Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will respond to amendments Nos. 20 to 26, inclusive.

The purpose of Part 8 is to allow us to regulate offshore service vessels, and there is a key aspect in this section which provides the Minister with the power to make rules for such regulation. I confirm that it is my intention, if and when this Bill is enacted, to have rules progressed as soon as possible using that power. Indeed, work has already commenced in updating the cargo ship rules and high-speed craft rules which will form the base certifications for these vessels. It is important the powers are provided, but not that there is a mandatory obligation placed on a Minister to make rules or regulations. Under the Merchant Shipping Act, it is standard drafting language to use the term "may" rather than "shall" when providing such a power.

The Senator is also proposing to make it mandatory for any rules made under the section to specify the need to comply with requirements of recognised organisations. Some of the vessels we are referring to here, however, will be small crew transfer vessels which will be operating domestically to and from wind farms. Recognised organisations typically only prescribe requirements for larger ships on international voyages. As such, it is impractical to make it mandatory for smaller offshore service vessels on domestic voyages to comply with the requirements as set out by recognised organisations.

The Senator also wishes to make it mandatory for the rules to require compliance with the provisions of chapter XV of the SOLAS Convention and the IP Code. That convention and code typically relate to ships on international voyages, however, which are 500 gross tonnes and greater. For such vessels, it is our intention to comply with our obligations under the convention. It may not be practical, however, to apply the provision of the convention or the code to smaller vessels less than 500 gross tonnes operating on domestic voyages. We need to be able to determine the most appropriate safety standards from the vessel based on its size, purpose and area of operation. The Senator further wishes to make it a requirement to have different rules for different classes of vessels and make it mandatory to take into account the listed criteria. It is practical to have the option to have different sets of rules given the different types of vessels that may be involved, but it will be determined during the drafting process as to what rules are required and whether a single set can be used to cover a range of vessels. As such, the use of the term "may" is more practical in this instance. The Senator also wishes to make it a mandatory requirement for the Minister to accept alternative approaches in terms of construction and provision of equipment, which is not appropriate. This should be the exception rather than the rule. It could be the case that some of the offshore service vessels may be, or were previously, flagged to another state that provided for different requirements. This provision, therefore, would allow acceptance of an alternative manner in terms of construction or equipment once it was of an equivalent standard. This will be determined after the full survey and should not be mandatorily accepted under legislation.

The Senator also wishes to make it mandatory for any rules to include survey requirements. Offshore service vessels cannot be provided with a certificate under section 48 of this Bill without first having undergone the appropriate survey. I confirm that any rules drafted under this section would set out the detailed survey requirements, but it is more appropriate to maintain a consistent drafting approach throughout this section.

The Senator proposes to make it mandatory for any rules under the section to include incidental, supplementary and consequential provisions. There may not be any of those types of provision required and, therefore, it is not practical to make it mandatory to include such matters.

For the reasons I have set out, I cannot accept the amendments. However, I wish to reiterate my commitment to the Senator that it is my intention to progress the preparation of the rules using the powers under this section of the Bill.

The Senator mentioned LNG tankers. LNG carriers importing LNG into Ireland, which is the carriage of dangerous goods on a large scale, is separate to what is being provided under this Bill. Given that the primary purpose of such carriers is the transportation of LNG internationally to Ireland, they would not be certified as offshore service vessels under this Bill. Instead, such carriers must be certified under the relevant provision of the SOLAS Convention, including chapter VII on the carriage of dangerous codes and the international code for the construction and equipment of ships carrying liquefied gas in bulk. LNG carriers do not fall within the scope of the Bill.

The definitions in the Bill are entirely in line with the SOLAS Convention and we want to align with international best practice and meet our obligations under the convention. The 2010 Act's provisions refer specifically to ships that fall within the scope of the SOLAS Convention only. That is why the term "shall" is used. The vessels to be provided for under this Bill may fall outside the scope of the convention and we need to be able to determine the most appropriate standards from the convention that can be applied to smaller vessels. It would not be practical to apply all the provisions of the convention to them.