Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 112: To ask the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources if the independent risk assessment of the Corrib gas terminal in north Mayo has been totally discredited and compromised in view of the recent revelations that the independent consultants (details supplied) hired to review the safety of the Corrib gas onshore pipeline are part-owned by the project's major shareholder; if he will halt this development until a new thorough risk assessment is carried out in view of the fact that the onshore, high pressure technology employed by a company (details supplied) in developing this terminal, is not proven in any jurisdiction within the European Union; the practical measures he has put in place to ensure that the people of Erris in north Mayo will benefit from the substantial profits soon to be generated by this company; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21774/05]

Noel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is presumed that the Deputy is referring to the quantified risk assessment, QRA, for the onshore section of the gas pipeline and not for the gas terminal.

As regards the assessment that I commissioned on the QRA for the onshore pipeline, the position is that following media queries on 25 May 2005, my Department became aware that the company selected to undertake the QRA review is owned jointly by BP Oil Limited and Shell UK Oil Limited. Notwithstanding that, BP Oil Limited and Shell UK Oil Limited own the company jointly, BPA remains of the view that there is no conflict of interest. While I accept that BPA will have completed the review in a fully professional and objective manner, I remain conscious of the association of Shell UK Oil Limited with BPA by means of its 50% ownership of the company and I regret that this situation ever arose. In the interest of ensuring confidence in the independence of the process of evaluation of the safety aspects of the pipeline as addressed by the QRA version F and considering the public concerns and sensitivities on this issue, I instructed officials of my Department to initiate a further review of the QRA. I can confirm that my Department has engaged a consultant to carry out this further review of the QRA.

My officials are at present completing their assessment of the developers' application to install and commission the onshore pipeline. The decision in relation to this application will not be finalised until the consultant's report in relation to the QRA has been received and assessed. I should also add that the consultant's report will be put into the public domain in north Mayo and on the Department's website as soon as possible after receipt.

I have no function in relation to any profits that the developers gain from the Corrib gas field.

There are many benefits that the people of Mayo and the country at large can gain from the development of the Corrib gas field. Over the life of the Corrib field it will contribute to reduced importation of natural gas and an enhancement of our security of supply of energy. The construction work will contribute to Exchequer income from corporation, payroll and indirect taxation in so far as it relies on sourcing of Irish skills, staff and material. Operations will similarly contribute to the Exchequer and will also yield lease rental income. In addition to sharing in general prosperity, communities in Mayo will benefit where there is local sourcing of workers, services and goods. Direct construction employment will be of the order of 100, will rise to 500 and then fall back to 200 over the project period. It is anticipated that 50 to 60 staff in three shifts will be employed to operate the terminal. It is the stated policy of the operating company to recruit and train local staff to work the terminal and I understand that main contractors and subcontractors on the project have recruited some of their labour requirements locally.