Ms Claire Callanan:

I will go in reverse order and explain how an investigation is carried out. I am new but I will offer an illustration. Yesterday, we received an incident report. The way the system operates sees the emergency services filtering potential marine incidents and reporting to the board, which has three staff. The staff circulate that information immediately to the board members, so yesterday was my first experience of it. There was a flurry of emails over a short period in the afternoon entailing a brief technical outline of the incident, asking whether there was any missing information that would be essential for determining whether there would be a preliminary investigation or an investigator would be appointed immediately for a full investigation, and identifying an available investigator. Within an hour of the first communication, an available investigator had been identified and tasked with carrying out a preliminary investigation. That involved checking with the Garda in the first instance. Other State agencies involved include any of the emergency services and the Coast Guard. Also involved are local fishing information and the weather service. In the reports I have read, the latter appears to be essential, as it possesses technical information from the time.

The investigators are independent and retained as consultants by the board. They are appointed from time to time following the usual sort of process. They have expertise in marine engineering, naval architecture, naval machine learning, marine surveying, etc. An investigator gathers all of the information, carries out interviews and prepares a draft report, which is then considered. It may be returned to the investigator. When the investigation is concluded and a report has been drafted, there is a natural justice phase wherein persons who may be affected are given a copy of that report. They can comment on it, which is then taken on board by the MCIB. That is how the system operates.

I was impressed by the speed yesterday, as well as by the availability of board members. It was all done very efficiently by email. An investigator was identified and on the job within a short time.

The reports are published online when they are concluded. They generally contain recommendations that go to the Minister, after which the recommendations become a matter for the Department to consider and, if viewed as relevant, to take on board and feed into its legislative and other processes. In 2017, the Department reissued its code of safety on recreational vessels, so I assume previous reports fed into that. Safety on recreational vessels also seems to be a theme in the chairman's statement in the report that has just been published.

I welcome the observation on the Institute of Directors. I will take it back to the board, as one always needs to be reviewed and externally audited from time to time. Even if someone believes he or she is doing well, one can always do better. The observation is timely. I cannot say whether there has ever been a board review or reassessment. Assuming there has not been one in recent times, it would be useful. I am happy to take that observation back to the board for discussion.

Regarding the AAIU and the availability of expertise, there appears to be good co-ordination in what is a specialist area in respect of accidents. Although it is just a preliminary observation, my understanding is that there has been good co-ordinating and sharing between experts in rail, aviation and marine accidents. One of the members of the board is the chief investigator of rail accidents. The methods used may be different, but accidents have similar concepts, methodologies and other things to critique. Given that we are a small country with a very small number of experts in this area and, happily, a very small number of accidents, I appreciate the point about there being merit in sharing information and expertise. I believe we have that.

Regarding fees, Brexit and the current position, the fees for the chairperson are approximately €8,700 per annum. Currently, nine investigations are ongoing. They include one that is led by Antigua and Barbuda because it involves an Antiguan and Barbudan boat. We are contributing to that investigation but, as the flagship country, Antigua and Barbuda is the lead investigator. The most immediate objective is to progress existing investigations and reports. I am told that three draft reports are in the natural justice phase.

The deadlines for the receipt of responses are 5, 6 and 7 February and, depending on what comes back, three reports will be published relatively promptly thereafter.

I have had a preliminary briefing on Brexit and, if I may, I will respond in a number of ways. On the regulatory regime, apparently it will have little consequence when the United Kingdom falls outside the EU legal regime because, in large part, all countries are parties to international marine conventions that contain similar safety provisions and regulations. EU directives and regulations are closely aligned with international conventions. Therefore, there is a secondary legal regime in which continuing operations can be framed, if I can put it that way.

On the European Marine Safety Agency, it seems to us that the only issue is that data from the United Kingdom will not be uploaded and will not become part of the data platform. Therefore, to a certain extent, the value of the statistics and input from the joint agency will be devalued, given, in particular, that the United Kingdom is our nearest neighbour and a marine entity, but it is not something we can do much about.

On the response to a marine casualty, there is an international safety regime which operates in different areas from territorial waters. I understand the response to an emergency should not be affected. Thinking a little downstream, it might be the case that the outcome of marine casualty incidents could be prejudiced if there were to be delays or difficulties of whatever nature in seeking access across the Border or to healthcare facilities because it would not be the norm in the context of the EU healthcare regime. I have not bottomed it out sufficiently to see what would then operate.