Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I also welcome the Minister, even though I often argue with him about some of his proposals. I tend to be 90% in agreement with his agenda and I welcome this legislation. I compliment his officials who have put a great deal of work into it.

The Bill reflects international best practice. One of the great problems is the lack of clarity and responsibility in this area. Until now, the health and safety of workers was dealt with through a different method from the health and safety provisions relating to the transportation of equipment and liquids. The legislation will put together and tidy up many loose ends. In fairness to the Minister and his officials, it reflects the best of the practices which I have witnessed in different parts of the world. In other countries, similar legislation deals with work and investigation relating to onshore or offshore oil production activities and two different sets of regulations applies and it does not work. Norway and Canada have legislation to deal simply with the pipeline.

What the Minister has done is the way forward and it is a role model for best practice. International practice will mimic this and in that regard, it is crucially important. Senator O'Malley and I visited the Shell base in north Mayo. I have not been a great supporter of Shell over the years but I put my prejudices to one side to examine the work it was doing and I was particularly interested in the safety aspect of it. I was convinced and persuaded by the way the company does its work. I spoke with trade union and other worker representatives and found out that during 1 million man hours of construction on the site there has not been an accident. I never experienced such a concentration on safety on a site. Workers, including managers, were required not to exceed the speed limit under any circumstances on their way to work in the morning; they cannot go down a stairs without clutching the hand rail; and they must walk around on site not only with a helmet on but also gloves.

Senator Donohoe referred to the safety case audits. This issue jumped off the page when I read the legislation. I do not agree with the Senator's conclusion but I do not have a problem with the petroleum company being responsible for paying for the safety audit because that is no different to normal business practice where an auditor of a company's books must be paid by the company as long as we can have trust and confidence in him or her complying with certain standards and it is governed by a regulatory structure. If a petroleum company employed somebody to conduct a safety audit without any checks and balances regarding his or her qualifications, background and so on, the person's role would be questionable at best as the Senator said.

We all have our views about what happened in north Mayo. Shell has made many mistakes, including in regard to the recent issue where it emerged it was in breach of strict requirements of its planning permission. It should have more sense than to walk into it with the eyes of the world upon it.

We must be satisfied at every level that this is safe. We must say to the people that we are 90% dependent on imported energy sources and that, as the Kinsale gas field goes off-stream in the next year, we need the gas from the Corrib gas field. This must deal with all the issues in order that people can cope with them.

I read an article in The Wall Street Journal on the oil exploration industry and the lack of investment by companies, including Shell, in exploration. Many think these multinationals are trying to get into our territory, but in April last year the Minister had an auction for two of the blocks for exploration and there were only two indications of interest. We cannot live with this.

The Minister has picked up on unpopular issues such as the need for a debate on nuclear energy. We also need a fair debate on exploration, the costs of investment and how the State will never be able to afford to do it. The only way it can do so is in partnership with the private sector where the private sector gets the oil out of the ground and we achieve a fair result. I will not comment on that debate because my views are different from those held by many Members, but we need it.

In section 1 of the Bill there is a commencement date that is left at the discretion of the Minister. There should be a set commencement date in every Bill or the relevant Minister should have to explain why it was not implemented. There is legislation the public thinks was passed, signed by the President and written into law that has never been commenced by the Department responsible. This morning we talked about the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act. I do not want to see us back here asking about this legislation. The Minister should insert a date into section 1(2); it could be as much as five years hence, but if it is not commenced by then, someone should be answerable.

Overall, this is hugely important legislation. It will be welcomed by the trade union movement that the Government has seen fit to bring forward legislation governing the safety of citizens, workers and energy sources. This is hugely important and the Minister is to be complimented.

All the points raised by Senator Donohoe must be answered and I hope the Minister will do so. The Minister has shown on the Broadcasting Bill his willingness to accept the changes necessary to strengthen the legislation. Both Senator Donohoe and I raised with the Minister's officials yesterday the need to have safety information in the public domain. It should be accessible on-line. We are not talking about commercially sensitive information. I do not want to receive telephone calls or people to say to me that companies are claiming that they comply with legislation but that there is really a deal between them and the Government. That raises unnecessary hares. There is no reason this information should not be available, while there are many good reasons it should be, the best being that people can find their own benchmarks. In the discussions we had with Shell, we asked how it judged its safety record and it had an answer to every question. I am not touching on issues that made national and international headlines, rather I am talking about on-site issues.

I welcome this legislation and will support it. I will also, on Committee Stage, seek changes, not to the main thrust of the Bill but to ensure we have learned from what has happened in north Mayo - that people will look under every stone and come to all sorts of conclusions if information is not available. I will give an example. There is a controversy about a proposal to build a prison near to where I live. Specifications on every matter from safety to drainage became an issue. Eventually those responsible handed over 12 volumes of information in a box measuring one cubic metre. That argument went out the window. That is the way to do business. If someone wants to argue about something, give him or her the information he or she needs in order that we can focus on the real issues involved.

I compliment the Minister on introducing the Bill, as it is important that we emphasise safety. I compliment the officials on bringing forward legislation that reflects best practice internationally.