asked the Minister for the Marine if he has any plans to strengthen safety regulations for fishing vessels in the light of a number of recent accidents involving loss of life; if it is intended to introduce controls on the design of vessels and limits on the load they may carry; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Current legislation regarding safety of fishing vessels is contained in the Merchant Shipping Acts, 1894 to 1983 and in rules and regulations made thereunder. These cover safety equipment to be carried in a fishing boat, registration of fishing boats, manning and certification of crews, provision of radio installations, musters and safety of navigation.

The safety of fishing vessels has been a matter of great concern at international level for some time, but the great differences in design and operation between fishing vesels and other types of ships has always proved a major obstacle to their inclusion in the International Maritime Organisation's Safety of Life at Sea Convention and Load Lines Convention.

The International Maritime Organisation studied in great detail the specific problems relating to fishing vessels and their findings formed the basis of a Convention, adopted in 1977, called the Torremolinos International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels. This Convention incorporates the safety requirements for the construction and equipment of new, decked fishing vessels of 24 metres in length and over, including those vessels also processing their catch. Because of difficulties perceived by many member states, including Ireland, with its provisions, the Convention has not as yet entered into force. The Convention is under review by the IMO and my Department will examine any amended version with a view to incorporating its provisions into domestic legislation.

I also propose to make regulations shortly which revise the manning and certification requirements relating to fishing vessels. The proposed new regulations take account of the trend towards larger fishing vessels of considerably increased engine power and correspondingly increased range and will require for the first time the carriage of qualified engineer officers on board fishing vessels. These regulations will improve considerably safety on board fishing vessels.

Will the Minister of State agree that neither current Department regulations nor obligations by the State under the Torremolinos International Convention 1977 cover boats under 40 feet? Will the Minister accept that there is an urgent need for his Department to regulate such things as the weight that boats of under 40 feet carry and the need to carry life rafts or life jackets, none of which is legally obligated on such vessels at present?

It is not true that that is the position. There is legislation in existence concerning the safety of fishing vessels. Under the Merchant Shipping Acts, 1894 to 1983 there are rules and regulations covering safety equipment to be carried by fishing boats as well as registration, provision of radio installations and the manning and certification of crews. There is primary legislation in relation to life saving and fire appliances and liability on an owner and master of a vessel. Another provision provides authority to survey a ship to ensure compliance with requirements in relation to life saving appliances. I should like to tell the Deputy that we have not ratified the Torremolinos Convention and I understand that it cannot be ratified until such time that 50 per cent of the shipping tonnage in the world agree to it. We are far from that position at the moment but we could ratify the part of the Convention that relates to safety at sea. I expect that Convention to be amended in the near future and we should await that before giving consideration to ratification.

I am obliged to the Minister of State for outlining the areas covered by regulations under maritime shipping laws but what he has said only confirms my view that issues such as the design, the weight of the load that can be carried, the need to carry a life raft or life jacket are not obligatory on boats under 40 feet. Has the Minister's Department any intention of taking action in regard to those matters?

I am aware that it is not obligatory and the reason is the cumbersome nature of life jackets. Now that smaller life jackets are available we are making every effort to impress on fishermen the need to wear them at all times. It is also a matter for the owners and masters to ensure that is done. We will have another look at this area and, if necessary, we will consider introducing an order. Fishermen will agree about the cumbersome nature of some of the life jackets.

I should like to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that the boat involved in this unfortunate accident off Malin Head in September, the Boy Seán— four fishermen lost their lives in that accident — was 36 feet. In view of the fact tha seven lives were lost this year, will the Minister not agree that it is time a regulation was introduced by the Department? Encouragement is not enough.

Mention of the unfortunate accident off Malin Head in which four men lost their lives gives me an opportunity to sympathise with the McDaid family on their tragic loss. Hopefully the body which is still missing will be found and can be laid to rest. Go ndéana Dia trócaire ar anamacha na ndaoine sin. An investigation is being carried out by an inspector of my Department and we hope to have a full report soon, which will be available only to the Minister for the Marine. If he finds it necessary to have a public inquiry, that will be his decision. As I said, we are awaiting the report and we may have a lot to learn from it.

We join with the Minister's expression of sympathy to the families of those involved in the Malin Head disaster earlier this year. Would the Minister agree that the manning of lighthouses could play a crucial factor in safety at sea?

The Deputy is introducing new matter into this question.

While I would dearly love to give my constituency colleague an answer, I must point our that I answered this question the last time it was raised. I would probably be setting a precedent if I answered a question which did not relate directly to the question on the Order Paper. However, the Deputy knows he does not have to be invited to my office to discuss this matter. I appreciate his deep interest in this.