Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)

Obviously I welcome Chapter 2, the series of amendments Nos. 40 to 48, inclusive, on liquefied gas carriage. I sought, as with the chemical carriers, to insert a number of amendments, which again would have opened up the maximum fine. These are amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, to amendment No. 42, which would have opened up the possibility of a find equivalent to 10% of turnover. It is the same argument I made before.

I have introduced similar amendments with regard to the requirements for double-hulled vessels and the construction rules for ships travelling through or berthed in Irish waters, and also on the subject of flags.

On the previous Stage I asked the Minister about the IGC code for the construction and equipment of ships carrying liquefied gases in bulk, to which he referred in passing. I may have mentioned this with regard to chemical tankers also. What is the situation when a ship is transferred to a flag of convenience, for example? Is it possible that, despite SOLAS, ships will be travelling around the globe and through our extensive waters without IGC certificates? The Minister is saying he will track this.

The Minister told us during the previous Report Stage discussion that 65 or perhaps 70 ships were carrying the Irish flag. What is the update on the Irish Maritime Development Office? He stated that we had chemical carriers but that so far we do not have liquefied natural gas carriers. These are issues in which the public is interested. The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport is always asking the Irish Maritime Development Office to come before it to provide updates, because there was much interest, under the previous Department, in the work of that development office and the number of ships - for example, Italian ships - that were being re-flagged to Dublin or Cork.

How does the IGC code apply in respect of amendments Nos. 40 to 48?

See this speech in context