Noel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)

The Deputy will appreciate that the gas safety provision which is under consideration in this Bill relates to downstream facilities only. On the issue raised by the Deputy, as regards the specific types of infrastructure he describes, we are examining the matter in detail with the co-operation of CER, with a view to providing the appropriate legislative framework to ensure that such functions are properly transferred. The Deputy may recall that this was among the recommendations made through our technical advisory group and in the Atlantica reports on the Corrib gas field. It is agreed that there is no problem and that CER will look after this. We are in a consultative process with CER, the petroleum industry and the Health and Safety Authority with a view to progressing the whole matter, having regard to the current requirement for analysis of regulatory impacts. As the Deputy knows well, once regulations are being introduced and new standards are being imposed, a regulatory impact assessment must be carried out and that is taking place in consultation with the various bodies referred to.

The process is much more complex than I had envisaged when we first set out on this route. In line with what Deputy Broughan said, it has to be done correctly and we are taking a cautious approach. I thought we might have been able to spell it out in this Bill, but because we want to do it correctly and need to consult widely, that has not been possible. We might be in a position to amend the Bill in the Seanad to take account of the Deputy's suggestions and he might alert the Labour Party spokesperson there about that. However, if that proves difficult for us, technically and legally, we shall have to do this via separate legislation and that is the intent. However, I would prefer if it could be done in this Bill given that we have taken this route. I assure Deputy Broughan that either this Bill will be amended in the Seanad or a separate Bill will be published once talks have concluded.

There is nothing to be gained by returning to last week's debate. It is not accurate to state that worries about the pipeline and its route were vindicated by TAG, Advantica and CPI. That may be the case with the CPI report but I do not hold much store by it. The TAG report did not make any adjudication but Advantica made it clear the pipeline, as proposed, is safe. A number of recommendations were made to allay fears. Mr. Peter Cassells accepted the report. He would be the first to state he was not technically competent to second guess world experts in the area. In a bid to meet the genuine concerns of a number of people in Mayo, he recommended a change in the pipeline. All this was accepted by Shell and by the Department but spurned by Shell to Sea.

I welcome the optimistic scenarios regarding what might lie off the west coast. I hope the predictions are correct. The more people exploring, the better chance we have of making finds. Currently it is only speculation. While it is wonderful to speak of 10 billion barrels, we must first discover them and then bring them ashore. Before the end of the year I hope to be able to discuss the terms of the next set of licences and explorations.

The scenes we saw last Friday were appalling. No useful purpose is served by rent-a-mob or by anyone stoking up feelings. I defend the right to peaceful protest but others have the right to work. If everyone respects the rights of others we will not see the scenes we saw last week.

See this speech in context