Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I support the decision of the Government to sign the ATT and support its ratification. One hundred and fourteen countries have signed the treaty and eight countries have ratified it. Is it intended that we will we work with our EU partners to ensure that other nations not only sign it but also ratify it? What benefit is there in signing up to the treaty but not ratifying it?

What are we doing to ensure that those European countries that sign the treaty meet their obligations? We know that in regard to Syria, some prominent countries, among them some of the biggest arms suppliers, wanted to lift the embargo. European countries that rank as large spenders are Britain, in fourth place, France, in ninth place, Germany, in 11th place, and Italy. We know that spending on arms contributed to the financial crisis also. What is the difference between signing the treaty and ratifying the treaty and what plans are in place to ensure other EU states abide by the treaty? What are the ramifications for a state that ratifies the treaty but breaks the obligation to sign it? I commend the Department for taking a lead on this, as we are one of only eight countries to do so.

The Tánaiste has pointed out that it is easier for us to sign up to it because of the agreement relating to an export control system. Will that be a difficulty for other EU countries? Where do we go from here?