Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish to refer to the issue of petrol stretching. As the Minister is aware, this is a major issue in my constituency and across the west in general. It is imperative that everything possible should be done to try to bring people to account in respect of this matter. On Second Stage I stated that at present the average fine, on conviction, in respect of fuel laundering is €2,900. The amount of damage done to vehicles by those involved in petrol stretching is far in excess of this amount. I am of the opinion that we need to review the penalties which apply. A cap of €5,000 applies in respect of District Court fines relating to summary convictions. This should be made the minimum level of fine in respect of those who supply illegal fuel. Such individuals should also be obliged to serve up to 12 months in prison. I understand that the current specification which applies in the case of unleaded petrol - reference is made to this in section 51 - could allow for up to 10% kerosene to be blended into it and no one would be guilty of breaking the law. As a result, there is a possibility that people involved in petrol stretching could escape conviction. Is there a need to tighten up the definition in respect of petrol to ensure there is no loophole in this regard?

Second, if it is the case that we cannot secure a criminal conviction, can the Minister of State ensure evidence collated by the Revenue Commissioners will actually be made available for a civil class action, if it is to take place?

The other aspect is that we need to ensure what has been occurring cannot happen again. Petrol stretching has been occurring in continental Europe, including Poland, for years. It seems the Revenue Commissioners have had their eye off the ball in regard to what is happening in other jurisdictions. We should have tried to put some checks and balances in place. Let me refer specifically to section 50. The information required for diesel deliveries is far more detailed than that required for petrol deliveries. There is actually a variation in the amounts of detail required to comply with the licensing regime currently in place under the Revenue Commissioners. The returns made by filling stations are far more detailed for diesel deliveries they receive than for petrol deliveries.

I understand a distributor that operates here and in the United Kingdom actually took petrol from its fuel stations off the market in the United Kingdom earlier this year. There is genuine concern that some of that fuel ended up on the market here in our network of filling stations. I urge the Revenue Commissioners to investigate whether the company took petrol off the market in the United Kingdom, the reason for doing so and, if it was taken off the market, what happened to it subsequently. We should have assurances that it was not distributed in our fuel network.

The final aspect that needs to be addressed, which I raised last night, is the need to put a fund in place to assist those who have had their vehicles damaged. Many of them have third party insurance so the damage to their engines is not covered. Those with comprehensive insurance who do not have no-claims bonus protection face higher premiums. Some financial relief will have to be provided for them. There have been cases where insurance companies did not pay people who were comprehensively insured.

In this context, something needs to be done for licensed retailers selling legitimate fuel. Owing to the current rumour and innuendo, their businesses are being undermined. I know of a legitimate fuel retailer that wants to reduce the price of petrol by 2 cent per litre but which is afraid to do so for fear it will be branded as a fly-by-night operator selling dodgy fuel. This is a serious issue and it needs to be tackled very quickly.