I am pleased that this Bill has been introduced in the Seanad and I welcome the opportunity to address the House on this important subject. I look forward to hearing Senators' contributions. This is a short but important and extremely urgent Bill which needs to be viewed in the context of the constantly developing situation at EU and international level regarding regulatory matters aimed at preventing pollution by ships and providing adequate compensation for victims of pollution incidents.
The Bill provides for the limits of compensation payable to victims of pollution resulting from spills of persistent oil from tankers to be increased by about 50%. I propose to introduce amendments on Committee Stage which will have the effect of further increasing, almost fourfold, the amount of compensation payable. Compensation is payable in accordance with the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992 – the liability convention – and the International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage, 1992 – the fund convention.
The Oil Pollution of the Sea (Civil Liability and Compensation) Acts 1988 to 1998 give effect to these conventions. The liability convention governs the liability of ship owners for oil pollution damage. The convention lays down the principle of strict liability of ship owners and creates a system of compulsory liability insurance. The ship owner is normally entitled to limit his or her liability to an amount which is linked to the tonnage of his or her ship. The fund convention is supplementary to the liability convention. The main function of the international oil pollution compensation fund is to provide supplementary compensation for damage under the liability convention. The compensation payable by the IOPCF for any one incident is limited to 135 million special drawing rights, approximately €180 million, including the sum actually paid by the ship owner or his or her insurer under the liability convention.
On 12 December 1999 the Maltese registered tanker Erika broke in two in the Bay of Biscay, some 60 nautical miles off the coast of Brittany. The tanker was carrying a cargo of 31,000 tonnes of heavy fuel oil of which some 19,800 tonnes were spilled. This incident led to a reassessment, at EU and international level, of many aspects of the regulatory arrangements which apply regarding maritime safety and the protection of the maritime environment. The arrangements which apply at international level regarding liability and compensation in respect of pollution caused by oil tankers are being examined in this context.
The process was given added impetus in November 2002 when the Bahamas registered tanker Prestige, laden with 77,000 tonnes of heavy fuel oil, broke in two off the coast of Galicia in Spain, spilling an unknown but substantial quantity of its cargo. While the examination has been underway at the IOPCF since the establishment of a working group in April 2000, it was considered that action needed to be taken with regard to compensation levels without awaiting the completion of the working group's business. The total amount of compensation of 135 million SDR fixed in the 1992 fund convention was considered unacceptably low and it was decided to increase the compensation levels by about 50% to a total of 203 million SDR. The increases, which are to apply internationally, are to take effect on 1 November 2003. The Bill gives effect to these measures and needs to be enacted by that date.
Annual contributions to the IOPCF are levied by the fund administration on oil importers in member states who have imported, by sea, more than 150,000 tonnes of oil in a previous calendar year. Three importers in the State are liable for contributions to the fund, the ESB, the Irish National Petroleum Corporation and Aughinish Aluminia. The size of the annual contributions vary according to the amount of oil eligible for levy and the number and size of claims settled in any one year. Claims arising out of a costly incident can push up the contribution required in any given year. The total contribution made by the Irish importers in 2002 was about €200,000. While it is not possible to estimate accurately the effects of the revised limits, it is not anticipated that the current contribution levels will be significantly affected.
While the IOPCF working group is continuing its examination, its deliberations led to the adoption of a protocol to the fund convention in May 2003 at the International Maritime Organisation. The protocol provides for the establishment of a supplementary compensation fund which will further increase the amount of compensation payable to victims to 750 million SDR, or approximately €1 billion. The Committee Stage amendments which I propose to introduce provide for the protocol to have effect in Irish law.
The supplementary fund was initially proposed by the European Commission as an EU measure. Member states preferred, however, to pursue the matter in an international context. Adoption of the protocol, with considerable support from EU states, followed. EU member states have been urged to introduce legislation to give effect to the protocol at the earliest opportunity and before the end of the year, if possible. The provision of adequate compensation for victims of oil pollution from tankers must be viewed as part of a wider framework involving the prevention of pollution and the response to incidents.
I had hoped to introduce provisions of this Bill as part of the Sea Pollution (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2003, which is a wide-ranging Bill relating to aspects of the marine environment that was published on 3 July 2003 and referred to this House. However, the provisions relating to the increased limits had to be fast-tracked and published separately in view of the approaching deadline. The amendments relating to the protocol are being proposed for inclusion in this Bill because, like the provisions relating to the increased limits, they involve amendments to the Oil Pollution of the Sea (Civil Liability and Compensation) Acts 1988 to 1998. It is more efficient and rational to include both elements in the same Bill.
The Government is anxious that our legislation complies with accepted EU and international standards while addressing specific Irish concerns. The Irish Sea Pollution Bill 2003 updates our legislation in relation to the protection of the marine environment by giving effect in our law to several internationally agreed instruments. I propose to give the House a snapshot of the evolving situation at EU and international level by referring briefly to some of the measures which are included in that Bill.
The Sea Pollution (Amendment) Act 1999 gives effect in Irish law to the International Maritime Organisation's Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation Convention. The IMO, in March 2000, adopted a protocol to OPRC, providing for a response measure similar to those for oil pollution to apply in respect of hazardous and noxious substances. The Sea Pollution (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2003 gives effect to the protocol. Building on the arrangements adopted in respect of oil tankers and vessels carrying hazardous substances, a convention was adopted at international level in March 2001 in relation to civil liability in respect of pollution from spills of bunker oil, which is oil that is carried other than as cargo. The miscellaneous provisions Bill gives effect to that convention. The International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships 2001, the AFS Convention, was adopted by the IMO in October 2001 and the miscellaneous provisions Bill also gives effect thereto. The Sea Pollution Act 1991 provides for the prevention of pollution of the sea by oil or other substances and gives effect to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, done at London on 2 November 1973, as amended by the protocol done at London on 17 February 1978, also known as the MARPOL Convention. Regulations covering the various sources of ship-generated pollution were originally contained in the five annexes to the convention.
MARPOL is under continual review at the marine environment protection committee of the IMO, and amendments are adopted as considered necessary. The convention was modified by the protocol of 1997, whereby a sixth annex was added, relating to the prevention of air pollution from ships. The miscellaneous provisions Bill amends the 1991 Act to enable the necessary regulations to be made in that respect. I look forward to discussing the miscellaneous provisions Bill with Senators in due course.
I also wish to mention the Sea Pollution (Hazardous and Noxious Substances) (Civil Liability and Compensation) Bill 2000, which is currently before the Dáil. The Bill gives effect in Irish law to the International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea 1996, known as the HNS Convention. The convention complements the arrangements regarding civil liability and compensation for oil pollution, which are the subject of the Bill before us.
EU member states, including Ireland, have been to the fore in recent years in advocating improvements at international level to safety standards for ships and the protection of the marine environment. Ireland was one of several EU member states which co-sponsored the request to the IMO leading to increased limits, which are the subject of the Bill now before us. EU member states were also prominent in adopting, and supporting the adoption, of the supplementary fund protocol. Following the incident involving the Erika, measures were introduced and agreed regarding the regulation of ship classification societies, the accelerated phasing out of single-hulled oil tankers, the strengthening of the port state control measures and ship-reporting arrangements.
The European Maritime Safety Agency was established by regulation in August 2002 for the purpose of ensuring a high, uniform and effective level of maritime safety and preventing pollution of the marine environment within the EU. The agency is to enable the Commission to offer the full range of professional services needed to discharge its duties in that connection. All member states are represented on the agency's board. The Commission has recently published a proposal to amend the regulation to provide the agency with the necessary legal competence regarding pollution response and to specify its role regarding maritime security and the training of seafarers. That proposal has been examined at official working group level by member states.
The incident involving the Prestige gave added impetus to the drive to improve ship safety and pollution prevention measures. EU Ministers committed themselves to building on the progress made during the previous few years. To that end, several new measures were introduced. The EU Council of Ministers and the Parliament have adopted a proposal by the Commission to further accelerate the phasing out of single-hulled tankers and to ban the carriage of heavy-grade fuel oil in such tankers. EU member states have requested that the IMO introduce similar arrangements, to be applied internationally. A Commission proposal concerning sanction for offences involving pollution of the marine environment is currently under consideration at EU official working group level.
Belgium, France, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom decided earlier this year to present the IMO with a joint request to designate certain maritime areas as particularly sensitive sea areas, or PSSAs, to strengthen its protection of especially vulnerable areas. The limit of the PSSAs proposed coincides with the 15th meridian, the Porcupine Bank, and includes parts of the special waters of the north-west Europe zone, as defined under the MARPOL Convention, the English Channel and the coastal waters in certain parts of pollution response areas, and the exclusive economic zones along the Spanish, French and Portuguese coasts. The aim of the exercise is to protect our marine environment and coastline from oil spills by discouraging vessels from entering the PSSA. It is proposed to ban certain tankers. For example, single-hulled and some double-hulled tankers would have to state their intention to cross the area 48 hours in advance.
The PSSA request was considered by the Marine Environment Protection Committee in July 2003. Irish experts from several Departments and agencies, together with colleagues from five other states, attended to support the request. The MEPC agreed in principle to the request for designation and referred the matter to an expert navigation committee for examination. That committee is expected to report to the MEPC next year. The MEPC did not accede to the request to ban tankers as proposed. It is open to the states concerned to introduce other protective measures. Possible proposals in that regard are being considered by the officials and experts concerned.
While attention is properly being given to disasters such as the Erika and the Prestige, I remind the House that in Ireland we succeeded earlier this year in averting a serious oil spill. That incident, and the manner in which it was handled, was used at European level by our colleagues as an example of how a response to such an incident should be handled, rather than how they have been dealt with, in the case of the Prestige in particular. An incident occurred on 28 January 2002 off the Donegal coast involving a 22 year old single-hulled Panamanian-registered tanker, the Princess Eva, which had a potential for pollution similar to that caused by the Prestige and the Erika. The vessel was carrying 55,000 tonnes of heavy oil from Copenhagen to the USA. It experienced very heavy weather off the north-west coast of Ireland. Following an accident on board in which two crew members were unfortunately killed and another seriously injured, the vessel entered Donegal Bay, where the two bodies were transferred to shore. An oil spill was averted owing to actions taken by the Irish Coastguard and the maritime safety directorate of my Department. Such events serve to remind us of our coastline's vulnerability. Ireland has accordingly consistently supported measures at both EU and IMO level to bring about improvements in ships' standards, better protection of the marine environment and adequate compensation of victims. I propose to continue that approach.
The events in question have also focused my attention on the provision of safety services. I am satisfied that the establishment of a single agency responsible for all safety matters is the best course of action. I intend to submit proposals to the Government for a decision in that regard as soon as possible. The matter is currently being discussed with trade union and staff representatives with a view to resolving the industrial relations issues which arise and charting the way forward for the development of the marine safety services. I look forward to debating the legislation required with Members of the Oireachtas in due course.
This Bill is very short but urgent. It must be enacted by 1 November 2003, the date on which the increased limits come into effect internationally. It is in the interest of both contributors and potential victims that the deadline be met. In the event of an accident off our coasts, the increased limits would apply only if our legislation were in line with that which applied internationally. On the other hand, if an incident occurred which affected a state whose legislation gave effect to the increased limits, Irish contributors would be required to pay towards meeting the extra costs involved. In the circumstances, I am asking the Seanad to deal with the Bill as expeditiously as possible. I will be making a similar request of the Dáil. I look forward to hearing Senators' contributions and have no hesitation in commending the Bill to the House.
