WATER & MARITIME ISSUES
Each speech listed here is an edited speech. If you'd like to see the speech or debate in full, please go to the Oireachtas website and click on "Seanad Eireann" and then "Seanad Debates" and click on the relevant date as listed with each speech on this page.
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme (31/03/10)
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme (18/02/10)
Water and Roads Infrastructure (03/02/10)
Shannon Flooding (26/11/09)
Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 (12/03/09)
Harbour (Amendment) Bill 2008 (05/02/09)
Malin and Valentia Coast Guard Stations (09/10/08)
Shannon Water Abstraction Proposal (02/10/08)
Coast Guard Stations (27/02/08)
Control of Water Resources (21/12/07)
Marine Rescue Stations – Malin and Valentia (05/12/07)
Water Services Bill 2003 (01/05/07)
Maritime Safety Bill 2004 (04/05/05)
Maritime Safety Bill 2004 (20/04/05)
Back to top of the page
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme
31/03/10 - I have been involved with this legislation since it was presented as a Bill and have seen it changed time and again. My interest in the issue is not driven by the actual events as much as by the way we are processing the matter. …We are now acknowledging that the further consideration of the Ombudsman’s special report by an Oireachtas committee is a matter for that committee. It may well be, but that is no reason we cannot refer it to a committee.
I will not get involved in the politics of the matter. … It is not an issue for me whether someone did right or wrong. For me, the issue is that a process has been put in place to solve these issues. In this case, the process finished with the Ombudsman. …. the Ombudsman came to a conclusion and made a recommendation to a Department. The Department concerned decided not to implement the Ombudsman’s recommendation.
Closure is not possible in this regard. What happens when a Department refuses to implement an Ombudsman’s recommendation? Having considered the reasons for its refusal and not accepted them, the Ombudsman can refer the matter to the Dáil or Seanad. That is included in the legislation and very clear. However, what happens next? The answer is nothing. There is a vacuum in the legislation. There is a legislative error, for which we must take responsibility. …. My own view is that we should have a system under which the Dáil, the Seanad or a joint committee would have the power to bring a matter to finality and closure.
The Government amendment is an attempt to stop debate on the issue. That cannot be right. I am happy to have cited the letter from Deputy Sargent who has written to the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to say he considers it would be useful to invite the Ombudsman to make a presentation to the joint committee. That is a significant step forward. I ask the Government to listen to this suggestion. …. If people play political football with the matter, it is as clear as day what the result will be. …. The issue is how we deal with the matter.
This is not the first time such a thing has happened. To my limited knowledge, it happened at least twice before because I was involved on two occasions. One case was dealt with by the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service. That case was dealt with twice. The previous Ombudsman outlined his views on the case. Therefore, what is proposed in this respect has happened previously. A precedent is not being established in terms of what is sought. The last time what is sought happened was at the invitation of the committee concerned. There is no reason that could not happen in this case.
The last time what is proposed happened, the committee concerned examined the matter. … Having examined the case, the committee, unanimously as I recall, came to the conclusion that the then Ombudsman’s recommendations should be implemented. The committee called in officials of the Revenue Commissioners and told them that they wanted them to implement the recommendations. They listened to the committee but they did not do that. It is daft that this could happen. I am not saying that we as public representatives should be able to call the shots in all situations. That type of thing happens but we should have a way to bring closure to a situation such as this. It is not a matter of blocking something. We are not creating a precedent.
Even if this matter is passed to the joint committee and it decides to implement the Ombudsman’s recommendation, the matters will be sent back to the Department. The joint committee does not have power to insist that the Department implements the committee’s recommendation. If the result were to be the same in this case, that would be the third time that committees of Parliament would have dealt with matters, come to the same conclusion on them as the Ombudsman and the recommendations in the cases were not implemented, or if the committee were to come to the conclusion that the Ombudsman’s recommendation was not to be implemented and it disagreed with the Ombudsman, the situation would still be unfinished. We need to examine this area.
The Minister of State will note that I have not gone into the detail of the issue as I do not want to get involved in the case. I have read about it and have views on it. However, I specifically want to point out a weakness in the procedure in the legislation and to highlight that we have unfinished business. A citizen can go through all the hoops required under legislation and we can still not bring the matter concerned to finality.
This motion is about examining a procedure and the Ombudsman’s views on the matter, how she weighed it up and for a committee to come to the conclusion to agree or disagree with that. It does not mean she is right nor does it mean she is wrong. ... I would prefer if it were dealt with in a committee than in either of the Houses.
Back to top of the page
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme
18/02/10 - I come from a fishing town, Dingle, and when going to school half of my class were from the fishing community. Anybody of my age from a town like Dingle or Killybegs will remember long nights with winds blowing and howling, and waves crashing in on the pier and in through the harbour’s mouth, with families waiting along the harbour wall wondering whether their boats would come back in. There is nothing as devastating as the loss of a fishing vessel and the loss of a life. I saw that many times while growing up and it is never forgotten. It teaches one a considerable amount. Above all else it teaches one enormous respect for the profession of fishing and the great investment and risk that goes with being dependent on fishing as part of a fishing family. I say that because in all these matters I am very biased towards the fishing industry.
The real issue here, if I take politics out of it, is that we do not have any method of dealing with a report from the Ombudsman coming back to the Oireachtas. …The Ombudsman makes the point that the scheme was well intentioned. The complaint was that it had been arbitrarily applied, The Minister of State has outlined why, in his opinion, that is not so. Both he and the Department are entitled to their opinion. What is interesting is that the Ombudsman found that it had been unfairly applied.
The Ombudsman … made two points. She said the scheme was inadequately advertised and that there was no discretionary element. …There is an interesting element involved and I know from where the Ombudsman is coming…. There has been a series of court cases in recent times dealing with judicial reviews, in which the courts have concluded that there was no clear evidence of a discretionary element being exercised. I am referring to the exercise of discretion in the formation of a judgment. The word “discretion” can give the wrong impression, inferring that people can do as they like, but that is not what is meant in this case. In the Ombudsman’s use of the word, she means there was no indication that discretion had been used in coming to a judgment. The Minister of State can agree or disagree, but this should be brought to the attention of his ministerial colleagues, as it applies to every single scheme and is why we do not have computers instead of Departments. It is why we pay civil servants, Ministers and politicians to make judgment calls. One cannot have schemes that are so hidebound that there is no formation of a judgment or, in the Ombudsman’s words, “discretion”. I emphasise that the use of the word in this case does not mean doing business.
….. it is my business to examine the arguments made. The Minister of State has said that in coming to her judgment on the quantum of money suggested the Ombudsman based the figure on the decommissioning scheme which, as he rightly pointed out, has no relationship to the other scheme. However, that is not an argument, as she had to use a benchmark. I have read that statement three times and believe it weakens the Minister of State’s argument. If I was in his position, I would not have said it.
…. The Minister of State has said also that the Ombudsman seemed to base her conclusion on an assumption that if there had been discretion, it would have been granted to the family concerned. I do not know whether that is the case and have not seen it. It is a big step to make.
The final one is to the effect that if the Ombudsman is unhappy with the way in which his or her proposals are being dealt with by a Department or Government agency, he or she can report the matter to the Oireachtas, but at that point we stopped in a lacuna. The Minister of State and I have been over this ground in another place many times. Surely, where mediation or arbitration is involved, we should always say the matter should be brought to a conclusion and that there should be closure. However, we have left a gap in the legislation that does not result in closure. I do not even mind whether such closure involves a free vote in the House on whether we should accept the Ombudsman’s position, which would be no reflection on anybody.
I say to the departmental officials present that if the Ombudsman happens to be right on this occasion, it does not mean the Department has acted dishonourably, unethically or immorally. It just means it made a mistake, in the view of the Ombudsman.
Back to top of the page
Water and Roads Infrastructure
03/02/10 - We could easily have had a plan in place to deal with all that happened in the last couple of months but it would have meant diverting budgets. For anybody in a local authority who had the options of either fixing a road this year or putting material aside to deal with something that might happen once every 40 years, the choice would have been very easy. I do not blame local authority members for getting it wrong on this occasion. I do not believe I would have done better.
We must have learned that the legislation which gives 32 different local authorities responsibility, is just not working. There needs to be a national authority with a national policy that can be implemented locally by local authorities. There is no other way to deal with the matter.
I spoke today with representatives of Sustainable Energy Ireland and asked why there is no requirement in the building regulations stipulating that every house built in Ireland should have some form of renewable energy resource. I was told this can be achieved under current legislation and that it is only a matter of ensuring it is done. Most people are getting away by installing devices such as wood pellet boilers. This is one of the wettest countries in Europe and we all have roofs on our houses. Twenty-six inches of water fall every year on my house in Dublin. It is expensive to retrofit water-harvesting devices. Rainwater could certainly be used for all toilets in houses. There would be a huge saving.
The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government stated the current severe weather episodes have identified a number of weaknesses in our water service infrastructure. That is not true because we have known about these weaknesses. The Dublin and Cork local authorities have been referring to the wastage of water for years. Nothing new has been identified. We need an honest debate in the Houses on water charges. The charge would not be for water but for the delivery, provision or piping of water.
Back to top of the page
Shannon Flooding
26/11/09 - Since the foundation of the State, the issue of Shannon flooding has been the plaything of different political parties. I recall that Éamon de Valera promised to drain the Shannon 70 or 80 years ago. I introduced a Bill in this House in 1998 with the support of Senators Madeleine Taylor-Quinn and Kathleen O’Meara that was rejected by the Fianna Fáil-led Government. It dealt with the entire issue of water management etc. In the previous year, the Bill had been introduced to the House and the Fine Gael-led Government had refused it. I nearly fell off my seat yesterday when I heard the Leader of the House mention the Doherty report. I have to hand the Doherty report and demand that Members discuss it next year. I thought that of all things, the Leader would not wish to have it discussed. This report deals with territory the Cathaoirleach and I know well, right up to the doorstep of the Cathaoirleach’s own house. This report was published in 2000 by a sub-committee of the Oireachtas joint committee on enterprise and included proposals such as raising the storage level of Lough Ree and Lough Allen and to increase the channel capacity at Banagher to 255 cu. m per second. Had this been implemented, the Cathaoirleach might not have had the water on his doorstep this week. Other proposals included the removal of the Meelick weir, the diversion of the Suck, the raising of the sluice gates at Athlone and the road levels in Athlone, Clare and Galway, as well as to reduce river levels in October. I could go on and on.
This report dealt with all those issues. The Deputy Leader’s then party leader, Deputy Sargent, also was on the sub-committee. I have tried to get the report discussed in this House and have raised it repeatedly. While I am partial to the River Shannon for reasons that will remain unstated, the solution exists. This is a national emergency but it has been so for many years. I refer to the floods of 1914, 1954, which damaged the Cathaoirleach’s home town, and 1999. It is all there, including a proposal to the ESB that the water levels be reduced in Ardnacrusha and all those areas in mid-October every year prior to the floods. This report contains all this information, including accurate costs. I seek a debate on this issue because it is absolutely appalling and embarrassing for everyone.
Back to top of the page
Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008
12/03/09 - Practical issues ….. I have taken my boat in and out of Bantry and Fenit harbours … silting was a particular problem in Bantry. .. there was 2 m of silt, which means only 20% of the pier can be used in low water. That is also an issue in Fenit. The Tralee Canal goes from Fenit to the basin in Tralee and it is highly silted at present. Like Bantry, Tralee Bay goes into a corner and silt builds up. It is very tricky to navigate through. That is an issue because, like La Rochelle and Dingle, for example, Bantry and Fenit harbours have a dual role, namely, leisure and business. That requires local knowledge. It is only when a fisherman gets a bit tetchy about a guy in a small sailing boat getting in his way as tries to land his livelihood that one realises one must have local rules. These are important areas for the development of our tourism industry. We need people who want to attract local industry to be in charge.
I refer specifically to the Government amendments. These will enhance local decision-making and respect local culture. They are an adornment of local democracy and self-determination. ... It would be a very foolish, stupid and misinformed Minister who, in the light of the debate which has taken place, would take such a regressive step at this point. As somebody who has spent most of his life at a negotiating table, I take it that this was a sort of halfway house outcome which allowed both parties to emerge with dignity and which delivers. In that regard, it is important.
Cork and Kerry have been to the fore in providing facilities to attract people. They are the furthest away from the boating populations of Britain and Europe but they have put in extraordinarily good harbour facilities all the way from Youghal to Fenit which should be continued all the way up the coast. This is a good example of local politics being enhanced by national politics and of a public representative using national politics and the Upper House of Parliament to deliver for his local area. It is a good day’s work for the local communities in Kerry and Cork and for politics.
Back to top of the page
Harbour (Amendment) Bill 2008
05/02/09 - We intended dealing with the Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 today. I express my admiration for the fight that Senator Denis O’Donovan has been making on this issue. ….. I do not want to get into the debate raised by Senator O’Donovan, but the reality is that there is a harbour authority in west Cork running an efficient and effective operation and making money in the locality, yet someone in Dublin has decided it should be part of a Cork city outfit. That will again disable the west and is completely unnecessary. There is no gain and it adds to administration.
Back to top of the page
Malin and Valentia Coast Guard Stations
09/10/08 - I previously raised the question of the future of the rescue service and Coast Guard stations at Malin and Valentia Island. The Leader, to his credit, responded very positively on both occasions. We waited to see what developments took place. We now face an extraordinary and possibly unprecedented situation which needs to be sorted out. No one is taking responsibility for moving in the direction of closing down the stations at Malin and Valentia Island. We hear from one side that this was a political decision and from the other that it was not.
It is hard to believe that, when serving as a Minister, Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher, would have set about closing the station at Malin, in his county. This is not something that politicians rush to do. In his defence, there is no evidence that he did this. It was stated to a committee of the House and it has been inferred otherwise, that this was a decision of a Minister of the Government. We are entitled to know the position. Before arguing about the madness of the decision in the first place, about which I have previously spoken, let us decide who makes the decision. Is it Government policy to close down, or to allow to fade away, the Coast Guard stations at Malin and Valentia Island? I do not wish to hear that we are not doing anything at the moment. Are these stations keeping the same level of authority, influence and importance as they have at present? It is a simple question for the appropriate Minister, and we can proceed from there when we will know where we must fight.
Back to top of the page
Shannon Water Abstraction Proposal
02/10/08 - Lough Ree — that great lake on the Leader’s doorstep — is under threat from Dublin City Council which wants to take water from it. I know this is an issue close to the Leader’s heart and I hope he will support me as he has done in the past. Some years ago Fianna Fáil, in Opposition, and I proposed the Shannon River Council Bill and it passed through Second Stage. I want the support of the Government side to reintroduce the Bill to protect the Shannon.
Back to top of the page
Coast Guard Stations
27/02/08) - I consider this proposal to be an absolute outrage against the west coast. It constitutes yet another denuding of support, infrastructure and tradition from rural Ireland. However, whatever the economic rights and wrongs of this proposal, it is wrong socially and in every other way.
I know both Malin and Valentia. A lovely new school has been located on the north side of Malin on the way towards Malin Head, which will lose numbers as a result of this measure. Every time one removes something from any small parish in the west, a ripple effect takes place throughout the community and everyone suffers in some way. Moreover, this is of great cultural significance and the points made by the previous speakers were highly impactful.
I am an offshore member of the RNLI and if I am sitting in Dursey Sound and wondering whether to stick my nose out into Kenmare Bay or to venture along the coast as far as Valentia, I would like to know that the person who speaking to me from Valentia is able to say what the swell is like, what kind of wind is blowing, whether there are many white tops in front of him or her or what is the story. Alternatively, if I am offshore and wish to get into Portmagee around Bray Head, I want someone who knows every inch of the area to be able to tell me it is a bit rough today, a south-westerly is blowing up and it is dangerous and difficult. Anyone from any place from the south-west to Malin who has ever suffered a night waiting for a lost boat to make contact and return home knows that the dependency on Malin and Valentia was an integral part of how we grew up. We grew up listening to old ships’ radios and while matters obviously have advanced since then, in the old days everyone tuned into channel 16 and listened to the marine services. These services are always present and know every inch of the region.
Above all however, this is decentralisation turned on its head. What is being done is completely wrong. Anything that is removed from such a community ultimately causes suffering for all. Members do not wish to see such developments happening. This is a bigger issue that pertains to regionalisation, decentralisation and saving the west. It resembles the thinking underlying the opening of the Atlantic highway from Derry to Limerick and beyond and is similar to opening the western rail corridor. It pertains to those issues and forms part and parcel of an interdependency of infrastructures and community in those areas.
This development is happening before Members’ eyes. Last year, half of the Members of the Oireachtas more or less mentally cheered when the salmon fisheries were closed. While I know there were good reasons for decommissioning one third of the fishing fleet, if matters continue in this fashion there will be nothing left in the west. It will be like turning out the lights on rural Ireland. Every week another decision is made which takes more from that area. Members should be sufficiently brave and responsible to acknowledge that it will cost more to invest in the west of Ireland and that there is inequality of investment in such regional areas. What is happening in Malin and Valentia at present is a step backwards and I ask the Government to withdraw its position in this regard.
Back to top of the page
Control of Water Resources
21/12/07 - I wish to bring to the attention of the House a matter arising from the issue we discussed recently, the schools water charges. The bills are being sent out by well-known companies. I have been a Member of this House for 20 years and I cannot remember the House ever deciding to privatise our water or to give our water away to companies. My colleague, Senator Ross, has referred time and again to the mistakes made more than 20 years ago when control over the toll bridges was handed over to NTR. I have some news for the House; NTR is a 50% owner of the company Celtic Anglian Water, which is supplying water to the Connemara Gaeltacht. Now that NTR has been paid off by an eventual €0.75 billion to allow the traffic to run free in Dublin, it is locking onto the water in Connemara and in other places.
I am concerned about who controls our water. When did we give it away? These companies are working for large profits and that is really the reason for the large bills. If large profits are being supported by large bills from companies such as the ones which run the Luas, the toll roads or which are now taking control of our water, there is a serious question for every politician of all sides and views to discuss. I do not want us in 20 or 30 years’ time having to buy back control from these contracts that are being given out currently unseen. This is privatisation by stealth and people do not like that aspect of it.
Back to top of the page
Marine Rescue Stations – Malin and Valentia
05/12/07 - There have been many emotional discussions and debates about the merits of centralisation and decentralisation. In light of the agreement of all parties on the merits of decentralisation, it is unacceptable that there is a proposal before the Government at present to close the marine rescue stations in Malin and Valentia. It is appalling that we should do this. It shows a lack of understanding of the needs of seafarers. It is a classic ignorant east coast approach to a western issue. Anyone who has come through Dursey Sound or the Blasket Sound knowing that the Valentia rescue centre is within sight will know what I mean. It is not just about technology or radar screens. It is about hundreds of years of lore. It is about people who know the size of the swell two days after the waves have gone, who know the sounds of Sceilig Mhichíl agus Sceilig Bheag and can tell one from the other.
This action is appalling. It takes away from these two places. I do not know whether people know Malin Head and Valentia Island, but there is not a lot of work around and not much happening. The idea of taking away employment in those areas is unacceptable. This is an all-party issue. The Minister should be told it is just not on. It is wrong and flies in the face of all we need. It was ironic that this hit the news yesterday when Malin station had just co-ordinated the rescue attempt for the Kennedy family in Inver in Donegal. The House should take a clear line on this and indicate that the closure is unacceptable. I would like the Minister to come to the House and discuss this so that we may explain to him that this is about more than technology and data. There is also a cost issue. The buildings and personnel are in place and any upgrading required can be done while retaining both stations.
Back to top of the page
Water Services Bill 2003
01/05/07 - I listened to a most heated and energetic debate at the INTO Annual Congress this year on that issue. The Minister has met representatives of the educational communities at local level who have pointed out to him how inadequate are their grants to meet the demands on them in terms of different local authority charges. I am not opposed to local authority charges in a general sense but it is quite unfair that they are used at school level. In the event of schools having to pay charges to local authorities, could they not be allowed to recoup those charges from the State? There should be no difficulty about that since it would not require a change in the law. The State should recognise the difficulty for schools and give those running primary and post-primary schools around the country money to compensate for the additional charges.
…… It would be very helpful if Sustainable Energy Ireland were to make grants available for rainwater harvesting. I have raised the matter with the Minister before. It would be a simple policy to implement and I do not understand the reticence to pursue it.
I agree with Senator Moylan’s point about enforcement. I recall that when we built our own house 35 years ago, which was before the introduction of self-contained, bio-cycle waste systems for one-off housing, the septic tank provider also installed a tertiary treatment plant. By the time the material had been processed in the third tank, it was like clean water. Senator Moylan makes the important point that while we require the installation of certain systems, we never check to see how well they are doing.
I have spoken to people from the fisheries boards who must often examine applications for planning permission and who must do tests regarding soakage. One cannot argue with that. Such measures might deal with the issues which often bother rural dwellers. It is important to monitor the outcomes of decisions to see if they are working properly.
Back to top of the page
Maritime Safety Bill 2004
04/05/05 - Upon examining section 16 concerning authorised officers, it occurred to me that there is specific reference in all other legislation to the role of the harbour master. As both the Minister of State and I know, the harbour master is crucial to the general operation of harbours in ensuring the implementation of Acts.
I have received representations about a difficulty arising from this Bill because harbour masters are not specifically mentioned. I ask the Minister of State to examine this matter with a view to determining whether further work is needed before it is introduced in the Dáil. A risk concerning certain ambiguities surrounding the role of the harbour master or the dilution of this role by the Bill exists, in particular where the harbour master is appointed by some form of harbour authority and must have his or her position sanctioned by the Garda or the Minister. There are problems of transition that may just be housekeeping, which can be dealt with quickly.
Our harbour masters are referred to in all relevant legislation, from primary legislation to by-laws. I fear that a smart Alec will challenge the harbour master’s role and find we have left a gap in the Bill. This is my residual worry. The harbour master is recognised internationally as the appropriate person for the role. If one arrives in a port in the Mediterranean, the south of England or the west of Ireland, the person in charge is the harbour master. A harbour master is appointed by local authorities to manage harbours under their jurisdictions and by-laws. Rosslare, where the local authority appoints the harbour master, is another example of what I am talking about.
The Minister of State and I have trust and confidence in the fantastic work harbour masters have done around the country. Is it not important to underline and reinforce their authority and our trust and confidence in them by having them mentioned in the Bill? This significant legislation will be welcome.
Back to top of the page
Maritime Safety Bill 2004
20/04/05 - This new Part 4 of the Bill makes provision for passenger boats, fishing vessels and pleasure craft and the three sections mirror each other. In each, the phrase used is “may provide for the registration” of these craft. As far as I am aware, this is the first time in legislation that the registration of pleasure craft has been provided for. Perhaps this is not the case. I know it could be done earlier. Can the Minister of State indicate how it might work? There are many reasons this seems to be the case.
It is very difficult to recognise an individual boat. Irish pleasure boats, some of which can be quite expensive, are generally not registered. The reason for this is a difficulty with the Department, which is not anyone’s fault but is simply the way things are. Currently, getting a pleasure craft registered requires a person to go through 90% of the same procedure as if one were getting the Queen Mary registered. This is not an exaggeration and one must go through all the same steps. I have informed the Minister of State previously that we should have a simple method whereby someone can register a boat very much like one would register a car.
This issue will be important in the future. At some stage the Minister of State will regulate that a boat must pass a safety test, a sort of NCT for boats, to ensure it is a safe craft. There must be some element of registration involved and the Minister will never require people to go through the current process. We need an easier process to do it as it is currently very hard to prove.
The Minister of State’s Department should create an easy method to register a boat in the same way as a car, whereby one takes the engine number, the hull number, where it came from, where it was made and the year, registers the number and puts it on the side.
The lack of a number also facilitates crime. In recent times, in a number of locations along the Shannon and at sea, boats have been stolen. It is very difficult to trace a boat that does not have a number on it.
It is very strange that pleasure craft in Ireland do not have numbers. We need a measure for pleasure craft. I apologise for belabouring the issue but it is important in terms of safety, taxation, imports and exports and the regulation of the industry to know how boats are bought and sold, where they are placed, who owns them, where they are and where they have travelled.
The small vessel register is a necessary measure. …. I agree this should be introduced on a voluntary basis. It is a good way of beginning and discovering where difficulties lie. A responsible boat owner will go out of his or her way to register because people who have an interest in boating and waterways will wish to do so. I have no difficulty with this.
The Minister of State’s comments on secondary legislation worry me. He should give himself power now by introducing a Schedule to the Bill to allow him to establish a system for small vessel registration by ministerial order rather than any other requirement. I was under the impression the Minister of State could do this under the legislation and I see his official nodding. This is the way it should be so the Minister of State can now examine what comes before him.
Places where people can pull in must be developed as there is a shortage of such places on the Shannon. I spoke earlier on the need for urgent infrastructural projects but the difficulty in having environmentally friendly marinas built and provided along the Shannon is worrying. I have examined some of the proposals that were ruled out of order and would think myself to be as environmentally friendly, conscious and supportive as anyone. The Minister of State’s Department should get involved in supporting responsible people who are trying to provide a good service by supplying proper environmentally-friendly marinas along the Shannon in particular.
I am delighted the Minister mentioned the coast guard. The Department could be a little more supportive of members of the coast guard on whom our lives very often depend, which the Minister of State quite rightly said, and to whom we owe a great debt of gratitude. These people should get some type of call-out fee, some element of support or some financial help. They put their lives at risk, particularly the coast guard which is not part of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution. They are very much dependent on the Department. I know this area is being restructured, which is important. Will the Minister of State ensure the types of supports and structures in place for them are adequate?
It is not necessary for surveys to be carried out by personnel from the Department. If I buy a boat and get it insured, it is my responsibility to get a marine surveyor to survey the boat. Most boats which have been bought have been surveyed along the way. It should be enough for the Department to recognise the person carrying out the survey. One of the major problems has been having to depend unfairly on the Department to get surveys done. That pressure should not be on the Department and people should use qualified surveyors. There are a number of recognised qualifications for marine surveyors who are very diligent about their work because their reputations depend on it. They will not state a boat is safe if it is not because it will come back to haunt them.
…. legislation should be passed to provide that people on boats should use only eco-friendly detergents. It is a small thing as they are not much more expensive. Most supermarkets along the Shannon and other waterways sell such products, particularly along the inland waterways. Sink waste is more damaging to the environment than sewage and biological detergents cause more damage than anything else. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should introduce legislation, a directive or a ministerial order stating that only eco-friendly detergents should be used on boats.
On the question of safety I support this section. As far as I can recall, the section deals with those who steer, drive, manoeuvre or pilot their boats. A significant number of the call-outs are by those who have been careless in their planning and have taken no notice of the weather. They think that because they have a new boat with a big engine they do not have to worry about anything. Suddenly they find that at a headland they are not ready for the force 7, 8 or 9 winds on the other side. There should be a requirement in passage planning for any distance that people check on the weather.
Met Éireann is helpful and good at what it does but in terms of improving safety at sea it requires significantly greater resources. For most of the coastland of the UK and even of Northern Ireland, it is possible to get a localised sea area forecast. … If more resources were provided to Met Éireann it could, in addition to the national forecast provided to RTE radio, provide a more detailed sea area forecast to the local radio stations, such as Hyland Radio, North West Radio and Radio Kerry. In this way one would get a much more detailed forecast. That should be done. Met Éireann has the ability to do this but it does not have the resources to make it available. More money should be put into Met Éireann.
… It is important that we attempt to ensure this legislation is enacted before the summer, if only for the propaganda value of raising awareness. This would signify a clear new beginning for the new boating season which starts at this time of year. The Government should be mindful of the importance of this.
Back to top of the page
Each speech listed here is an edited speech. If you'd like to see the speech or debate in full, please go to the Oireachtas website and click on "Seanad Eireann" and then "Seanad Debates" and click on the relevant date as listed with each speech on this page.
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme (31/03/10)
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme (18/02/10)
Water and Roads Infrastructure (03/02/10)
Shannon Flooding (26/11/09)
Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 (12/03/09)
Harbour (Amendment) Bill 2008 (05/02/09)
Malin and Valentia Coast Guard Stations (09/10/08)
Shannon Water Abstraction Proposal (02/10/08)
Coast Guard Stations (27/02/08)
Control of Water Resources (21/12/07)
Marine Rescue Stations – Malin and Valentia (05/12/07)
Water Services Bill 2003 (01/05/07)
Maritime Safety Bill 2004 (04/05/05)
Maritime Safety Bill 2004 (20/04/05)
Back to top of the page
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme
31/03/10 - I have been involved with this legislation since it was presented as a Bill and have seen it changed time and again. My interest in the issue is not driven by the actual events as much as by the way we are processing the matter. …We are now acknowledging that the further consideration of the Ombudsman’s special report by an Oireachtas committee is a matter for that committee. It may well be, but that is no reason we cannot refer it to a committee.
I will not get involved in the politics of the matter. … It is not an issue for me whether someone did right or wrong. For me, the issue is that a process has been put in place to solve these issues. In this case, the process finished with the Ombudsman. …. the Ombudsman came to a conclusion and made a recommendation to a Department. The Department concerned decided not to implement the Ombudsman’s recommendation.
Closure is not possible in this regard. What happens when a Department refuses to implement an Ombudsman’s recommendation? Having considered the reasons for its refusal and not accepted them, the Ombudsman can refer the matter to the Dáil or Seanad. That is included in the legislation and very clear. However, what happens next? The answer is nothing. There is a vacuum in the legislation. There is a legislative error, for which we must take responsibility. …. My own view is that we should have a system under which the Dáil, the Seanad or a joint committee would have the power to bring a matter to finality and closure.
The Government amendment is an attempt to stop debate on the issue. That cannot be right. I am happy to have cited the letter from Deputy Sargent who has written to the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to say he considers it would be useful to invite the Ombudsman to make a presentation to the joint committee. That is a significant step forward. I ask the Government to listen to this suggestion. …. If people play political football with the matter, it is as clear as day what the result will be. …. The issue is how we deal with the matter.
This is not the first time such a thing has happened. To my limited knowledge, it happened at least twice before because I was involved on two occasions. One case was dealt with by the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service. That case was dealt with twice. The previous Ombudsman outlined his views on the case. Therefore, what is proposed in this respect has happened previously. A precedent is not being established in terms of what is sought. The last time what is sought happened was at the invitation of the committee concerned. There is no reason that could not happen in this case.
The last time what is proposed happened, the committee concerned examined the matter. … Having examined the case, the committee, unanimously as I recall, came to the conclusion that the then Ombudsman’s recommendations should be implemented. The committee called in officials of the Revenue Commissioners and told them that they wanted them to implement the recommendations. They listened to the committee but they did not do that. It is daft that this could happen. I am not saying that we as public representatives should be able to call the shots in all situations. That type of thing happens but we should have a way to bring closure to a situation such as this. It is not a matter of blocking something. We are not creating a precedent.
Even if this matter is passed to the joint committee and it decides to implement the Ombudsman’s recommendation, the matters will be sent back to the Department. The joint committee does not have power to insist that the Department implements the committee’s recommendation. If the result were to be the same in this case, that would be the third time that committees of Parliament would have dealt with matters, come to the same conclusion on them as the Ombudsman and the recommendations in the cases were not implemented, or if the committee were to come to the conclusion that the Ombudsman’s recommendation was not to be implemented and it disagreed with the Ombudsman, the situation would still be unfinished. We need to examine this area.
The Minister of State will note that I have not gone into the detail of the issue as I do not want to get involved in the case. I have read about it and have views on it. However, I specifically want to point out a weakness in the procedure in the legislation and to highlight that we have unfinished business. A citizen can go through all the hoops required under legislation and we can still not bring the matter concerned to finality.
This motion is about examining a procedure and the Ombudsman’s views on the matter, how she weighed it up and for a committee to come to the conclusion to agree or disagree with that. It does not mean she is right nor does it mean she is wrong. ... I would prefer if it were dealt with in a committee than in either of the Houses.
Back to top of the page
Ombudsman Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme
18/02/10 - I come from a fishing town, Dingle, and when going to school half of my class were from the fishing community. Anybody of my age from a town like Dingle or Killybegs will remember long nights with winds blowing and howling, and waves crashing in on the pier and in through the harbour’s mouth, with families waiting along the harbour wall wondering whether their boats would come back in. There is nothing as devastating as the loss of a fishing vessel and the loss of a life. I saw that many times while growing up and it is never forgotten. It teaches one a considerable amount. Above all else it teaches one enormous respect for the profession of fishing and the great investment and risk that goes with being dependent on fishing as part of a fishing family. I say that because in all these matters I am very biased towards the fishing industry.
The real issue here, if I take politics out of it, is that we do not have any method of dealing with a report from the Ombudsman coming back to the Oireachtas. …The Ombudsman makes the point that the scheme was well intentioned. The complaint was that it had been arbitrarily applied, The Minister of State has outlined why, in his opinion, that is not so. Both he and the Department are entitled to their opinion. What is interesting is that the Ombudsman found that it had been unfairly applied.
The Ombudsman … made two points. She said the scheme was inadequately advertised and that there was no discretionary element. …There is an interesting element involved and I know from where the Ombudsman is coming…. There has been a series of court cases in recent times dealing with judicial reviews, in which the courts have concluded that there was no clear evidence of a discretionary element being exercised. I am referring to the exercise of discretion in the formation of a judgment. The word “discretion” can give the wrong impression, inferring that people can do as they like, but that is not what is meant in this case. In the Ombudsman’s use of the word, she means there was no indication that discretion had been used in coming to a judgment. The Minister of State can agree or disagree, but this should be brought to the attention of his ministerial colleagues, as it applies to every single scheme and is why we do not have computers instead of Departments. It is why we pay civil servants, Ministers and politicians to make judgment calls. One cannot have schemes that are so hidebound that there is no formation of a judgment or, in the Ombudsman’s words, “discretion”. I emphasise that the use of the word in this case does not mean doing business.
….. it is my business to examine the arguments made. The Minister of State has said that in coming to her judgment on the quantum of money suggested the Ombudsman based the figure on the decommissioning scheme which, as he rightly pointed out, has no relationship to the other scheme. However, that is not an argument, as she had to use a benchmark. I have read that statement three times and believe it weakens the Minister of State’s argument. If I was in his position, I would not have said it.
…. The Minister of State has said also that the Ombudsman seemed to base her conclusion on an assumption that if there had been discretion, it would have been granted to the family concerned. I do not know whether that is the case and have not seen it. It is a big step to make.
The final one is to the effect that if the Ombudsman is unhappy with the way in which his or her proposals are being dealt with by a Department or Government agency, he or she can report the matter to the Oireachtas, but at that point we stopped in a lacuna. The Minister of State and I have been over this ground in another place many times. Surely, where mediation or arbitration is involved, we should always say the matter should be brought to a conclusion and that there should be closure. However, we have left a gap in the legislation that does not result in closure. I do not even mind whether such closure involves a free vote in the House on whether we should accept the Ombudsman’s position, which would be no reflection on anybody.
I say to the departmental officials present that if the Ombudsman happens to be right on this occasion, it does not mean the Department has acted dishonourably, unethically or immorally. It just means it made a mistake, in the view of the Ombudsman.
Back to top of the page
Water and Roads Infrastructure
03/02/10 - We could easily have had a plan in place to deal with all that happened in the last couple of months but it would have meant diverting budgets. For anybody in a local authority who had the options of either fixing a road this year or putting material aside to deal with something that might happen once every 40 years, the choice would have been very easy. I do not blame local authority members for getting it wrong on this occasion. I do not believe I would have done better.
We must have learned that the legislation which gives 32 different local authorities responsibility, is just not working. There needs to be a national authority with a national policy that can be implemented locally by local authorities. There is no other way to deal with the matter.
I spoke today with representatives of Sustainable Energy Ireland and asked why there is no requirement in the building regulations stipulating that every house built in Ireland should have some form of renewable energy resource. I was told this can be achieved under current legislation and that it is only a matter of ensuring it is done. Most people are getting away by installing devices such as wood pellet boilers. This is one of the wettest countries in Europe and we all have roofs on our houses. Twenty-six inches of water fall every year on my house in Dublin. It is expensive to retrofit water-harvesting devices. Rainwater could certainly be used for all toilets in houses. There would be a huge saving.
The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government stated the current severe weather episodes have identified a number of weaknesses in our water service infrastructure. That is not true because we have known about these weaknesses. The Dublin and Cork local authorities have been referring to the wastage of water for years. Nothing new has been identified. We need an honest debate in the Houses on water charges. The charge would not be for water but for the delivery, provision or piping of water.
Back to top of the page
Shannon Flooding
26/11/09 - Since the foundation of the State, the issue of Shannon flooding has been the plaything of different political parties. I recall that Éamon de Valera promised to drain the Shannon 70 or 80 years ago. I introduced a Bill in this House in 1998 with the support of Senators Madeleine Taylor-Quinn and Kathleen O’Meara that was rejected by the Fianna Fáil-led Government. It dealt with the entire issue of water management etc. In the previous year, the Bill had been introduced to the House and the Fine Gael-led Government had refused it. I nearly fell off my seat yesterday when I heard the Leader of the House mention the Doherty report. I have to hand the Doherty report and demand that Members discuss it next year. I thought that of all things, the Leader would not wish to have it discussed. This report deals with territory the Cathaoirleach and I know well, right up to the doorstep of the Cathaoirleach’s own house. This report was published in 2000 by a sub-committee of the Oireachtas joint committee on enterprise and included proposals such as raising the storage level of Lough Ree and Lough Allen and to increase the channel capacity at Banagher to 255 cu. m per second. Had this been implemented, the Cathaoirleach might not have had the water on his doorstep this week. Other proposals included the removal of the Meelick weir, the diversion of the Suck, the raising of the sluice gates at Athlone and the road levels in Athlone, Clare and Galway, as well as to reduce river levels in October. I could go on and on.
This report dealt with all those issues. The Deputy Leader’s then party leader, Deputy Sargent, also was on the sub-committee. I have tried to get the report discussed in this House and have raised it repeatedly. While I am partial to the River Shannon for reasons that will remain unstated, the solution exists. This is a national emergency but it has been so for many years. I refer to the floods of 1914, 1954, which damaged the Cathaoirleach’s home town, and 1999. It is all there, including a proposal to the ESB that the water levels be reduced in Ardnacrusha and all those areas in mid-October every year prior to the floods. This report contains all this information, including accurate costs. I seek a debate on this issue because it is absolutely appalling and embarrassing for everyone.
Back to top of the page
Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008
12/03/09 - Practical issues ….. I have taken my boat in and out of Bantry and Fenit harbours … silting was a particular problem in Bantry. .. there was 2 m of silt, which means only 20% of the pier can be used in low water. That is also an issue in Fenit. The Tralee Canal goes from Fenit to the basin in Tralee and it is highly silted at present. Like Bantry, Tralee Bay goes into a corner and silt builds up. It is very tricky to navigate through. That is an issue because, like La Rochelle and Dingle, for example, Bantry and Fenit harbours have a dual role, namely, leisure and business. That requires local knowledge. It is only when a fisherman gets a bit tetchy about a guy in a small sailing boat getting in his way as tries to land his livelihood that one realises one must have local rules. These are important areas for the development of our tourism industry. We need people who want to attract local industry to be in charge.
I refer specifically to the Government amendments. These will enhance local decision-making and respect local culture. They are an adornment of local democracy and self-determination. ... It would be a very foolish, stupid and misinformed Minister who, in the light of the debate which has taken place, would take such a regressive step at this point. As somebody who has spent most of his life at a negotiating table, I take it that this was a sort of halfway house outcome which allowed both parties to emerge with dignity and which delivers. In that regard, it is important.
Cork and Kerry have been to the fore in providing facilities to attract people. They are the furthest away from the boating populations of Britain and Europe but they have put in extraordinarily good harbour facilities all the way from Youghal to Fenit which should be continued all the way up the coast. This is a good example of local politics being enhanced by national politics and of a public representative using national politics and the Upper House of Parliament to deliver for his local area. It is a good day’s work for the local communities in Kerry and Cork and for politics.
Back to top of the page
Harbour (Amendment) Bill 2008
05/02/09 - We intended dealing with the Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008 today. I express my admiration for the fight that Senator Denis O’Donovan has been making on this issue. ….. I do not want to get into the debate raised by Senator O’Donovan, but the reality is that there is a harbour authority in west Cork running an efficient and effective operation and making money in the locality, yet someone in Dublin has decided it should be part of a Cork city outfit. That will again disable the west and is completely unnecessary. There is no gain and it adds to administration.
Back to top of the page
Malin and Valentia Coast Guard Stations
09/10/08 - I previously raised the question of the future of the rescue service and Coast Guard stations at Malin and Valentia Island. The Leader, to his credit, responded very positively on both occasions. We waited to see what developments took place. We now face an extraordinary and possibly unprecedented situation which needs to be sorted out. No one is taking responsibility for moving in the direction of closing down the stations at Malin and Valentia Island. We hear from one side that this was a political decision and from the other that it was not.
It is hard to believe that, when serving as a Minister, Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher, would have set about closing the station at Malin, in his county. This is not something that politicians rush to do. In his defence, there is no evidence that he did this. It was stated to a committee of the House and it has been inferred otherwise, that this was a decision of a Minister of the Government. We are entitled to know the position. Before arguing about the madness of the decision in the first place, about which I have previously spoken, let us decide who makes the decision. Is it Government policy to close down, or to allow to fade away, the Coast Guard stations at Malin and Valentia Island? I do not wish to hear that we are not doing anything at the moment. Are these stations keeping the same level of authority, influence and importance as they have at present? It is a simple question for the appropriate Minister, and we can proceed from there when we will know where we must fight.
Back to top of the page
Shannon Water Abstraction Proposal
02/10/08 - Lough Ree — that great lake on the Leader’s doorstep — is under threat from Dublin City Council which wants to take water from it. I know this is an issue close to the Leader’s heart and I hope he will support me as he has done in the past. Some years ago Fianna Fáil, in Opposition, and I proposed the Shannon River Council Bill and it passed through Second Stage. I want the support of the Government side to reintroduce the Bill to protect the Shannon.
Back to top of the page
Coast Guard Stations
27/02/08) - I consider this proposal to be an absolute outrage against the west coast. It constitutes yet another denuding of support, infrastructure and tradition from rural Ireland. However, whatever the economic rights and wrongs of this proposal, it is wrong socially and in every other way.
I know both Malin and Valentia. A lovely new school has been located on the north side of Malin on the way towards Malin Head, which will lose numbers as a result of this measure. Every time one removes something from any small parish in the west, a ripple effect takes place throughout the community and everyone suffers in some way. Moreover, this is of great cultural significance and the points made by the previous speakers were highly impactful.
I am an offshore member of the RNLI and if I am sitting in Dursey Sound and wondering whether to stick my nose out into Kenmare Bay or to venture along the coast as far as Valentia, I would like to know that the person who speaking to me from Valentia is able to say what the swell is like, what kind of wind is blowing, whether there are many white tops in front of him or her or what is the story. Alternatively, if I am offshore and wish to get into Portmagee around Bray Head, I want someone who knows every inch of the area to be able to tell me it is a bit rough today, a south-westerly is blowing up and it is dangerous and difficult. Anyone from any place from the south-west to Malin who has ever suffered a night waiting for a lost boat to make contact and return home knows that the dependency on Malin and Valentia was an integral part of how we grew up. We grew up listening to old ships’ radios and while matters obviously have advanced since then, in the old days everyone tuned into channel 16 and listened to the marine services. These services are always present and know every inch of the region.
Above all however, this is decentralisation turned on its head. What is being done is completely wrong. Anything that is removed from such a community ultimately causes suffering for all. Members do not wish to see such developments happening. This is a bigger issue that pertains to regionalisation, decentralisation and saving the west. It resembles the thinking underlying the opening of the Atlantic highway from Derry to Limerick and beyond and is similar to opening the western rail corridor. It pertains to those issues and forms part and parcel of an interdependency of infrastructures and community in those areas.
This development is happening before Members’ eyes. Last year, half of the Members of the Oireachtas more or less mentally cheered when the salmon fisheries were closed. While I know there were good reasons for decommissioning one third of the fishing fleet, if matters continue in this fashion there will be nothing left in the west. It will be like turning out the lights on rural Ireland. Every week another decision is made which takes more from that area. Members should be sufficiently brave and responsible to acknowledge that it will cost more to invest in the west of Ireland and that there is inequality of investment in such regional areas. What is happening in Malin and Valentia at present is a step backwards and I ask the Government to withdraw its position in this regard.
Back to top of the page
Control of Water Resources
21/12/07 - I wish to bring to the attention of the House a matter arising from the issue we discussed recently, the schools water charges. The bills are being sent out by well-known companies. I have been a Member of this House for 20 years and I cannot remember the House ever deciding to privatise our water or to give our water away to companies. My colleague, Senator Ross, has referred time and again to the mistakes made more than 20 years ago when control over the toll bridges was handed over to NTR. I have some news for the House; NTR is a 50% owner of the company Celtic Anglian Water, which is supplying water to the Connemara Gaeltacht. Now that NTR has been paid off by an eventual €0.75 billion to allow the traffic to run free in Dublin, it is locking onto the water in Connemara and in other places.
I am concerned about who controls our water. When did we give it away? These companies are working for large profits and that is really the reason for the large bills. If large profits are being supported by large bills from companies such as the ones which run the Luas, the toll roads or which are now taking control of our water, there is a serious question for every politician of all sides and views to discuss. I do not want us in 20 or 30 years’ time having to buy back control from these contracts that are being given out currently unseen. This is privatisation by stealth and people do not like that aspect of it.
Back to top of the page
Marine Rescue Stations – Malin and Valentia
05/12/07 - There have been many emotional discussions and debates about the merits of centralisation and decentralisation. In light of the agreement of all parties on the merits of decentralisation, it is unacceptable that there is a proposal before the Government at present to close the marine rescue stations in Malin and Valentia. It is appalling that we should do this. It shows a lack of understanding of the needs of seafarers. It is a classic ignorant east coast approach to a western issue. Anyone who has come through Dursey Sound or the Blasket Sound knowing that the Valentia rescue centre is within sight will know what I mean. It is not just about technology or radar screens. It is about hundreds of years of lore. It is about people who know the size of the swell two days after the waves have gone, who know the sounds of Sceilig Mhichíl agus Sceilig Bheag and can tell one from the other.
This action is appalling. It takes away from these two places. I do not know whether people know Malin Head and Valentia Island, but there is not a lot of work around and not much happening. The idea of taking away employment in those areas is unacceptable. This is an all-party issue. The Minister should be told it is just not on. It is wrong and flies in the face of all we need. It was ironic that this hit the news yesterday when Malin station had just co-ordinated the rescue attempt for the Kennedy family in Inver in Donegal. The House should take a clear line on this and indicate that the closure is unacceptable. I would like the Minister to come to the House and discuss this so that we may explain to him that this is about more than technology and data. There is also a cost issue. The buildings and personnel are in place and any upgrading required can be done while retaining both stations.
Back to top of the page
Water Services Bill 2003
01/05/07 - I listened to a most heated and energetic debate at the INTO Annual Congress this year on that issue. The Minister has met representatives of the educational communities at local level who have pointed out to him how inadequate are their grants to meet the demands on them in terms of different local authority charges. I am not opposed to local authority charges in a general sense but it is quite unfair that they are used at school level. In the event of schools having to pay charges to local authorities, could they not be allowed to recoup those charges from the State? There should be no difficulty about that since it would not require a change in the law. The State should recognise the difficulty for schools and give those running primary and post-primary schools around the country money to compensate for the additional charges.
…… It would be very helpful if Sustainable Energy Ireland were to make grants available for rainwater harvesting. I have raised the matter with the Minister before. It would be a simple policy to implement and I do not understand the reticence to pursue it.
I agree with Senator Moylan’s point about enforcement. I recall that when we built our own house 35 years ago, which was before the introduction of self-contained, bio-cycle waste systems for one-off housing, the septic tank provider also installed a tertiary treatment plant. By the time the material had been processed in the third tank, it was like clean water. Senator Moylan makes the important point that while we require the installation of certain systems, we never check to see how well they are doing.
I have spoken to people from the fisheries boards who must often examine applications for planning permission and who must do tests regarding soakage. One cannot argue with that. Such measures might deal with the issues which often bother rural dwellers. It is important to monitor the outcomes of decisions to see if they are working properly.
Back to top of the page
Maritime Safety Bill 2004
04/05/05 - Upon examining section 16 concerning authorised officers, it occurred to me that there is specific reference in all other legislation to the role of the harbour master. As both the Minister of State and I know, the harbour master is crucial to the general operation of harbours in ensuring the implementation of Acts.
I have received representations about a difficulty arising from this Bill because harbour masters are not specifically mentioned. I ask the Minister of State to examine this matter with a view to determining whether further work is needed before it is introduced in the Dáil. A risk concerning certain ambiguities surrounding the role of the harbour master or the dilution of this role by the Bill exists, in particular where the harbour master is appointed by some form of harbour authority and must have his or her position sanctioned by the Garda or the Minister. There are problems of transition that may just be housekeeping, which can be dealt with quickly.
Our harbour masters are referred to in all relevant legislation, from primary legislation to by-laws. I fear that a smart Alec will challenge the harbour master’s role and find we have left a gap in the Bill. This is my residual worry. The harbour master is recognised internationally as the appropriate person for the role. If one arrives in a port in the Mediterranean, the south of England or the west of Ireland, the person in charge is the harbour master. A harbour master is appointed by local authorities to manage harbours under their jurisdictions and by-laws. Rosslare, where the local authority appoints the harbour master, is another example of what I am talking about.
The Minister of State and I have trust and confidence in the fantastic work harbour masters have done around the country. Is it not important to underline and reinforce their authority and our trust and confidence in them by having them mentioned in the Bill? This significant legislation will be welcome.
Back to top of the page
Maritime Safety Bill 2004
20/04/05 - This new Part 4 of the Bill makes provision for passenger boats, fishing vessels and pleasure craft and the three sections mirror each other. In each, the phrase used is “may provide for the registration” of these craft. As far as I am aware, this is the first time in legislation that the registration of pleasure craft has been provided for. Perhaps this is not the case. I know it could be done earlier. Can the Minister of State indicate how it might work? There are many reasons this seems to be the case.
It is very difficult to recognise an individual boat. Irish pleasure boats, some of which can be quite expensive, are generally not registered. The reason for this is a difficulty with the Department, which is not anyone’s fault but is simply the way things are. Currently, getting a pleasure craft registered requires a person to go through 90% of the same procedure as if one were getting the Queen Mary registered. This is not an exaggeration and one must go through all the same steps. I have informed the Minister of State previously that we should have a simple method whereby someone can register a boat very much like one would register a car.
This issue will be important in the future. At some stage the Minister of State will regulate that a boat must pass a safety test, a sort of NCT for boats, to ensure it is a safe craft. There must be some element of registration involved and the Minister will never require people to go through the current process. We need an easier process to do it as it is currently very hard to prove.
The Minister of State’s Department should create an easy method to register a boat in the same way as a car, whereby one takes the engine number, the hull number, where it came from, where it was made and the year, registers the number and puts it on the side.
The lack of a number also facilitates crime. In recent times, in a number of locations along the Shannon and at sea, boats have been stolen. It is very difficult to trace a boat that does not have a number on it.
It is very strange that pleasure craft in Ireland do not have numbers. We need a measure for pleasure craft. I apologise for belabouring the issue but it is important in terms of safety, taxation, imports and exports and the regulation of the industry to know how boats are bought and sold, where they are placed, who owns them, where they are and where they have travelled.
The small vessel register is a necessary measure. …. I agree this should be introduced on a voluntary basis. It is a good way of beginning and discovering where difficulties lie. A responsible boat owner will go out of his or her way to register because people who have an interest in boating and waterways will wish to do so. I have no difficulty with this.
The Minister of State’s comments on secondary legislation worry me. He should give himself power now by introducing a Schedule to the Bill to allow him to establish a system for small vessel registration by ministerial order rather than any other requirement. I was under the impression the Minister of State could do this under the legislation and I see his official nodding. This is the way it should be so the Minister of State can now examine what comes before him.
Places where people can pull in must be developed as there is a shortage of such places on the Shannon. I spoke earlier on the need for urgent infrastructural projects but the difficulty in having environmentally friendly marinas built and provided along the Shannon is worrying. I have examined some of the proposals that were ruled out of order and would think myself to be as environmentally friendly, conscious and supportive as anyone. The Minister of State’s Department should get involved in supporting responsible people who are trying to provide a good service by supplying proper environmentally-friendly marinas along the Shannon in particular.
I am delighted the Minister mentioned the coast guard. The Department could be a little more supportive of members of the coast guard on whom our lives very often depend, which the Minister of State quite rightly said, and to whom we owe a great debt of gratitude. These people should get some type of call-out fee, some element of support or some financial help. They put their lives at risk, particularly the coast guard which is not part of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution. They are very much dependent on the Department. I know this area is being restructured, which is important. Will the Minister of State ensure the types of supports and structures in place for them are adequate?
It is not necessary for surveys to be carried out by personnel from the Department. If I buy a boat and get it insured, it is my responsibility to get a marine surveyor to survey the boat. Most boats which have been bought have been surveyed along the way. It should be enough for the Department to recognise the person carrying out the survey. One of the major problems has been having to depend unfairly on the Department to get surveys done. That pressure should not be on the Department and people should use qualified surveyors. There are a number of recognised qualifications for marine surveyors who are very diligent about their work because their reputations depend on it. They will not state a boat is safe if it is not because it will come back to haunt them.
…. legislation should be passed to provide that people on boats should use only eco-friendly detergents. It is a small thing as they are not much more expensive. Most supermarkets along the Shannon and other waterways sell such products, particularly along the inland waterways. Sink waste is more damaging to the environment than sewage and biological detergents cause more damage than anything else. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should introduce legislation, a directive or a ministerial order stating that only eco-friendly detergents should be used on boats.
On the question of safety I support this section. As far as I can recall, the section deals with those who steer, drive, manoeuvre or pilot their boats. A significant number of the call-outs are by those who have been careless in their planning and have taken no notice of the weather. They think that because they have a new boat with a big engine they do not have to worry about anything. Suddenly they find that at a headland they are not ready for the force 7, 8 or 9 winds on the other side. There should be a requirement in passage planning for any distance that people check on the weather.
Met Éireann is helpful and good at what it does but in terms of improving safety at sea it requires significantly greater resources. For most of the coastland of the UK and even of Northern Ireland, it is possible to get a localised sea area forecast. … If more resources were provided to Met Éireann it could, in addition to the national forecast provided to RTE radio, provide a more detailed sea area forecast to the local radio stations, such as Hyland Radio, North West Radio and Radio Kerry. In this way one would get a much more detailed forecast. That should be done. Met Éireann has the ability to do this but it does not have the resources to make it available. More money should be put into Met Éireann.
… It is important that we attempt to ensure this legislation is enacted before the summer, if only for the propaganda value of raising awareness. This would signify a clear new beginning for the new boating season which starts at this time of year. The Government should be mindful of the importance of this.
Back to top of the page