Dan Boyle (Green Party)

That is true. This debate may, in many respects, seem esoteric but that is one of the reasons the Seanad should exist. While we need to balance our daily Order of Business in respect of current events and the change agenda as represented in the preceding statements on postal codes, we also need a Chamber that takes a long-term view of Ireland and its resources. We have not fared too well in the past in this respect. It is amazing that as an island country it took us until 1999 to engage in a national seabed survey. It has been a successful survey that has mapped a huge area, ten times the size of the national land area. There is another 13% to be surveyed in the next phase.

This debate covers the effect of the survey on coastal communities, sea-dependent industries and the harvesting of the sea. In the first instance, however, we are discussing the seabed and its use. Our coastline covers the largest area in the European Union that can be used for manifold purposes, as the survey and the 2008 independent review of the mapping programme show. Those uses have been mentioned - fishing, biodiversity, renewable energy projects and the like. I would like to know how the seabed can be used. The depths are significant but an apparatus can be attached to the seabed to harness tidal power. While the technology is being developed and the engineering work is being done here, it is being tested off the Scottish coast. That is a comment on us. Scotland's potential for renewable energy drawn from waves, tides and wind is equal to ours but we should be trying to maximise the added value we obtain here. Nevertheless, the company should be commended for exploiting the export potential of its technology.

The purpose of this debate is to see how the follow-on survey from the national seabed survey will come into being, be properly resourced and determine what we intend to learn from it. The INFOMAR study is integral to the national development plan. In our present fiscal situation questions arise about devoting resources to anything or whether we need a timetable for the project. This project needs a particular political action to ensure it receives maximum priority because it affects our long-term development. It is a long-term plan. A 20-year lifespan will perhaps see everybody in this Chamber out, in terms of their longevity and participation in political life. If we have anything to offer the future development of the country, these are the projects we need to develop rather than think of the next election.

The value of the INFOMAR programme is that it represents much of what recent Government policy has tried to promote through the smart economy document concerning the interdependence and inter-relationship between science, technology and innovation. Resourcing it properly, recognising it and making it a main plank of Government policy are important aspects. What needs to be done, arising from these statements, is to provide a clear sense of purpose from this House. The contributions of Opposition Members follow through on this. In this survey we will be doing the country a service. If there are question marks where they are usually raised in the current fiscal climate, particularly in the Department of Finance, it is up to everybody in the political system to meet that challenge head-on because, although there may not be an immediate political impact, or one that individual politicians can latch onto and thereby achieve self-aggrandisement, this is something the country needs to do and is for its betterment. On those grounds, the Minister, the Department and the placing of the project within the National Development Plan should be given every possible support.