Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

This is important legislation for an island nation and should be carefully considered and debated in detail. I welcome the role of the United Nations in providing security on our seas. This is particularly relevant with the use of the sea and boats to import drugs. We cannot turn a blind eye because these drugs are destroying communities and young people.

We must face up to the reality that the smoking ban makes it easier for drug pushers to peddle their wares. Groups of young people having a cigarette outside pubs are now easy pickings for pushers. They do not have to worry about staff or door men, they get their orders via mobile phone and then deliver them to the crowds outside the pubs and clubs. This is a new phenomenon that must be tackled. We must accept the downside of the smoking ban is that it makes it easier for drug pushers to sell drugs to young people.

The purpose of this Bill is to give effect to the United Nations Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation 1998 and the Protocol to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf. The convention and protocol are among a set of international instruments against terrorism which member states of the United Nations are enjoined by Security Council Resolution 1373 of 28 December 2001 to implement as soon as possible. The terms of the convention and the protocol require approval by Dáil Éireann pursuant to Article 29.5.2° of Bunreacht na hÉireann and the Bill must be enacted before Ireland can be a party to them.

It is essential that when we talk about public safety and international terrorism we do not exclude state terrorism. It is being ignored in current debates and written out of history. In recent days I have been meeting the families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings who were massacred in 1974 and there are strong indications that the British state was involved in this atrocity. We must open our eyes to the fact that it is not just the small guys who plant the bombs who are terrorists. Everyone has a responsibility, states have been and are involved in terrorism. The activities of the United States and Israel in the last few days demonstrate this point.

The Bill creates specific offences related to the safety of Irish ships, other ships which are in Irish territorial waters and the fixed platforms on the continental shelf. Consequently, on standard lines for extra-territorial jurisdiction, it covers offences committed outside the State in breach of the convention or protocol. There is provision for the apprehension and detention of alleged offenders and the handing over of them to the appropriate authorities along the lines of the provisions of the Criminal Justice Bill 2002 which is currently before the Dáil. That Bill makes the necessary provisions on four other conventions against terrorism.

Section 1(2) makes it clear that any Defence Forces involvement under the Bill is only to be in aid of the civil power at the request of a member of the Garda Síochána of at least inspector rank. That is an important contribution to our security and policing services.

When we are discussing this Bill we should focus on the importance of the bays around Ireland, particularly Dublin Bay. Many of us have been campaigning for the preservation of Dublin Bay for years. We have worked with community groups in the Clontarf area in particular to protect Dublin Bay from the proposed in-fill.

In October 1999, Dublin Port Company Limited applied to fill in 52 acres. This application was rejected in March 2000 after independent consultants found the environmental impact statement was inadequate. On 7 March 2002, Dublin Port Company Limited reapplied to fill in the same 52 acres. The independent consultants reported on the EIS in September 2002 and the application is still current.

Since 1972, Dublin Port Company Limited has tried for other in-fills and we must remain on our guard. I compliment my predecessor, the former Deputy Seán Dublin Bay Loftus, for his work. In 1972 Dublin Port Company Limited published its long-term plan for the bay and filled in 2,870 acres. In 1980, it published notices applying to fill in 94 acres of the bay and 1988, 1999 and again in 2002 it applied to fill in 52 acres. I raise these questions because the signs coming from the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources are not encouraging. If the Minister gives the go ahead to the company there will be massive opposition from local people.

I commend and thank the people involved in the campaign to preserve Dublin Bay, particularly Dublin Baywatch, which is active in Clontarf. So far it has made presentations on the issue to the Government task force on the use of port land and estates and other presentations on transport and logistics.

It is important that we do not overdevelop some ports while ignoring others. If we want to stop the bottlenecks and traffic jams, we should be more radical, looking around the coast and developing other ports. I want to highlight those issues regarding development. I am not only saying that we should not fill in Dublin bay; I am also putting forward constructive proposals to deal with the situation. The explanatory memorandum reads as follows.

Subsection (7) obliges the court to pay due regard to whether the rights of the person in question can be given effect to in the state requesting the extradition of that person, namely, the right to

(a) communicate without delay with the nearest appropriate representative of the state of which that person is a national or which is otherwise entitled to establish such communication or, if that person is a stateless person, the state in the territory of which that person has his or her habitual residence, and

(b) be visited by a representative of that state.

It continues:

Subsection (9) is a necessary exemption from any liability for any master of a ship or person in charge of a fixed platform who acts in a reasonable way under this Bill when enacted.

Those are extremely important issues to raise under the legislation. Let us consider the section of the Bill dealing with its financial implications. The Exchequer expenditure could arise from mutual assistance, extradition of alleged offenders, and other requirements of the 1988 convention and protocol. While such expenditure is unlikely to be significant, the Dáil approval of the terms of the 1988 convention and protocol is specifically required by Article 29.5.2° of Bunreacht na hÉireann, as well as the entitlement of this Bill. In other words, if we are to be serious about the legislation, we will have to bring in the necessary resources, particularly to improve the safety of our citizens. We have been slack on the safety and public protection of citizens of this State over several years. Earlier I mentioned the example of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. Our citizens were totally neglected by successive Governments, and it is important that this issue be constantly highlighted.

Regarding the development of the seas and the fishing industry, I commend those on this island involved in it. I would also defend the interests of the fishermen and others who go out risking their lives daily, making a massive contribution to this economy and the State. I will defend them to the end when it comes to the sometimes negative comments from people about the revenue they earn and their salaries. They deserve every single cent they get, since they work extremely hard at a very difficult job. They also play an extremely important part in the economic development of the nation. We must target this resource and use it more often.

I welcome the overall debate on maritime security, and I hope the amendments tabled at a late stage will be taken into account.

See this speech in context