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

Question 337: To ask the Minister for Defence when he will proceed with the salvage operation for the [i]Asgard II[/i]; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6971/09]

Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 341: To ask the Minister for Defence his views on the raising of the [i]Asgard II[/i]. [7302/09]

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 337 and 341 together.

At its last meeting, the Board of Coiste An Asgard had a full discussion on the possibility of salvaging the Asgard II. The unanimous view of the Board was that a salvage operation should not be pursued any further. Having carefully considered the Board's report to me, I have accepted its recommendation. Spending in the region of €2 million on a salvage effort, the outcome of which is uncertain, is a risk that we cannot afford at this time. A real risk exists whereby more than €2 million could be expended on a salvage effort that proves unsuccessful or, following which, the vessel is found to be damaged beyond repair. The fact is, that until the vessel is salvaged, it would not be possible to assess whether it can be restored and the cost of doing so. Clearly, the greater the damage, the higher the cost of restoration.

The Asgard II is a 30-year-old wooden vessel that would have faced ever-increasing maintenance costs in the years ahead. The Board was of the view that vessels that even after a full restoration the vessel might have on-going maintenance problems. In addition, the possibility of increased regulatory requirements by the Department of Transport could add substantially to the cost of restoration. The Board also took into account the view that parents of potential trainees may be reluctant to allow their children to sail on a vessel that has sunk.

While the name "Asgard" has been associated with two important vessels, it is also about sail training and introducing young people to the experience of sailing. My priority is to ensure the continuation of the sail-training scheme. I have accepted the Board's recommendation to initiate planning for the procurement of a new vessel that will be similar in design to Asgard II but with a steel hull (a steel hulled vessel would be less expensive to build and maintain than a wooden hulled vessel). I would also hope that the future Asgard III would have facilities to cater for persons with physical disabilities, something the Asgard II could not.

I know that it was a very difficult conclusion for the Board to reach, but it is one I accept as being right and sensible. The costs and risks involved in attempting to salvage and restore Asgard II are too great. There is no doubt Asgard II was an outstanding sail-training vessel and was held in the highest regard both at home and abroad. She was an excellent ambassador for this country for close on 30 years.