that is academic when talking about nuclear waste. That dumping was stopped through international pressure, which is also warranted in regard to other substances dumped in the past.

I regret that the provisions of the Bill do not deal specifically with wreckage and-or disused military hardware. Since the end of the Cold War and the shift from land based to sea-based missiles, we must recognise that quite an amount of submarine traffic as well as surface sea traffic plies the waters off our coasts which raises the question of why the provisions of this Bill are confirmed to merchant shipping.

Perhaps the motivating force behind the introduction of this Bill — which I should like to have clarified by the Minister — was the interests of salvage workers or people interested in salvage, amateurs or professionals, seeking to explore and, on occasions, in the past, plundering various wrecks off our shores. Of course, another motivating factor could be the tragedy of the mv Kilkenny in Dublin Bay which highlighted a number of shortcomings in our legislation and procedures for dealing with wreckage particularly close to our shores. I gather that one can gather some of the flotsam and jetsam deposited from that wreck in Dublin Bay right along the coast in my constituency in Dublin North.

How can a salvor be cited for negligence and dishonesty, as stated in section 31? Is this matter to be left entirely to the Judiciary?

Section 41 provides for notification to the gardaí and the National Museum of various wrecks and details pertaining to them. Should the Maritime Museum, in the Minister's constituency in Dún Laoghaire, be fully involved in the documenting of wrecks, particularly those of historical merit? I wish to pay tribute to the Maritime Museum for the work done on a voluntary basis over the years despite the lack of State involvement in our maritime heritage. One of the most poignant aspects of this Bill is that it highlights just how late Ireland has been in coming to recognise our maritime heritage. I regret that but at least we are beginning to wake up to what our coast has to offer and what it has meant down through our history.

Coming from the constituency of Dún Laoghaire the Minister is in a very good position to appreciate the importance of getting the Bill right. No doubt he will be anxious to ensure the legislation is as cost effective as possible. In that regard perhaps he will avail of the opportunity to spell out who will foot the bill for the removal of the obstructions referred to in section 54. In my opinion the person responsible or the owner of the boat should pay for the removal of the obstruction. This is not simply a question of saving the taxpayer money. The fact that a laissez faire approach has been adopted in regard to obstructions in the past has meant that wrecks have been allowed remain for very long periods and I speak from experience in north County Dublin. The fact that wrecks are left in situ makes it very difficult to understand how section 56 (4) can be applied without exceptions being allowed. Perhaps we need some indication in legislation as to how the two might be complemented. I will give two examples: section 56 deals with interfering with wrecks or obstructions. When one goes to a harbour or a waterway one frequently sees boats tied to other boats. Sometimes people board vessels to reach their own when they are coming from or going to land. Will the Minister explain whether that will be a problem for people in future? Second, on a visit to Gweedore I recall seeing an old fishing boat firmly embedded in the expanse of sand which serves as a landmark for a local hotel. Naturally people are curious about it, look at it and often board it. Will this legislation mean a change in that practice because to date no notice was taken of anybody interested in exploring that old fishing boat?

Regarding the financial aspects of the Bill, it is difficult to understand how it can be said there will be no Exchequer or staff implications when it states that the Minister can appoint — not one — any number of receivers of wreck. Will they be paid from another source? It would seem that if the Minister is appointing them it should have some bearing on the Department of the Marine.

Like the Minister, I represent the maritime constituency of Dublin North, or, as we like to call it, Fingal. The Fingal coast has witnessed a large number of shipwrecks, many of which are still there. For example the Tayleur off Lambay Island was well documented and tragically cost many lives; the Belle Hill and the Sarah of Runcorn, in my town of Balbriggan, are enmeshed in the local history. To this day the people of Balbriggan are affectionately referred to in Skerries as the Belle Hill robbers because in the middle of the last century this large ship, bound for Argentina, foundered off the coast. Times have changed but at that time any fuel, delph or tea which was carried would not have been widely available to many of the poorer people living in the region. To this day one can find various items of such delph in houses which, I presume, will not be confiscated following the enactment of this Bill.

This Bill will be viewed with great interest in some quarters given the practices that have evolved down through the years of taking whatever was washed up. Taking such items was very similar to gathering stones off the shore. Many Fingal homes have on display items from various shipwrecks and in Rush the anchor of the Tayleur is a sad testament to the huge loss of life from that wreck.

Our respect for the sea has not been consistent in recent times. When we see "merchant shipping" as part of the title of this Bill the demise of Irish shipping is brought to mind. Our involvement in merchant shipping has been a very sad experience for many people who were employed in that area and our practice of allowing the sea to be used as a dumping ground not only through raw sewage being piped directly in the sea but also using estuaries as landfill sites is deplorable. In my area, Rogerstown estuary — a very precious wildlife reserve — is used as the repository for all waste in north County Dublin. To that end we have much catching up to do when it comes to respecting the sea and ensuring that we make the best use of it, bearing in mind its sensitivities.

We are a unique country in terms of our position in the European Community. The sea makes us unique because we are the last country in Europe not to have a direct link with the other member states. If it is worthwhile to be a member of the EC the use we make of our maritime environment is vital. This Bill is a positive step towards ensuring that that use is not harmful. Unfortunately, our uniqueness also extends to the fact that we do not have skips available at ports.

We do not have official procedures for dealing with much of the waste dumped at sea whether by fishing boats, merchant ships or ferries. As Deputy Clohessy said, when one is out in a boat one sees everything from barrels, plastic bags and beer can rings, basically anything that can float. Fishermen, and certainly those in Dublin North, will testify that fish are landed with the rings from beer cans and pieces of plastic around their necks. We have neglected to provide facilities for merchant ships to get rid of waste, have it processed on land and the sea has suffered.

When we talk about salvage and wrecks I hope we are talking not only about major news stories such as wrecks from the Spanish Armada and oil spillages but small scale pollution because from the wildlife point of view this is equally as deadly. Items floating in the sea are mistaken as food so that marine life from fish to turtles eat plastic and are not able to digest it. That aspect is not dealt with in this Bill but I hope it will be accommodated in the Bill on Committee Stage. I expect it will be improved on Committee Stage but, nevertheless, this long overdue legislation is welcome.

Mr. Mulvihill

I wish to share my time with Deputy Toddy O'Sullivan.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Mulvihill

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on the Bill. As a former member of the Naval Service I know about the dangers and hazards around our coast which is one of the most rugged in the world. For far too long we have neglected the sea. We are an island nation and we should have more interest in what is happening in the sea off our coast. I will not dwell on the tragedies that occurred but I had practical experience of trying to save lives at sea such as on the occasion of the still unexplained crash of the Viscount St. Phelim on Sunday, 24 March 1968 into the sea off Tuskar Rock with the loss of all on board. I was on board the corvette L.E. Clionna which caught fire off the Cork coast and, thanks to the quick and efficient action of the crew, a very serious tragedy was averted. We have seen tragedies at sea down through the years in Cobh such as the sinking of the Lusitania which changed the course of World War 1. The survivors landed in Cobh. The bodies of those who lost their lives are buried in the old churchyard in Cobh which I visit occasionally. This really brings home how angry the sea can be. We have a fine heritage centre and I recommend that every Member visit it because it is a mine of information on ships wrecked off our coast.

I welcome the provision in the Bill which gives permission for wrecks to be taken over by the local authority when they are a danger to shipping and navigation. At present nobody can claim a wreck in case the original owner turns up to claim it. I welcome also the provisions in section 7 (2) which provide that:

Subject to subsection (5), an authorised officer may, for the purposes of saving shipwrecked persons, a vessel in distress or the cargo or apparel of the vessel—

(a) requires assistance from such relevant persons as that officer thinks necessary;

If a person took a craft to save a shipwrecked person he could be charged with taking the craft without the owner's consent and I am glad to see that this will change.

As a member of the coastal management committee of Cork County Council I welcome in particular, section 52 which empowers the local authority to remove and sell wrecks. The example that comes to mind — I am sure Deputy Sheehan knows all about it — is the Bardini Reefer which is a danger to shipping in Castletownbere. I wish to quote the following from a letter addressed to Cork County Council by the Department of the Marine:

The cost of removal of the wreck estimated at £500,000 is not a firm figure. It is in fact a low estimate. The actual cost could be a good deal higher.

The extra revenue generated by the factory ships calling to Castletownbere would be of little assistance in covering the cost of the wreck removal. In any event, this additional revenue is required towards reducing the current deficit incurred in operation and maintenance of the fishery harbour centre.

I appeal to the Minister to look again at this because it is causing a great deal of concern in the area. Close by there is a visible wreck of another fishing trawler which went on the rocks some years ago. Two naval personnel were lost trying to save the lives of the shipwrecked persons.

I hope this Bill will lead to the modernisation of Ireland's maritime laws. I take this opportunity to thank the British authorities, especially the rescue organisation, who have co-operated with the Irish emergency service during maritime tragedies off our coast. This has saved a number of lives. I acknowledge the work that the Minister of State, Deputy Gerry O'Sullivan, and his Department have put into this Bill. I know the Minister has a special interest in safety at sea and in our harbours. He is committed to the Royal National Lifeboat Institute which has rescued many people.

Has the number of those wishing to be buried at sea increased? Is it cheaper to be buried at sea than on land? Will this Bill have the effect of increasing the number of those wishing to be buried at sea?

Mr. Sheehan

Is the Deputy contemplating that?

Mr. Mulvihill

Not yet, Deputy. Will there be provisions in legislation that must be complied with by those who wish to be buried at sea? Maritime people may wish to be buried at sea. I would prefer that there would be such a provision rather than having people opting to be buried at sea for financial reasons. Recruitment to the Defence Forces, and to the Naval Services in particular, was raised recently. I appeal to the Minister when he is recruiting to the Defence Forces to give special consideration to the Naval Service because it renders an invaluable service around our coast.

Mr. T. O'Sullivan

I welcome the Minister's offer to take on board amendments on Committee Stage. As an island nation it is absolutely essential that this House puts in place the necessary legislation to ensure the orderly movement of shipping to and from our ports and harbours. This is probably the most substantial maritime Bill since the Harbours Act, 1946, which was quite significant.

Every child knows about the Kowloon Bridge, the mv Kilkenny, the Havelet and the Ranga which sank off the Dingle coast many years ago. The disaster of the Herald of Free Enterprise was off our shores and before that the older generation will recall the heroic deeds of Captain Carlson in trying to save the Flying Enterprise. The ship was not flying an Irish flag, nonetheless, that was one of the greatest deeds of bravery in maritime history. All those disaster at sea have been the subject of discussion in almost every home and it is significant that they should affect an island nation such as ours to that extent.

Will the Minister reconsider some of the provisions of the legislation on Committee Stage? The Bill states that a period of seven days must be given when serving notice on the owner of a ship. That may present difficulties in some cases having regard to the fact that many ships fly flags of convenience. It may not be possible a short notice to ensure that lives are not put at risk, that environmental damage is not caused or that inconvenience is not caused to other ships using our ports. Those matters are fundamental. Deputy Barrett mentioned the Kowloon Bridge and the irresponsible action which resulted in the ship leaving the port, crashing into rocks a few miles down the coast and polluting the seas around west Cork. If this legislation had been in place at that time, there would not have been a débâcle. That demonstrates the need for decisive action as soon as a disaster is threatened, there is a risk of pollution or loss of life.

The Ranga, a newly built ship went aground off the coast of Kerry along one of our most scenic tourist routes, the Dingle Peninsula, which did not add to the attractiveness of the route. We must have the ability to deal effectively with such problems and I hope the penalties imposed under this legislation will be a disincentive to all shipowners acting irresponsibly within our territorial waters.

The demanning of our lighthouses has not received a great welcome and in the long term will prove a false economy. The people who manned those lighthouses also acted as look-outs and at times were responsible for saving lives but, unfortunately, modern technology has made them redundant. I hope that by way of legislation we will do everything possible to ensure the safety of our coastline.

I welcome the involvement of the director of the National Museum in maritime affairs. For far too long we have not been conscious of our maritime history. Because we are an island nation we tend to take things for granted. Many wrecks around our coast need the protection of proper legislation. Modern technology has enabled people to salvage ships of tremendous historical interest which, in the past, was thought to be impossible. An impressive salvage operation involving a Dutch ship that had been submerged for hundreds of years was carried out off the coast of Great Britain. By the use of modern technology it was possible to raise that vessel and transport it back to Holland. Regardless of whether we subscribe to violence, the Aud which sank off the Cork coast during the War of Independence while bringing vital armaments to this country to assist the insurrection may contain artefacts of importance to the National Museum. I have no doubt that salvage operations are carried out within the law, but it is possible that some people might not be scrupulous and desecrate monuments even though they are at the bottom of the sea. I hope the director of the National Museum will inform the Minister of the necessary steps that should be taken to ensure that important historical vessels are preserved and that at some future date it might be possible to salvage some of the artefacts on those vessels which might be important to future generations.

Section 8 deals with the functions of a harbour master where a vessel is in distress in a harbour. There is no provision in the Harbours Act, 1946, for such an appointment, but some harbour boards have the power to appoint a deputy harbour master. There are three or four deputy harbour masters in Dublin, two in Limerick and one in Cork, but the busy port of Waterford does not have one. In the absence of a harbour master a person authorised by the Minister may make a decision about whether a ship should leave port, but the legislation must be more specific. A specific person should be identified to carry out that duty. There are harbour masters in Galway, Dundalk, Drogheda, Wicklow, Arklow and New Ross, but there are no deputy harbour masters in those ports. It may not be possible for the authorised person to get to a certain location at short notice should that be necessary. Therefore, I ask the Minister to consider nominating a person to act on behalf of the harbour master. I understand that in Galway the secretary of the port acts as the deputy harbour master. In certain cases it is necessary for somebody to make a decision on the spot. In the case of the Havelet, despite the findings there is still doubt in some people's minds that it was not listing when it was leaving the port and I understand that may be the subject of legal proceedings in the near future.

During the summer I visited the port of Howth on which a great deal of money has been spent. A person was scrapping a ship which was tied up in the port. I accept that is an important commercial activity for the people in the area but a specific part of the port should be designated for it. The ship should not be tied up along the amenity part of the port to carry out such work. Likewise, small craft are scuppered in the confines of small harbours and ports and left to rot. There appears to be a convention among seagoing people not to scrap small craft, but to leave them to rot as if they will add to the appearance of the port. That is not acceptable. We must ensure that the environment is protected despite hangups about scrapping these smaller craft. It is common to allow small craft to rot rather than to destroy or dismantle them.

As a member of a port authority I am conscious of the importance of this legislation and I welcome the Bill which, I hope, will ensure we do not have a repetition of the Kowloon Bridge, the Ranga, or the Betelgeuse. I accept that the accident involving the Betelgeuse could not have been prevented. This Bill will enable the Minister and the local authorities to take the necessary action to ensure that ships are not allowed to rot and disfigure harbour areas. I hope the Minister will give consideration to the points I raised.

Another point relates to the ability of the shipowner to pay the salvor. The shipowner can be charged if the money accruing from the salvage is not sufficient. It will be difficult to get this money from the owner, indeed it is often difficult to identify the owner. Is it possible to strengthen this section? This issue will have to be addressed. The owner of a tug which answers a distress call will weigh up its economic potential for him. Is it possible that such a person may scupper the ship before it comes to port, thereby damaging the environment? I would like the Minister to consider making a fund available to cover that type of contingency. With regard to the seven days' notice, could we contact Lloyds of London who give the ships the rating to find out if a machanism is available to ensure that notice is served in the shortest possible time? The serving of a notice will cause difficulties. I know that modern communications systems make it possible for us to serve notice on the owner of a ship in a foreign port but I ask the Minister to keep these points in mind for Committee Stage.

Mr. Sheehan

I thank the Minister for introducing this long overdue Bill. I am sorry he is not here to hear me compliment him on how well he looked this morning after his sojourn on the ocean wave on board a west Cork trawler to assess the difficulties and hazards appeartaining to the high seas for the people trying to eke out a living there. I hope the Minister will have many more similar trips in the near future, perhaps he will take the junior Minister with him on the next occasion.

Ireland has 5,800 kilometers of coastline and is the third largest maritime country in the EC, in fact it is now the only island nation in the EC. Our geographical location and proximity to busy shipping lanes means that the risk of major incidents is very real and we must prepare accordingly. The Bill does not refer in detail to the recruitment and training of personnel although that is a very important matter. As everybody knows, a drifting vessel can endanger strategic resources such as offshore gas production platforms, something we did not consider when we talked about the danger of abandoned and helpless ships drifting to our coastline. So far nobody has alluded to the danger that would follow if one of those tankers or memmoth vessels went adrift and hit a gas producing platform. If that happened, the consequences for our coastline would be horrific.

Sunken or stranded vessels can block the approaches to ports and fishery harbours with obvious implications for the economic viability of the area. I fail to see why successive Ministers for the Marine during the past 12 years have allowed the Bardini Reefer to lodge on the main shipping entrance to Castletownbere Harbour. It should not be tolerated. Will the Department was until there is a major collision with the wreck on a dark wintry night? Will it take the loss of life and limb to get the Department to remove this sunken debris from that trading lane? This wreck is causing great difficulty for the vessels operating in and out of Castletownbere, our second major fishery port.

Deputy Mulvihill quoted a letter to Cork County Council of which I am proud to be a member, stating that the cost of removing this wreck would be astronomical, between £15,000 and £500,000. The harbour dues collected from the Russian factory ships by the harbour master would pay to clear the Bardini Reefer from Castletownbere Harbour and could also upgrade the harbour facilities. I call on the Minister to act before it is too late, to remove the danger to trade and resources in that major fishing port. I appeal to him to provide the money to remove this wreck immediately without waiting for the passing of the Bill.

If the Department of the Marine cannot deal with that small problem I would hate to think of what might happen if there is a major emergency before the winter is out. Coming as I do from an area on the south west coast which is exposed to the ravages of Atlantic storms I am only too well aware of the dangers in the major shipping lanes off that coastline.

Mr. E. Kenny

The former Taoiseach nearly lost his life there.

Mr. Sheehan

That will be of historical importance as the years roll by.

Mr. E. Kenny

It is a remarkable spot.

Mr. Sheehan

Following a recent storm three major vessels, the Cristos Bitas, the Capo Emma and the Kowloon Bridge, were disabled in Bantry Bay. By some miracle an experienced, first class international welder was able to bridge the gap on the hull of the Capo Emma, which was carrying a large cargo of crude oil. The damage was caused by a freak Atlantic wave and the ship was towed to safety. The Minister would be wise to designate Bantry Bay as the never centre of a major search and rescue service to cover the south and south west coastline. It is well known that if a vessel is crippled within 50 to 100 miles off the south west coast it will be towed to the one and only bay in western Europe where it can be accommodated without causing any interference to shipping lanes. I urge the Minister to designate Bantry Bay as the nerve centre of a search and rescue service. This would be a step in the right direction.

It is also well known that vessels transporting oil, gas and chemicals pose a major threat in the sense that there is a risk of fires and explosions. Moves are afoot in the European Community to established exclusion zones around our coast. I urge the Minister at the next EC Council of Ministers to emphasise that our south and west coasts are very vulnerable and seek the establishment of a 20-mile exclusion zone to keep all tankers carrying dangerous and explosive materials away from our coast. If we are to protect the livelihoods of people living near the south and south west coasts we need clean beaches. Our tourisim industry is of major importance and we must ensure that we protect those who have invested heavily in the industry. The Minister should act immediately and ensure that a 20-mile exclusion zone is established.

I wish to draw attention to the fact — this presents a grave threat — that Japan is now transporting its nuclear waste to Sellafield for disposal. The Minister will be aware that the ships transporting this dangerous cargo pass perilously close to our south east coast and on up the Irish Sea. Why did the European Community grant Japan the prerogative to send its nuclear waste to Europe given that it could dump this waste in the vast expanses of the Pacific Ocean? Instead, the nuclear waste will be encased in concrete and dumped 400 miles from my nearest beach in Barleycove in west Cork. This is a disgrace and it should not be tolerated any longer. I urge the Minister at the next meeting of the EC Council of Ministers to emphasise that there is a necessity to ban this dumping in the seas off our coastline.

I wish to pay tribute to the Royal Air Force helicopter service at Brawdy in Wales for the invaluable service it is providing to this nation. Each time it is summoned when there is an emergency off our south west coast it arrives promptly. The crew always brave the elements, even in 100 miles per hour hurricane winds, to help in emergencies. We should upgrade our helicopter service so that it will be able to respond in a similar fashion from bases located at Shannon and, indeed, Castletownbere.

Mr. E. Kenny

Skibbereen or Schull.

Mr. Sheehan

I appeal to the Minister to outlaw the indiscriminate dumping of ballast within our territorial waters. This has caused pollution with tar from these vessels being washed up on our beaches. The Minister must do everything to prevent this happening.

I compliment the Minister on producing this Bill which contains 66 sections but there is one omission. If a ship flying a flag of convenience of a Third World nation is scuttled, burned or sunk in our waters and the owner cannot be traced or the company has gone into liquidation it will not be possible to recover the costs of the salvage operation. I would like the Minister to include a new section in the Bill on Committee Stage to ensure that in cases where the owner of a vessel cannot be traced or where the company has gone into liquidation the costs of salvaging the wreck will be borne by the Department.

Incidents like that involving the Bardini Reefer cannot be allowed to continue on any part of our coastline. The Bardini Reefer is having a damnable effect on the minds of the inhabitants of our area who have to watch, at low tide, the top deck of that sunken vessel at the entrance to Castletownbere Harbour and, at full tide, the top of its masts. The Minister might say that mammoth conger eels and fish are bred in the hull of that vessel. I fail to see why successive Ministers have sat idly by and allowed this wreck to remain in Castletownbere. Until such time as the Minister takes action to remove that obstacle from Castletownbere Harbour, I will not have much faith in this Bill.

The low standard of maintenance, operation and crewing on the world's tanker fleet is of major concern. At one time tankers were operated by the giants of the oil industry but this is no longer the case. The fleets of traditional maritime nations have dwindled and most ships operate with low standards under a flag of convenience and crews recruited from Third World countries where qualifications are more easily come by than in the traditional maritime nations. We in Europe should not tolerate slipshod methods with tankers and ships being slapped together in the shortest possible time, resulting in them cracking up in severe storms off our coastline. Why not introduce an international test to make sure these vessels are seaworthy so that these bangers of vessels which are a menace to our natural resources can be removed? I call on the Minister to do something about that. He is looking well after the sojourn on the ocean wave on a good west Cork trawler. I hope he will take similar trips in the not too distant future, bring his junior Minister with him and get an up-to-date account of the dangers for the fishermen operating off our coasts.

Mr. E. Kenny

This is an important Bill, for many reasons. The Minister referred to the thanks the State owes to the various organisations which assisted in emergencies, accidents and marine safety over the years. My late grandfather was a member of Irish Lights for a number of years. He served on lighthouses from the north west coast to the south west coast. I recall his many descriptions of sea rescues and the bravery and courage of people in the lifeboat service, Irish Lights, the agencies that assisted and ordinary people. Deputy Sheehan referred to the courage of the RAF pilots and personnel in times of severe storm and inclement weather conditions. RAF helicopters carried out a substantial number of air sea rescues in the last 20 years around our coast at no cost to this State. That fact is often lost sight of although it is a very good example of international relations between two countries. In the light of what is going on now in the North, it should not be forgotten.

I am happy that the Minister set in train some very important developments in regard to the air-sea marine rescue service based on the west coast and I trust that with the Structural Funds and part of the £8 billion from Europe the service will continue to be developed.

One of the first sea wrecks I recall seeing was the Plassey which went aground off Inisheer in the Aran Islands about 40 years ago. It still remains on the coast as a rusting and derelict wreck. One of the more famous wrecks in recent times was the Torrey Canyon off the south coast of England. There was another off the north west coast of France and the Exxon Valdez, again in recent times. These call into question the necessity to do whatever can be done to protect environmentally sensitive areas. The west coast from Inishowen down to Mizen Head is wide open to the reach of the Atlantic, the awesome power generated by nature in the throes of a storm is frightening. There was an example a number of years ago when a huge tanker, 300 miles off the west coast, was in danger of breaking up. Even the RAF pilots were unable to get to it and the American Air Force had to be called into service with its jolly green giant helicopters to attempt to deal with it.

In the event of a major oil spillage off the south or west coast, I doubt if the major accident and emergency plans which county councils and local authorities are supposed to implement would be capable of dealing with the amount of oil or chemical spillage that would invade the beaches off the west coast. If we are serious about developing tourism in areas that have been very much left on the sidelines because of their peripherality, where many of the counties have eight, nine and ten blue flags under the European system of grading of beaches, the Minister must crack the whip and see that the most stringent safety precautions are put in train to eliminate the possibility of accidents that would destroy a potentially important part of economic life on the west and south west coast.

Having said that, I wish the Minister well in his office. It is said that if he was still in the Department of Foreign Affairs we would not have had the difficulties of a number of weeks ago. I have no doubt that his personal love of the west will be seen to great effect in what he implements in the Department of the Marine and Defence. I wish his Minister of State well also because he has undertaken particularly difficult tasks which I hope he will conclude in due course.

Minister for the Marine (Mr. Andrews)

I am grateful to Deputy Kenny for his remarks and I will certainly take note of what he says. I will deal with contributions to the debate, but not necessarily in the order in which they were made. I am pleased the Bill evoked such interest. Its title, Merchant Shipping (Salvage and Wreck) Bill, 1993, is somewhat intimidating. It amends past merchant shipping Acts. The Bill, which evoked interest in many areas, particularly that of maritime retrieval, is worth studying. It brings about fundamental changes to marine legislation which has not been amended for many years. It up-dates the legislation to enable us address maritime problems.

I was pleased Deputy Sheehan mentioned Castletownbere. I stayed on board a vessel there overnight, compliments of the captain of the Resplendent, which is an appropriate name of a vessel for Members of the Dáil. I would like to express my deep appreciation to the captain of the vessel, Captain Ted Harrington, who was in a pairing arrangement with Captain Sean O'Sullivan of the Cisemair. I saw the position in Castletownbere and I was most impressed by the professionalism and attention to detail of the fishermen in landing fish. They brought aboard a substantial herring catch, a species of fish that is more common in the Celtic Sea. The herring fishing season extends from October to February. I wish to express my appreciation to those involved in the fishing industry in west Cork who looked after me extremely well. I gained handson experience of the industry and increased my knowledge of my portfolio in the Department of the Marine. I appreciate Deputy Sheehan's remarks and I will respond to other points raised by him in the strong presentation of his case.

I note Deputy Barrett's comments regarding the need to up-date legislation following the publication of the report on the Havelet accident. The Deputy acknowledged that in the company of the Minister of State at the Department of the Marine, Deputy O'Sullivan, I referred a number of matters relating to safe practices on passenger ferries to the Department's expert body, the National Safety Ferry Committee, for urgent consideration. I will be guided by the recommendations of that committee. I will have no hesitation in amending existing legislation, even if such amendments breach recognised international standards.

I wish to refer to substandard vessels, rust-bucket vessels, and their elimination from our waters. It is important that we do not allow those vessels which pose an environmental threat in our waters. They are floating threats to the ecological wellbeing of our island. In the memorandum of understanding on port State control, the monitoring of substandard vessels and their elimination from our waters is given priority. Under that arrangement 14 member states, including EC member states, inspect vessels arriving at ports to ensure compliance with international conventions and standards. If a vessel is found to be defective it is detained until such time as the deficiencies are put right. The port State control committee recently took the initiative of targeting flag States that are persistent offenders. I agree with Deputy Barrett that we must closely monitor this; it is being seriously addressed.

Arising from the European Community's safe seas policy document a ministerial conference on port State control will take place in Copenhagen next September and the Minister of State or I will represent this country and I will contribute to its deliberations. I assure the House I will press for considerable strengthening of port State powers, as expressed by Deputy Barrett, and for measures to ensure greater effectiveness in inspection procedures. We will continue to support efforts to encourage improved standards and compliance with international regulations among the fleets of developing countries. The recent establishment of port State control regimes in Asia and South America is a promising development. In the context of what we seek to achieve such developments should be considered.

Regarding resources for local authorities to remove wrecks that are navigation hazards or threaten the marine environment, this Bill empowers such authorities to recoup the cost of such removals from the owner of the abandoned wreck. I accept Deputy Barrett's contention that Ireland can play a significant role as an international regulatory forum and at international regulatory fora. Through Ireland's initiative the IMO is now developing standards for design and construction of a proper sewerage system arising from the Celtic Pride tragedy. Safety on board passenger ferries and cargo vessels is kept under constant review by the Department and international bodies. I would welcome any suggestions from the Deputy in that regard.

Deputy Barrett raised a number of matters relating to the prevention of accidents. Part III of the Bill deals with prevention and IMES are given powers to intervene before a vessel is wrecked or stranded. The Safety of Life at Sea Convention, to which Ireland is a party, specifies more stringent construction standards for ships. The International Maritime Organisation of which Ireland is an active member constantly up-dates requirements for the construction of ships and operational standards.

I acknowledge the concerns expressed by Deputy Clohessy in respect of the condition of ships carrying dangerous cargoes through our waters, Deputy Sargent also made that point. The flag State is obliged to ensure that their ships are of international standard in relation to stability and construction. The port State control mechanism should check the diligence of the flag States in this regard. The creation of environmentally sensitive areas from which high risk shipping must be excluded, as proposed in the European safe sea document, goes some way towards alleviating our concerns in this regard. Deputy Sheehan's point regarding an exclusion zone of 20 miles will be seriously addressed. I will give further consideration to the points raised by Deputies Sheehan and Clohessy, particularly Deputy Clohessy's point regarding the treatment of offshore drilling platforms.

Regarding Deputy Clohessy's point on landowners' liability, section 9 (2) provides that any damage sustained by a landowner shall be a charge on the vessel in distress or its cargo. The section offers protection to the landowner but if the Deputy wishes to table an amendment on Committee Stage I will consider it.

The proposed regulations governing burial at sea have not been finalised. They will relate to such matters as a suitable coffin, appropriately weighted, and disposal in an adequate depth of water at a suitable location. I would welcome any further suggestions Deputies may have on this matter. Deputy Clohessy raised the question of mutiny aboard vessels, particularly mutiny in Irish waters and I can assure him that local authorities will have no liability in that regard.

Mr. Rabbitte

It does not look as if there will be a mutiny. Everything looks calm.

Mr. Andrews

Yes, and the same is the case over there. The waters are calm all around. There are other points I wish to address and perhaps I could deal with them after Question Time. Alternatively, the Deputies may wish me to address these matters more specifically on Committee Stage.

Mr. Sheehan

We agree to that.

Question put and agreed to.