Category Archives: Active Citizenship

Senator Daly: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and I welcome the delayed Bill to the Seanad. As the Minister of State will be aware only 2% of the laws made in this country every year actually come before the Dáil and Seanad. Most of the laws that come into effect in Ireland are EU directives, EU regulations or statutory instruments, signed by Ministers directly into Irish law and they never receive the scrutiny they deserve. This is one of the few occasions when a directive has to come to the Houses of the Oireachtas to be scrutinised before being passed. However, as we see, we have less than four weeks to do it even though the directive started out in 2013.

The Government and previous Governments have failed to put in place systems in this House, meaning that directives from Europe, many of which are excellent and much needed, are only dealt with at the last minute and do not receive the scrutiny they require. In 2009 there were 47 Acts of the Oireachtas yet there were more than 1,200 EU regulations, 547 EU directives and nearly 600 statutory instruments. The legislators only looked after 47 Acts and the rest were done by Ministers and civil servants.

The Bill is to be welcomed. In light of the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico where nearly 8,000 barrels a day, which is nearly 100,000 l, disappeared in the first 24 hours, increasing to 6 million l per day at the height of the disaster, obviously it is very important to have legislation of this nature. With the estimated 10 billion barrels, 1 trillion l, in oil and gas reserves off the Irish coast, having a proper safety and regulatory system is important.

The Minister of State outlined the Bill excellently. When industry welcomes a Bill introducing safety regulation, we should be concerned. While the Minister of State has said there is no cost to the Exchequer, was any regulatory impact assessment carried out? The programme for Government promised that the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform would carry out regulatory impact assessments for Bills such as this. Obviously, we do not want to put an undue burden on oil and gas industries or suppliers, but it is important to know what the regulatory impact assessment would be.

I have concern over the decommissioning of oil and gas platforms. It is great for the taxpayer that we would get the revenue from it. However, if a company decides to fold its tent and close up its operations in Ireland, there is no entity to chase for the decommissioning of the platform. In fact all the money we might have got from the taxation and the levies applied on the industry would then be spent on decommissioning oil and gas platforms.

I believe the Minister of State will also be concerned that certain sections of the Bill refer to a maximum amount of money to be applied in fines. The term “as low as is reasonably practicable” is very much open to interpretation. I know they are talking about best practice, but I am sure other jurisdictions would have a definition of what is “as low as is reasonably practicable” regarding the prevention of major accidents offshore.

We do not have much time. I know this is a bit like Committee Stage. We will ram through Committee Stage and I do not blame the Minister of State for that; it is just the way the Bill has come in. Section 8 deals with safety case guidelines. It refers to “the appropriate technical principles and specifications relating to… decommissioning of… infrastructure”. Should a bond not be put in place whereby as the Department gives out a licence it also asks the company to put a bond in place so that if it goes to the wall at least we would be able to get the money from the bondholder to decommission the infrastructure? The concern is that that would be a massive cost on the taxpayer into the future.

I am concerned about the lack of sanction over not carrying out requirements by the new authority and also about a limit on the fines. One of the sections refers to “on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €3,000,000”. I do not know why we would limit an oil company to a fine not exceeding €3 million. The cost of the clean-up for the Gulf of Mexico disaster has now reached €14 billion and it has still not finished. Every now and again BP issues an announcement that the clean-up is finished and then the US Coast Guard states it is not done and there is still more clean-up being done.

Section 15 deals with a reportable petroleum incident. This is why I highlighted the first 24 hours in the Deepwater Horizon disaster. The Bill refers to the requirement for “information and particulars as may be prescribed by the Commission, without delay, and no later than 24 hours after taking those measures”. That relates to the reporting of an incident. One of the issues with the Deepwater Horizon incident was that it was not reported early. The fact that it went on for years was obviously a huge issue. Section 15(2) states that they do have to report anything within 24 hours and make the State aware. Failure to do this incurs a fine of €1 million. One would hope they would do it. These companies deal in trillions and we are imposing an on-the-spot fine that is equivalent to a parking fine for some of them.

The Minister of State spoke about the issues of transparency. The Bill provides that: “The Commission may, with the consent of the Minister, publish a non-confidential version of the reports.” However, there are also confidential versions, which would lead to a lack of transparency.

Obviously, I am concerned over the limited amount of time we have – we had two years to do this and we are doing it in four weeks. This has happened before and I have spoken many times in this House about the lack of process when it comes to what is essentially a good directive. I am not giving out about the concept of the directive, but we are missing opportunities, one of the most important of which is consequences for the operators not doing what they should do.

We talk about the safety measures required, including fire tenders and other equipment, but do we actually have that in place? How many fire brigades would be required? Obviously, because it is mostly offshore, we will need boats that can deal with incidents at sea. The fire services are provided by the local authorities and do not have these boats hanging around the place. How many do we have? How many are required? If there is an incident and we do not have the equipment, whose fault is it? To bring it in from the Gulf of Mexico or the North Sea would take days. Those are the lessons that should have been learned from the Gulf of Mexico disaster – the equipment was not deployed in time.

I wanted to make those points. I know we are supposed to be discussing the generality of the Bill, but in reality we do not have much time to get this right.Donegal and Kerry could be badly affected by oil rigs just sitting there, which has happened in California and other places because there is an issue around who is going to pay for them to disappear. We should have a bond system in place on which the Government at least would be able to call in the event of a company no longer being in existence, as that would mean there would be money to pay for the decommissioning of such rigs.

Senator Daly: I support the proposed amendment to the Order of Business on the lone parent allowance. All of us have received representations on this important issue and I hope the Government will accept the amendment. I commend the Taoiseach on his recent announcement in Killarney that he will release the files on the Kingsmill massacre in the North. He met the families involved and promised to release the files but this was delayed for technical reasons. I ask the British Prime Minister to do the same in regard to the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and to honour his commitment under an international agreement, the Weston Park Agreement, to hold an inquiry into the killing of Pat Finucane. The nature of the cover-up of past incidents, which is the nicest way I can put it, is revealed by the fact that the Birmingham Six files are under lock and key until 2069.

My colleague, Senator Darragh O’Brien, referred to the issue of organ donation and transplantation. Senators will be delighted to hear that we will not recall the Seanad this summer to debate that issue. One in ten people on organ transplant waiting lists die not because of a shortage of organs but because of systems which do not work. Our systems for pancreatic transplants have collapsed. The Government knew that Dr. Hickey was retiring but he has not been replaced. Thankfully, we now have 19 organ donor co-ordinators who were hired as a result of the recall of the Seanad. The head of the Spanish transplant authority stated that we had the worst system in Europe and that our system was killing people. The publication of those embarrassing comments on the front page of a Sunday newspaper one week before the Seanad was recalled forced the Government to act. It now needs to act on the issue of pancreatic transplants because the current situation is not good enough. The Minister for Health acts like a commentator, as if he has nothing to do with these issues and just happened to appear on the Marian Finucane show after reading a newspaper article, which is where he appears to get most of his information, as opposed to being briefed by his own Department. If he put a proper system in place instead of spending millions of euro on dialysis, the taxpayer would save €325 million per year. The sad reality is that 65 people will die on the organ transplant waiting list this year simply because the system does not work. As the Minister with responsibility for that system, I ask Deputy Varadkar to come to the House to explain why he is allowing people to die under his watch.

Senator Daly: I support my colleague, Senator Darragh O’Brien, and second his amendment to the Order of Business on bringing in the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, who one would swear was not the Minister for Health and merely worked as a commentator condemning actions in his own Department, allowing his response to be dictated by Beaumont Hospital and then wondering why it was not brought up yesterday. If it had been brought up yesterday, it would have been ruled out of order because it was not related to the Bill under discussion. Not only does the Minister not know what is going on in his own Department, but Leo, the commentator, does not know how the Seanad works.

—-Later—-

Senator Daly: I am sorry – the Minister does not know how the Seanad works.

I welcome the announcement by the Pope in the past half an hour on climate change and ask for a debate on it. Climate change is the most serious issue facing mankind. It is the most serious threat facing the world at this time. When one considers that half of the creatures of the Earth have disappeared since 1990, in China life expectancy has reduced by five years because of air pollution and the US Army has stated that it is a more serious threat than terrorism, that is the level of threat the planet faces at this time. I ask that we have this debate. It is not about being optimistic or pessimistic, but about being determined. There is a UN conference coming up in Paris in the near future and many of the experts in the field of climate change have stated that those who will decide the outcome in Paris will decide who lives and who dies. That is how serious climate change is for the planet. It is an issue that does not affect Europe as much as it affects those in Africa and elsewhere in the developing world, but it affects them to a degree that is life-threatening. I ask the Leader organise a debate in that regard.

Senator Daly:  I would like to ask the Leader to organise a debate on collusion between the British security forces and the Ulster Volunteer Force and other loyalist paramilitary groups in the North. An excellent recent documentary on RTE showed that gangs of murderers were sponsored by the British state. They were basically death squads. This state-sponsored terror was orchestrated with the full knowledge of Downing Street, Westminster and the British Government. The time for soft diplomacy is over. Frederick Douglass said that “power concedes nothing without a demand”.

In Downing Street tomorrow, the Taoiseach will meet David Cameron, who could release all the files on the collusion allegations with a stroke of a pen. There are many horrific cases, but the most horrific is the case of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, which was the biggest mass murder in the history of this State. Even though the Barron report showed that the bombings could not have been carried out without the assistance of people in the British military, David Cameron is refusing to hand over files that would show the British state had nothing to do with it. If I were accused of the biggest mass murder in the history of this country, I would want to clear my name. If I were David Cameron, that is what I would do. If I were the Prime Minister of England, I would do that. Even though European courts and UN bodies have said the British state needs to carry out investigations, they have refused to do so. As a former Secretary General of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade put it, first they deny, then they cover up and years afterwards they eventually apologise. Soft diplomacy is not good enough. The Taoiseach needs to demand that those files be handed over so we can prosecute those who perpetrated the biggest mass murder in the history of this island. I ask the Leader to organise a debate on this matter. Indeed, I propose that motion 18 on the Order Paper be moved and be taken before No. 1. I hope there will be all-party support in this House on the issue, as there was in the Dáil

Senator Daly: I move:

That Seanad Éireann, recalling the motions by Dáil Éireann adopted unanimously on 10 July 2008 and 18 May 2011 which:- noted ‘the interim and final reports of the sub-Committee of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights on the report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin-Monaghan Bombings and the three related Barron reports, including the Inquiry into the Bombing of Kay’s Tavern, Dundalk, and commends the sub-Committee on its work’;

– urged ‘the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to allow access by an independent, international judicial figure to all original documents held by the British Government relating to the atrocities that occurred in this jurisdiction and which were inquired into by Judge Barron, for the purposes of assessing said documents with the aim of assisting in the resolution of these crimes’; and

– directed ‘the Clerk of the Dáil to communicate the text of this Resolution, together with copies of the aforementioned reports, to the House of Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with a request that the matter be considered by the House of Commons’;

– notes that the question of obtaining access to information held by the British Government on the bombings has been pursued for many years;

– requests the Government to continue to raise the matter with the British Government and to press it to comply with the request and affirms the support of Members of this House; and

– acknowledges that the co-operation being sought is taking place in the context of transformed relationships on this island and between Ireland and Britain based on mutual respect, on partnership and on friendship.

I thank the Leader for agreeing to pass the motion and we look forward to the news from Downing Street tomorrow when the Taoiseach meets Prime Minister Cameron, and hearing what response he will give—-on the release of the files on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.