Peter Kelly (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)

The Petroleum (Exploration and Extraction) Safety Bill 2010 will confer statutory responsibility on the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, for upstream or unprocessed petroleum safety. As it stands, this responsibility is split between several agencies such as an Bord Gáis, the Health and Safety Authority, An Bord Pleanála and county councils. The need to dispense with the current fragmented regulatory and safety regime in favour of a more unified approach was brought to the fore by the independent mediator in the Corrib dispute, Mr. Peter Cassells. I agree with Mr. Cassells that one cannot have various different bodies doing a regulatory job when a single agency would suffice.

A specialised Corrib technical advisory group, founded by the then Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, in 2005 also found the regulatory regime was incapable of giving due weight to the societal risk posed by petroleum-related activities. There is a need for a State body with the appropriate expertise and powers to regulate overall public safety in the sector. With market liberalisation, the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2006 conferred responsibility on CER for the public safety of downstream or processed gas activity. This Bill will now extend the responsibility of CER to the safety of upstream oil and gas. Ensuring maximum public safety is the fundamental objective of this proposal and this is the overriding benefit. Under this Bill, the HSA will remain responsible for enforcing occupational safety and health laws for oil extraction.

A number of different approaches have been taken by other countries. The UK, for example, has chosen to empower its general employment health and safety authority with specific powers for pipeline safety. This type of system does not lend itself to Ireland as the legislation establishing the HSA here is different from that in the UK. The HSA cannot be given responsibility for infrastructure that does not have operatives in attendance. It is responsible for the safety of employees rather than for the public at large. The HSA does not have experience in this field of pipeline safety. In any case, it would not make sense to have two separate regulatory or safety organisations for one industry, particularly when the upstream aspect is relatively minor. Under this legislation CER will be able to recover its losses from the industry. The new safety regime for upstream safety is designed to strengthen public safety and is in compliance with the recommendations of the recent safety studies into the Corrib gas field. In the future it would be worth exploring the option of giving overall responsibility for pipeline safety to one authority, as is the case in Denmark.

This would be extremely beneficial in terms of benefits of economies of scale and the pooling of professional knowledge. This is a technical Bill but its main objective is very clear. It will ensure the highest standards of public safety are adhered to for upstream petroleum. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context