Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

That is somewhat disappointing considering all of the commentary of the Minister of State to date. She said that she acknowledged the need for a new mechanism for appointing members of the board of the MCIB. Can she tell me what progress has been made since she made that statement?

The Clinch and Lacey reports have done us a service. There is a fear in government and in the Department about publishing those reports. The Minister of State did not address that, or is perhaps not in a position to do so. I appreciate that it might not be fully within her scope in terms of authority within the Department to do so, but she did not address when they could be published. There is a lot of suspicion and concern about this and a lot of people are involved. It is only when we read the very extensive MCIB reports that we realise the situation.

Families from all parts of Ireland whose partners, friends or relations have been involved in serious casualties have contacted me. They are deeply concerned. A number of marine publications are following this issue. It is a big issue for maritime communities. It is about people's safety.

At the end of the day, I respect the Minister of State, her job, what she is doing and the rationale she set out in her response. However, let us not fool ourselves. The European Court of Justice found enormous shortcomings. It raised the question of the independence of the organisation and decision-making of any party whose interests could conflict with the task at hand, in this case the task of investigation. This rests with the Minister of State. As I said, the judgment went on to state that we need to learn from the tragedies and save lives. That is what the judgement clearly set out. The Department officials and Minister know that.

The judgment states there is a clear conflict in the official investigations, their regulatory framework and in the fact they made recommendations to themselves, effectively being judge and jury in their own cause. That does not give people comfort. The Minister of State has suggested an amendment or tweaking that. I do not see that amendment No. 2 will in any way frustrate or stop the Bill from being enacted. I would have thought the Minister of State could have said this was two years away, we might not even be here ourselves and that it is well-intentioned but way down the track. Surely we would get our act together within two years.

I cannot see any reason for not accepting this amendment other the fact it is an Opposition amendment. Perhaps it is a numbers game and the Government is not that interested because it does not need to curry favour or ask for support. I do not know what the position is. There is a general trend whereby anything that comes from the Opposition in this House is opposed. That is a pity because no one has a monopoly on wisdom, vision, policy, foresight, empathy and concern with the people involved and those whose family members have tragically lost their lives.

There is opportunity in a good argument. I do not go away disappointed that the amendment has been rejected. That is not the way I operate. I come in here with one thing to do, namely, to table two amendments with the objective of getting space and time on the floor of the Chamber to raise questions about the judgment of the European Court of Justice and the failings of the State to respond adequately and immediately to that. I sought to have the Lacey report publication date confirmed by the Minister of State or the relevant Minister. My third request was at the Clinch report be published. I am going away happy enough that I have had an opportunity to engage with Minister of State is a respectful way regarding these issues.

I will be clear about what I am asking for. I would like a more urgent response from the Minister of State regarding the EU judgment. I thank Michael Kingston for being brave and taking the case. I am terribly sorry that the taxpayer has had to pay substantial money regarding the case and that has still not prompted speedier action. That is for another day. I ask that the Lacey and Clinch reports be published as soon as possible. It would be great if the Minister of State could share any information she has on that, but if she cannot do so she might come back to me in the next few days. I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House.