asked the Minister for the Marine if he will make a statement on the damage to marine life along the Cork coast arising from the sinking of the Kowloon Bridge; and the plans, if any, he has to assist fishermen in the area, for loss of earnings and increased costs arising from the sinking of the vessel.

In view of legal actions being prepared by my Department and the possibility of similar actions by private interests I believe it would be inappropriate to make a definitive statement on the extent of the damage at this stage. It is as yet in any event too early to assess the full consequences for marine life.

My Department and the Wildlife Section of the Department of Energy have been monitoring the situation and while I understand that marine life along the coast has been affected by the oil pollution, the greatest damage appears to have been suffered by bird life and fauna and flora on the shoreline. There has been inconvenience to local fishermen and some fish and nets have I understand been oiled.

As regards claims for damages, I would see it in the first instance as a matter for private interests to pursue their claim directly with the insurers.

In view of the fact that the fishermen, whose livelihood is based on lobster, crayfish, whitefish and shrimp, claim that to avoid polluted fish and oil seeping from the wreck of the Kowloon Bridge they have to go beyond the normal fishing grounds at substantially higher costs, has provision been made to provide compensation for such fishermen? Further, in view of the fact that the Wildlife Section of the Department has become involved in monitoring the situation, is the Minister in a position to tell us what damage and destruction have been caused to wildlife as a result of the seepage from the Kowloon Bridge?

Forestry is the responsibility of another Minister. The Department of Fisheries would not deal with forestry, but the first part of your question is in order.

May I respectfully remind you that in his reply the Minister mentioned wildlife?

He may stray from the sea and mention wildlife, but he does not have responsibility for forestry. Another Minister would have to answer questions on forestry.

I am not referring to forestry but to wildlife and as the Minister seems to have some information about this——

It is not that important, but you did mention forestry. The Minister, to give any information he regards as appropriate and helpful.

While this is not my responsibility I am aware that the Minister for Energy who has responsibility for this area, is fully conversant with all developments and is conscious of the fact that wildlife and wild birds have to bear the brunt of oil pollution. I will bring the Deputy's interest to the Minister's notice and ensure that every effort is made to monitor the position as far as wildlife is concerned.

The Minister——

I will come back to the Deputy for a final question, but I am calling Deputy Doyle now.

Would the Minister give a brief update on the exact position of the Kowloon Bridge, particularly the ongoing risk of further oil spillages, vis-à-vis their effect on marine life and fishermen? Would the Department be prepared to give help to the private groups he referred to, particularly the environmental groups and those concerned with the protection of sea birds etc., in compiling their claims for the insurers? They are having considerable difficulty in tracing the source to which claims should be made and I respectfully request the Minister to help in the co-ordination of such claims even though I accept that they are not the direct responsibility of the Department of the Marine.

The primary concern of the Department of the Marine has been to have any oil in the vessel removed and safely disposed of. In that regard, a number of consultants have been contacted by the Department who are at present arranging a contract with one of them to advise on the best method of removing the oil as soon as the weather permits. The consultant was chosen from a number of firms suggested by the European Community from which we sought and have been given co-operation and advice on how best to deal with the matter. As I said, it is our immediate priority to have a thorough examination carried out on the structure with the best possible advice available to determine the best method of removing any oil which may be on board. I assure the Deputy that the keenest interest is being taken in this matter by my Department and the Department of the Environment and that every effort will be made to ensure, in so far as it is possible to do so, that the matter is given the utmost attention and dealt with as effectively and quickly as possible.

Perhaps the Minister would reply to the second part of the question in view of the difficulties experienced by the various voluntary groups in processing their claims to the insurers. In view of the fact that all these voluntary groups have now exhausted their funds in doing their primary job in protecting wildlife and the environment generally, does the Minister agree that the Department of the Marine should co-ordinate and process all these claims?

I visited the scheme recently and met many people, organisations and bodies who have been involved in this matter. I wish to compliment and pay tribute to the many volunteers who offered assistance to Government Departments and agencies after the disaster. We will certainly give every assistance possible but the question of compensation is premature at this stage because the matter needs to be finalised before we know the full extent of what can be done.

In view of the reduced catches and increased costs to fishermen, what specific action is the Minister taking to help in this regard?

I understand that claims have already been lodged on behalf of the fishermen by their legal representative and it is a matter for them to pursue their claim directly with the insurance companies. In answer to Deputy Doyle's question, we will assist the fishermen in any way possible but it would be premature to say any more at this stage.

The Minister said that claims have already been lodged on behalf of the fishermen. What aid are the fishermen getting from the State due to the fact that their livelihoods have been affected?

I cannot add anything to what I have said already. Private interests must pursue their claims and it would be premature to say any more at this stage.

May I take up a point?

I would prefer if you did not.

It is in relation to legal costs——

The Deputy will appreciate that there is reluctance to move into an area that might be sub judice.

It is the principle rather than the specific to which I wish to refer. The fishermen and the environmentalists will not be in a position to put money towards chasing insurance claims. If it comes to that, will the Minister ensure that the Department of the Marine take up the cudgels in the pursuit of these claims? Well and good if they go through in the ordinary way and are processed easily but it is beginning to look as if there could be difficulties in processing them. The money has run out and I ask the Minister to ensure that it will not be a limiting factor in the processing of these claims.

The previous Minister for Communications informed the Dáil in December 1986 that the owners and insurers of the Kowloon Bridge had been informed that full compensation would be sought for all costs arising as a result of the casualty. Undertakings have already been given that the Government will follow through to the very limit to ensure that full compensation is made for the damage arising from this unfortunate incident.