Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

I thank the Minister for his explanation of the Bill. I was part of a Government that changed the safety framework for gas and oil and if I understand the Minister correctly, we are continuing with that progress so that upstream and downstream safety regulation of oil will be done by the Commission for Energy Regulation on a cost neutral basis and that any costs incurred overtime will be recouped from the industry.

As a Minister I strongly supported safety regulation being separate from the Department. In the old days there was misunderstanding of ministerial approvals at various stages of the process and the present arrangement should allow us to follow best practice to ensure we have good safety processes. I also noted the Minister's intention to ask the EPA to look at fracking, which is a vital issue and we must satisfy public opinion that sound safety regulations are in place.

At present, the law provides for full cost recovery but cost recovery cannot take place until the regime is up and running. The research by its very nature, and the preparation and consultation that must take place, will take some time. The start-up costs until now have been funded by commercial loans and it is now intended that these be taken from the NTMA so there will be a saving in interest charges there. Since this is full cost recovery from the industry, the savings in the interest charges will ultimately lead to lower costs for the industry but the principle of full recovery of costs from the industry for safety regulation is absolute. On that basis, I have no difficulty with the Bill.

It is not often we get a Bill with just two sections and I support its introduction as quickly as possible so we have a thorough and comprehensive safety regime that follows the world's best practice. I do not believe it is possible to ensure that something is absolutely safe but we must follow best practice in respect of safety. I welcome the five phases relating to the development of the safety regime and I am aware that work is ongoing in this regard.

It is important that those who have concerns with regard to the safety of oil and gas should engage with the public consultation phase of the process in order that their views might be taken into account by the CER. It is also important that the CER should try to engage the public as much as possible as the framework is being developed. In cases such as this, what usually happens is that a framework is developed but no one pays too much heed to it until a difficulty arises. When that difficulty arises, people then tend to reconsider the framework and ask why it was written in a particular way. The answer that is given in such instances usually contains the phrase "you were consulted". People often do not engage with consultation processes until it is too late. As it develops the framework, the CER should ensure, as far as is possible, that members of the public will take part in the consultation process. That process should be proactive in nature in order that we might encourage those who are interested in the subject to make their contributions so that they might be taken on board. We might then reach a stage where there would be a general consensus to the effect that a good safety framework is being put in place for the oil and gas industries.

See this speech in context