Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)

The Minister will agree that there is no disagreement on some matters, one of which is that the Nuclear Suppliers Group, of which Ireland and 44 other countries are members, operates by consensus. This means that to stop the agreement coming into effect Ireland need only refuse to agree to a waiver. The Minister will also agree that the IAEA is not a secretariat to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. One of Ireland's most glorious achievements at the United Nations was its sponsorship of the NPT, of which another small country, Finland, was the first signatory. Given that the Nuclear Suppliers Group will decide whether the proposed US-India agreement on nuclear material will proceed, is it not a matter of a parallel process being established which will operate alongside the non-proliferation agreement? Will the agreement not make it impossible to hold the NPT in place or, as like-minded countries, universalise it and eliminate the threat of nuclear weapons? A comparison of the number of nuclear weapons in 2007 and 1945 shows that the danger to the planet is now 1.5 million times greater than it was in 1945.

Is it not the case that India proposes to offer 14 of its 22 nuclear installations for civil nuclear energy and that a further eight installations will not be subject to inspection and are being reserved for military purposes, with the result that there would be no control over the traffic of material? Is it not also the case that the military establishment in the United States stands to gain $100 billion from the transfer of nuclear capacity to India?

I, too, met the special representative of the Prime Minister of India and, as a friend of that country, I believe it has taken the wrong road. I am glad the Minister has taken note of the views of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs. He will be aware that the joint committee decided unanimously to stand by the non-proliferation treaty. Most Members take the view that Ireland should not facilitate a treaty which endangers rather than advances the universalisation of the movement towards peace.

See this speech in context