Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The purpose of this Bill is to enable the transposition into Irish law of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was opened for signature in 1999 but regrettably it has not, as yet, come into force.

The treaty requires a state party to the treaty to prohibit natural and legal persons anywhere on its territory or in any other place under its jurisdiction from carrying out or participating in the carrying out of a nuclear weapons test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.

Since the first and thankfully, so far, the only use of nuclear weapons in 1945 the world has sought ways of preventing the proliferation of these horrific weapons. Ireland has been very much to the fore on the international stage in promoting nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament. We have continually called on all states to refrain from testing nuclear weapons and to embrace nuclear disarmament.

While this Bill has been subject to some rather cheap shots from at least one senior political actor, it is nonetheless important that we pass legislation on the issue, which is what we are attempting to do today.

Growing concerns among states about the consequences of a large number of countries holding nuclear weapons, and the increased likelihood of their use if that happens, led to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968. This historic initiative was proposed by the late Mr. Frank Aiken in 1958. Another significant treaty, banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water, was concluded in 1963.

Ireland is fully committed to the policy of promoting nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. It is and always has been our view that the nuclear weapons states must speedily take steps towards achieving total nuclear disarmament. These states are obliged to do so under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is a strong moral obligation that should also drive them in this direction.

The current treaty structure — the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the treaty banning nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water — has had considerable success in limiting the number of nuclear weapons states. However, that structure left a clear gap by permitting the nuclear weapons states to continue testing new weapons underground. The solution to this problem was found in the comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty which prohibits all nuclear weapons tests anywhere.

The Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 September 1996 and opened for signature on 24 September 1996. Ireland signed on the first day. To date it has been signed by 176 countries and ratified by 135. All EU member states have ratified the treaty.

The treaty bans all nuclear test explosions, wherever they may be conducted. To verify compliance with the prohibition, the treaty provides for the establishment of an international monitoring system. This system comprises some 330 stations around the globe that will conduct continuous seismological, hydro-acoustic and radio-nuclide monitoring. This network of stations will permit the detection of any nuclear explosion.

The treaty provides for the establishment of a Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty organisation, known as the Treaty Organisation, to be based in Vienna at the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The purpose of the Treaty Organisation is to achieve the objectives of the treaty, to ensure implementation of its provisions, including those for international verification of compliance, and to provide a forum for consultation and co-operation among state parties.

The Treaty Organisation will be responsible for the running of the international monitoring system. It will have the power to inspect any sites on which it is suspected that nuclear testing has taken place. It will also have the technical expertise to make reliable judgments on suspicions.

As with other international organisations and bodies, the Treaty Organisation's budget will be provided by contributions from states' parties. Contributions will be based on the United Nations scale of assessment. Pending the entry into force of the treaty, a preparatory commission for the Treaty Organisation has been set up and it has begun to establish both the monitoring system and the organisation's administrative structure.

The treaty will enter into force when 44 specifically named countries have ratified it. The 44 countries in question are those which the International Atomic Energy Agency deems to have a nuclear capability, whether civilian or military. Ireland, naturally, is not among them. So far, 41 of the specified 44 states have signed the treaty. India, Pakistan and North Korea are the specified states which have not signed. Furthermore, only 34 of the 44 states have ratified it.

It is a matter of regret that, so far, the US has yet to ratify the treaty. Ireland and its European Union partners have expressed their deep regret that this is the case. There are hopes the US will see some sense in the matter. The treaty cannot enter into force without the ratification of the US. It would be an empty treaty without American adherence. However, the previous US administration's commitment to ratify the treaty, as well as its announcement that the US will abide by the moratorium on nuclear testing, in place since 1992, is welcome.

Provision was made that if the treaty had not entered into force within three years of opening for signature, namely, by 24 September 1999, a conference of states which had ratified it would be convened to consider ways of ensuring its rapid entry into force. A number of such conferences have taken place, the most recent being in September 2005, when the state parties agreed to spare no effort and use all available avenues to encourage signature and ratification of the treaty.

As the House will be aware, India and Pakistan in 1998 conducted tests of nuclear weapons. More recently, the need for the entry into force of the test ban treaty was brought home to all of us on Monday, 9 October last with the announcement by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea that it had conducted a nuclear weapons test. The test followed North Korea's announcement on 3 October that it intended to carry out such a test.

North Korea's announcement of intention was met with widespread international condemnation. On 6 October, the United Nations Security Council issued a presidential statement expressing its deep concern. The Security Council deemed that should North Korea carry out the test, it would jeopardise international peace, stability and security in the region and beyond. The statement further urged North Korea to refrain from its intended course of action and to comply fully with all of the provisions of Security Council Resolution 1695 of 15 July 2006.

That resolution called on North Korea, inter alia, to abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programmes and to return to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. Finally, the statement warned that should North Korea ignore the calls of the international community, the Security Council would act consistently with its responsibilities under the charter of the United Nations. Regrettably, North Korea failed to heed the concerns and warnings of the international community and, as I have already mentioned, it carried out a nuclear test on 9 October.

The response by the international community to the test was swift and universal in its condemnation. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, issued a statement on behalf of the Government. It stated:

I strongly condemn the provocative decision by the DPRK to test a nuclear weapon. This is a threat to regional security and in direct contravention of the objectives of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. It runs directly contrary to the will of the international community, as expressed by the UN Security Council, and it also ignores the patient efforts of the DPRK's neighbours to work constructively with it. I call on the DPRK to refrain from further dangerous acts and to return immediately and without preconditions to the six-party talks.

Following the test, the United Nations Security Council met last week to discuss the matter and on Saturday, 14 October, adopted a United Nations Security Council resolution. The resolution again calls on North Korea to abandon its nuclear programme. Furthermore, the Security Council has imposed stringent sanctions on North Korea in order to prevent further proliferation of goods into North Korea that could assist in its nuclear programme.

The preparatory commission for the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty organisation also responded by convening an urgent open-ended meeting of its bureau on the day of the test. Even though the treaty has not entered into force, the provisional technical secretariat, PTS, is permitted to provide data and analysis to states. However, the provisional secretariat is not permitted to make any final judgments with regard to the nature of a specific event. Under the treaty, this is the responsibility of state parties.

The provisional technical secretariat confirmed to states' signatories on the afternoon of the test that 13 seismic stations worldwide had recorded an event that morning at 1.35 a.m. GMT at a location just south of the border between North Korea and China. The event registered 4 on the body wave magnitude scale, which registers the first wave of an event. The test by North Korea should serve not to discourage us but rather to reinforce our determination to strive for the earliest possible entry into force of this important treaty. Actions which contradict the purpose of this treaty merely serve to demonstrate the urgency and necessity of having a universally applicable test ban treaty.

As I stated at the outset, the Nuclear Test Ban Bill will give legislative effect in Ireland to the nuclear test ban treaty. Some aspects of the Bill may strike Members as a little odd, but it transposes the treaty into national law precisely, however remote it may be that Ireland would be exposed to such actions.

The Bill will make it an offence for any person to carry out, or cause the carrying out of a nuclear explosion in the State. That is something we should all hope never happens. It will similarly be an offence for an Irish citizen to carry out, or cause to be carried out, such an explosion outside of Ireland. These rather odd-looking provisions arise directly from the treaty, and they are a treaty obligation. It is therefore a requirement that we transpose the obligation specifically into law.

The Bill also designates the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland as the national authority for the implementation of the treaty. The institute will act as the national focal point for liaison with the treaty organisation and other contracting parties to the treaty, and it will facilitate any on-site inspection visits by the treaty organisation's technical secretariat.

The Bill also provides for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to appoint authorised officers who would have the power to, inter alia, enter a place where he or she has reasons to believe an offence under the Act has been committed and to remove any relevant documentation. These officers would also have the power to accompany the international inspection team on any site inspections. It is very unlikely these provisions will ever have to be implemented, but they are part of the requirement that we transpose them into law.

In the unlikely event that a major offence is committed under the Act, it would be an indictable offence and would be liable to penalties including imprisonment for life. There is one set of provisions relating to the District Court, and I mention it to Deputies because it gave me pause for thought when I read it.

Deputies will have noted the Bill also provides for the District Court, subject to the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions, to try summarily a person charged with an offence under the Act where the court considers the facts alleged constitute a minor offence. Deputy O'Dowd is smiling as I smiled when I heard it.

See this speech in context