Dáil debates

Wednesday, 9 April 2008

Cluster Munitions Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

The following motion was moved by Deputy Billy Timmins on Tuesday, 8 April 2008:

That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:

Dáil Éireann:

welcoming the role being played by the Government in international efforts to secure a total prohibition on the production, stockpiling, transfer and use of cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians through its active participation in international initiatives to address the issue comprehensively, in line with its commitments in the programme for Government;

noting the convening by the Government of a diplomatic conference in Dublin in May 2008 to negotiate a new instrument of international humanitarian law on cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians;

recalling the intention of the Government shortly to establish a national committee on international humanitarian law;

noting that this committee will have, as its first task, the preparation of comprehensive draft legislation to give effect to the new instrument and to enact a domestic ban, thereby enabling its early introduction in the Oireachtas;

resolves that the Cluster Munitions Bill 2008 be read a Second Time this day nine months.

—(Minister for Foreign Affairs.)

7:00 pm

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sinn Féin welcomes the Cluster Munitions Bill 2008 published by Fine Gael. I echo the comments made by Deputy Timmins yesterday when he asked Deputies from all sides to support the passage of the Bill through the Oireachtas.

As it is rare that the occasion presents, I am sorry the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is not present to hear me commend him for the role played by the Government in spearheading the Oslo process begun in Norway in February 2007 to establish a treaty to ban cluster munitions. Since then more than 80 states have endorsed the Wellington declaration and efforts will, I hope, conclude in Dublin next month with the first explicit international humanitarian law directed at the use of cluster munitions.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs has witnessed at first hand the devastation caused by cluster munitions in Lebanon following Israel's invasion in 2006. He also witnessed the role played by Irish troops in helping to clear what some reports indicate are more than 1 million cluster bomblets left unexploded throughout that country. Unexploded cluster munitions are also to be found in the former Yugoslavia and all over Iraq and Afghanistan. The lengthy period of time these unexploded bomblets — there are often as many as one in five of the devices in each cluster munition — can lie on the ground for unwary civilians to stumble across them is one of the most appalling attributes of a weapon incapable of distinguishing between civilian and military targets.

I also acknowledge that the Minister has given a commitment that the Government will end the investment of public money in the manufacture of these weapons. The proposal to write into legislation and thereby ensure no public funds will be invested in financing or manufacturing cluster munitions, the commitment contained in section 7(3) of the Fine Gael Bill, is to be welcomed.

I look forward to the wholehearted support of the Green Party for this Bill. In 2006, former Deputy Dan Boyle published the National Pensions Reserve Fund (Ethical Investment) (Amendment) Bill 2006, which I supported. At the time, the then Deputy pointed out that the pension fund was:

invested in unethical industries, including arms and tobacco. It would appear that, under the existing legislation, the NPRF Commission has an obligation to invest in such industries if it expects them to return maximum profits.

The Green Party proposed, in its Bill, to go beyond eliminating investment in companies which profit from the manufacture of cluster munitions and turn the pension fund into a tool of ethical investment.

As section 19 of the National Pension Reserve Fund Act stands, the only criterion for choosing where to invest public money is based on the best possible return on the investment. No restrictions apply and no areas of trade are to be deemed unethical or unsuitable for Irish money investment.

The National Pensions Reserve Fund now amounts to €21.3 billion and holds shares in more than 2,500 companies and a number of other investment products. For this reason, while I support the Bill before the House and the efforts of the Government to divert our money from the manufacture of cluster munitions, I call on the Government, including the Green Party, to go further and amend the National Pensions Reserve Fund Act. The legislation should be changed in order that Irish people can have absolute confidence that our money is not being invested in oppression and the abuse of human rights. We should not make a profit on the misery of others or watch our pension fund rise in tandem with the slaughter of innocent civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon.

In December 2003 an investigation by the publication USA Today found that US forces had used nearly 10,800 cluster weapons since the invasion of Iraq in February of that year, while their British allies had used almost 2,200 such weapons. During the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Israeli Defence Forces used artillery-fired cluster munitions in populated areas of Lebanon according to Human Rights Watch. Researchers from that NGO also photographed cluster munitions in the arsenal of an Israeli artillery unit.

While I am supportive of the Bill, I propose to make a number of points on some of its sections. Section 3 states: "It shall be an offence for any person to trade in cluster munitions". Trade is defined in section 2 to include the "transit", "import" and "export" of cluster munitions. My reading of this definition is that it would be illegal for cluster munitions to be transported through Irish territory, seas or airspace. If this is the case, it underlines again the need for a regime of inspections to be put in place around flights through Shannon Airport. Similarly, if the Bill was enacted, the Government would be obliged to take proactive steps to ensure cluster munitions were not being transported through Ireland.

Section 3 may also have implications for Irish troops serving abroad as part of the EU battle groups. The French military used cluster bombs in Iraq and Kuwait in 1991 and notably in Chad in 1986. The French Government does not support the Oslo process for an outright ban on the use of these weapons but instead argues that the weapons can be made more effective by being made less harmful to civilians, although I wonder how it intends to do this. Its position is shared with Britain. If Irish troops were deployed abroad as part of an EU battle group which included French or British forces, a position in which we currently find ourselves, is it not possible that the armed forces of either of those countries might deploy with cluster munitions as part of their arsenal? In that case, it is theoretically possible that Irish troops could facilitate the transport, supply or storage of these weapons for the armed forces of other countries while on active service abroad. In such cases, what would be the legal position of the Irish troops? This House would be answerable in such circumstances.

While I welcome the suggestion of a register of prohibited investments in cluster munitions, as outlined in section 8, I would welcome from Fine Gael some clarification on how the party believes such a register would work in practice. I understand the regulations will be set by the Minister but I would be interested to learn how, in practical terms, companies would be identified and added to the list. Could a company establish a subsidiary to carry out the manufacture of cluster munitions while continuing to attract Irish investment into the parent company? How would this be established and monitored? The practical considerations of the proposal need to be spelled out. Would there be a need for an appeals mechanism where a company could argue that it did not trade in cluster munitions as outlined in the legislation?

I call on people to support the global day of action to ban cluster bombs on 19 April when the Cluster Munitions Coalition and Amnesty International are organising an event in Dublin. I urge Members to show their support in any practical way they can for these events on 19 April.

On behalf of the Sinn Féin Members, I register our support for this Fine Gael Bill as published. I urge support for it from all sides of the House. I am somewhat concerned we cannot proceed with the Bill immediately due to the Government amendment.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputies Chris Andrews, Barry Andrews, Cuffe, Ardagh and Mulcahy.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Photo of Mary WhiteMary White (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the debate on this Bill at a time when we are also debating the future of Ireland's role in the European Union and various issues of foreign and military policy, a good example of assertive and positive Irish neutrality.

Fine Gael is to be commended for introducing this Bill. There is a need for national legislation on cluster munitions and I welcome the forthcoming international convention to be hosted in Dublin on the issue. The use of such munitions has been painfully clear in conflicts across the globe in recent years. They have not only been used by allied forces in Kabul, Kandahar and Mazar-e Sharif in Afghanistan but by Israeli forces in the Lebanon and NATO forces in Kosovo, where it is estimated 30,000 unexploded bomblets remain. Can one imagine being a parent there in fear of one's children picking up one of these gaudily coloured bomblets, knowing it could rip their lives apart?

The UK Ministry of Defence estimates 60% of 531 cluster bombs dropped by the Royal Air Force during the Kosovo conflict missed their intended targets. The devastating nature of these bombs, which have indiscriminate and delayed impacts, is highlighted by UN statistics that state between 5% and 12% of such munitions do not explode on impact. They are a horrible, horrible weapon.

A recent report by Handicap International stated that research from 24 countries showed more than 11,000 confirmed casualties from cluster munitions. The figure could be as high as 100,000. Of the 11,044 cases discovered, 3,830 people were killed and the remainder injured. The term "remainder injured" is very easy to say; those people are maimed for life.

While approximately 98% of casualties were civilian, we will never know the full damage. I personally saw the effects of these bombs in south-east Asia in the late 1970s when I visited the Burmese-Vietnam-northern Thailand border. I saw people streaming across the border, fleeing conflict. Many were maimed, missing limbs, presumably due to landmines and cluster bombs. It was a horrible sight.

I welcome the Government's efforts in leading the way on securing a convention outlawing such munitions and creating a new norm of international humanitarian law. Following on from the success of the Ottawa Convention and the consensus and military practices arising from it, the prospect of a Dublin convention, spearheaded by Norway, Austria and Ireland among others, is a result of sustained and energetic work from the Government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern.

Another example of positive and ethical legislation emanating from the Government is the Control of Exports Act 2008, which I shadowed through the Dáil. Significant improvements have been secured by post shipment checking to ensure exports do not have a dual use and end up in the hands of those who want to maim and kill others in conflicts in China, Tibet, Burma and Pakistan.

Deputy Ó Caoláin referred to the issue of ethical investment by the National Pensions Reserve Fund Commission. My Green Party colleague Senator Boyle did much work in this area. It is important to ensure our pension moneys work ethically with no negative impact and exclude those involved in the manufacture of cluster munitions. The Green Party will work to ensure the ethical efficacy of the National Pensions Reserve Fund.

I welcome this debate and look forward to comprehensive precedent-setting legislation on cluster munitions.

Photo of Barry AndrewsBarry Andrews (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am grateful to Fine Gael for introducing this Bill in Private Members' time. I agree with Deputy White on the contribution made by Senator Boyle on the ethical issue of the National Pensions Reserve Fund when he was a Member of the Twenty-ninth Dáil.

The precedent set by the Government in seeking to withdraw the national pensions funds from companies involved in the manufacture of cluster munitions opens this debate into an interesting but problematic area. In pursuing these ethical goals, all noble, funding could be withdrawn from an unbelievable range of companies. It could be decided that any company operational in or benefiting from state contracts in an anti-democratic state, for example China and what it is doing in Tibet, should be included. Deputy Ó Caoláin raised an interesting point about subsidiary and related companies. How can we monitor, say, a French armaments company which sells other types of equally devastating ordnance?

Independent observers have identified that Barclays Bank closely supports the current Zimbabwean regime through its investment portfolio. The Mugabe regime depends on Barclays, as well as Standard Chartered Bank and Old Mutual Bank for its foreign exchange and survival. If Mugabe does not move out of power, despite the will of the people, will the Government withdraw its funds from Barclays Bank? Again, it is a sensitive issue.

Will we examine those companies which operate in states where democracy is in retreat, as in Russia, China, Iran, Pakistan, Kenya and Zimbabwe, to achieve a high level of ethical investment? I am not criticising the decision to withdraw investment from companies involved in the manufacture of cluster munitions. However, we have created a precedent and a proper debate is needed on future investments. I welcome that the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, has made it become part of the political discourse in a healthy way.

The Irish economy relies to a great extent on investments in Asia and states like Saudi Arabia, a country with no democratic values whatsoever, where the protection of human rights and the principles of democracy are not the first order.

It has been widely recognised that the millennium development goal of 0.7% of GDP from developed countries for overseas aid will not be easily achieved. One suggestion to deal with a possible shortfall would be to have a global tax on the exports of armaments. This would raise funds for the delivery of vital investment for the millennium development goals. I call on the Government to consider taking this suggestion one step further. I acknowledge that the Government has done significant work in this area. It is an example of forward thinking in independent foreign policy and although we are in the EU, we can take the initiative and be an independent voice. That is the reason we became a member of the UN Security Council and we are recognised as having that voice.

We must take this a step further and consider seriously the millennium development goals, identifying the exports and trade in armaments as a sector where we could implement a global tax.

Photo of Seán ArdaghSeán Ardagh (Dublin South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am delighted to speak on this motion because it is so important and timely. The action being taken by the Minister for Foreign Affairs in developing a diplomatic conference in Croke Park is an action on an international level of which we can all be proud.

Cluster munitions are air-dropped or ground-launched munitions that eject a number of smaller submunitions, with the most common types intended to kill enemy personnel and destroy vehicles. Submunition-based weapons, designed to destroy runways and electric power transmission lines, deliver chemical or biological weapons or to scatter landmines, have also been produced. Submunition-based weapons can disperse non-munition payloads such as leaflets, although it is not recommended for one to canvass in this way.

It is unfortunate that these cluster bombs, although they are made for a particular use, cause suffering to innocent people such as civilians and, very often, children living in an area.

I was delighted that on 31 March and 1 April there was a conference of 39 African countries in Livingstone in Zambia to discuss cluster munitions. At the conference, the Dublin diplomatic conference was noted as one of the major areas in which action will be taken and these African countries are certainly looking forward to coming over to see that an effective and binding international instrument can be debated, agreed and put in place.

It was interesting that two countries, Egypt and South Africa, decided they did not fully want to go along with this. Egypt would not agree with the policy because it manufactures the cluster bombs and South Africa sought exemptions for certain types of cluster munitions.

This is all based on the declaration of the Wellington conference on cluster bombs held in February this year. The idea is that a solution will be concluded in 2008 — we hope it will come with the diplomatic conference in Dublin in May. It is affirmed that the essential elements of such an international binding legal instrument would include a prohibition on the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians. There should also be a framework for co-operation and assistance that ensures adequate provision of care and rehabilitation to survivors and their communities, clearance of contaminated areas, risk education and destruction of stockpiles.

Some 82 countries signed the declaration. Conspicuous by their absence were the United States and Israel. As Deputy Mary White stated, with the destruction which has been caused in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Iraq, it is disgraceful that the US and Israel try to wash their hands of responsibility in this matter.

I hope this resolution will be put in place at the Dublin conference and Ireland will be the first country in the world to sign up to that convention on a legal basis by having a Bill published, as the Minister stated is his intention. I am delighted this matter was brought up for discussion and I hope the project of a binding international agreement prohibiting cluster bombs will be put in place in the near future.

Photo of Ciarán CuffeCiarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Fine Gael for reading the programme for Government so carefully. There is a commitment to a complete ban on the use of cluster munitions in the programme and in the absence of a full ban we will seek agreement on an immediate freeze on the use of cluster munitions, pending the establishment of effective international instruments to address humanitarian concerns regarding their use. There is a clear commitment, with which we are proceeding.

The issue clearly comes to a head as we lead into a very important conference in May. The global day of action to ban cluster bombs is Saturday week so it is a timely occasion on which to discuss the matter. The issue can be argued both ways. One can argue we should have the heads of legislation in advance of the conference or one can argue we should await the outcome of the conference before we put down on paper, in black and white, exactly what the State should proceed with. I recognise there are two sides to the argument. There is no doubt there is a genuine and strong Government commitment that is well on its way to being honoured in the early days of this Government.

I noted Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin from Sinn Féin wondered where was the Green Party commitments in this area, given the initiative of my colleague, Senator Dan Boyle, on investments. I am glad to state the National Pensions Reserve Fund is not investing in companies involved in the manufacturing of cluster munitions. That policy is well on its way to being implemented and I hope the National Pensions Reserve Fund will move even further to the kind of regulations and restrictions in place in some Scandinavian companies, where there is a blanket ban on investment in particular firms.

This is the direction we should take, be it with regard to armaments or other types of activities with which we disagree. Certainly, there is not too much sense in investing many millions, if not billions, of euro in health care for those suffering the ill effects of smoking while at the same time the National Pensions Reserve Fund invests in companies or industries which produce the cigarettes in the first place. We are seeing the start of constructive investment decisions and we could go much further in that area.

The Green Party spoke strongly on cluster bombs in many different fora. My colleague, Deputy Mary White, was involved in the constructive discussion of the Control of Exports Bill and my colleague, Nuala Ahern, argued very strongly for ten years in the European Parliament for a ban. She spoke about that in an opinion article in The Irish Times just less than a year ago. She pointed out that, historically, Ireland had led the way with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. We need to demonstrate that scale and commitment with a cluster bomb ban and we are well on our way to doing that.

It is a direct indication of the commitment of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, that he represents one of the seven countries pushing forward with the ban and is instrumental in hosting the conference in Croke Park in a month's time. At that stage we will see hundreds of delegates, all with one purpose in mind, to move ahead with the ban. I do not think it can be argued that the Government is dragging its feet in this area.

With the time remaining, I will point out the effects of cluster bombs. I will quote from a specific report by Landmine Action on cluster munitions in the Lebanon, which considers their use from 20 to 25 years ago rather than the most recent use of cluster bombs there. A gentleman from the west Beqaa region talks about hearing planes starting to bomb around him, stopping his car and going out to hide behind a large rock. He said:

I was trying to take care of my family. I could see the soldiers being killed by the bombing as I lay down on the ground to hide. Then I felt pain in my arm. A cluster bomb had exploded by my hand. The blood came out of my eye also. I stayed for 20 minutes lying on the ground. I tried to hold my hand. It came out of its place. I was holding my hand in my other hand. It was amputated. I thought I was dead. I also lost my hearing because of the explosion and a fragment meant I lost sight in my left eye.

This is the effect of cluster bombs and not only on adults. There are numerous accounts of children who played with cluster bombs and lost their lives when they exploded.

I welcome Fine Gael's interest in this area. However, I am of the view that substantial legislation relating to it will appear in the near future. I have no doubt that such legislation will lead the way internationally and will result in a ban.

Photo of Chris AndrewsChris Andrews (Dublin South East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this issue. It is not often the House gets the chance to discuss an issue in respect of which there is such a broad consensus and support.

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In that event, the Deputy should support the Bill.

Photo of Chris AndrewsChris Andrews (Dublin South East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The broad support to which I refer was inspired by the successful campaign against the use of landmines. The convention on cluster bombs will be every bit as successful.

It is important to remember that national co-operation is vital to the achievement of international co-operation. It is only with the latter that we can make some lasting improvements to the quality of life of those in war-torn areas whose lives have been so badly affected.

As previous speakers indicated, Ireland is playing a leading role in international efforts to negotiate the convention on cluster bombs. I congratulate the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and his Department on all they have done to date. Their Trojan work has led to the holding of the conference to which reference has been made in Dublin in May. That conference will create a huge amount of goodwill among the international community and will raise Ireland's profile. We hope it will also lead to a positive outcome. I have no doubt the latter will prove to be the case.

According to the Cluster Munitions Coalition, which is an international network, cluster munitions are stockpiled by more than 70 states. This implies that an overwhelming proportion of the world's population are affected by these weapons. Cluster munitions were first used in the Second World War. They were later used during the Vietnam War and created major difficulties in Laos. More recently, they were again used in the Israeli invasion of Lebanon during its conflict with Hizbollah. Cluster bombs are also being used on Europe's doorstep in Kosovo. I visited Kosovo last November and met a child who lost a limb as a result of a cluster bomb exploding. It was harrowing to see the damage done to that child.

Ireland's commitment to achieving its target is undisputed. The programme for Government commits us to a campaign for a complete ban on the use of cluster munitions. In the absence of a complete ban, we will seek an agreement on an immediate freeze on such munitions pending the establishment of effective international instruments to address humanitarian concerns regarding their use.

While I understand the Opposition's desire to enact domestic legislation, I support the Minister for Foreign Affairs' position that we should not prejudge or second-guess the outcome of the conference in May. We are taking a comprehensive approach to the development of the treaty and the most important thing is that we should encourage other states to become involved and support this initiative. International treaties do not come about overnight. A major amount of work is required in respect of them in the background at and on the fringes of many international conferences. Ireland is one of seven states — the others are Norway, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Peru and the Holy See — driving the Oslo process.

We must acknowledge that while making something illegal is extremely important, it is not the sole tool by which problems can be combated. In that context, I wish to recall the words of Martin Luther King Jr., who said: "Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal". The law in itself is not enough. We must support the law by issuing a moral condemnation of the use of weapons such as those under discussion. We must also provide humanitarian and financial support.

Ireland is working in close co-operation with NGOs and UN agencies to comprehensively address issues raised by the existence of unexploded cluster bombs. I welcome the work being done in this area by the Department of Foreign Affairs on the international stage in co-operation with the NGOs. I wish the Minister every success with the diplomatic conference in May.

Photo of Michael MulcahyMichael Mulcahy (Dublin South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I join my colleagues in genuinely congratulating Deputy Timmins and the Fine Gael Party on introducing this Bill. I do not believe there is one person in the House who disagrees with the spirit of the intention behind it.

During the previous Dáil, I had the honour to be a member of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs. One of my principal interests was the subject of nuclear non-proliferation. Those who know their history are aware that Ireland was the first country to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, NPT, in 1973. In the recent past, when the Tánaiste, Deputy Cowen, held the post of Minister for Foreign Affairs, Ireland was a leading light in the New Agenda Coalition, which has sought to bring parties together and expedite a further enactment of something similar to the NPT.

Previous speakers referred to the fact that Ireland was one of the first signatories to the Ottawa Convention on landmines. Ireland, therefore, has a strong and noble tradition in the fight against terribly harmful, evil, destructive weapons. Any efforts, regardless of the side of the House from which they come, directed against such weapons are very much to be commended.

I need not rehearse the facts relating to the May conference. This is not a simple area of law and it will not be easy to obtain agreement on the remaining aspects relating to it. The legislation that is eventually enacted — a group is engaged in work on it at present — will include provisions relating to the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions, the giving of assistance to victims of cluster munitions, the clearance of areas contaminated by unexploded cluster munitions and assistance in the destruction of stockpiles of cluster munitions. Some of the generous foreign aid we provide could be used in this area.

The Bill has a number of flaws. It is too narrow in its focus and the definition of trade contains words which do not suit their purpose. There is a need for much more comprehensive legislation. I do not agree with the notion that every bank should be obliged to submit a report at the end of the year to the effect that it has complied with the law. The law is the law. I do not submit to any authority at the end of each year stating that I have complied with the law. If trade in and use of these munitions is illegal, it should be taken as read that financial and other institutions are obeying the law. I would not support creating new elements of bureaucracy merely for the sake of doing so.

This is an important debate. I hope it helps bring to the attention of the public the fact that this matter is at the top of this Administration's agenda and not just by reason of the programme for Government. As already indicated, Ireland's role in nuclear non-proliferation and its involvement with the Ottawa Convention on landmines show that successive Fianna Fáil Governments, and other Administrations, have been absolutely committed to the fight against not only nuclear weaponry but other types of inhuman and destructive weapons. I welcome the opening of the debate. The Government amendment proposing that we adjourn this for nine months is eminently reasonable.

Photo of Lucinda CreightonLucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputies Breen, Bannon and Doyle.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Photo of Lucinda CreightonLucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to have the opportunity of speaking on this important motion and I thank Deputy Timmins for giving me this opportunity to speak. Deputy Timmins brings to this House a thorough and deep understanding of military and humanitarian issues from his time serving in the Defence Forces and, in particular, a deep understanding of the death and destruction wrought by modern warfare from his time spent in the Lebanon. I thank my colleague for introducing this Bill and for playing a proactive and campaigning role in seeking to tackle the policy issues that go to the heart of who we are as a nation. I propose to speak about why cluster bombs need to be removed from the arsenal of modern warfare and to focus in particular on what we, as a forward-looking nation, can do to make sure that any ban put in place is more than just empty rhetoric.

Cluster munitions stand out, even by the horrific standards of modern warfare, because in terms of both space and time they are utterly indiscriminate. In recent years the carnage caused by landmines has been brought to the attention of the public, but cluster munitions are even more indiscriminate. Landmines have had much publicity over the past number of years, but there has not been an equal emphasis on cluster munitions. With landmines, a record of minefields can theoretically be kept to facilitate post-conflict clearance. Cluster munitions, however, are scattered all over an area, usually from aeroplanes. They cover an area larger than a football field, killing and maiming indiscriminately. Like landmines, they fail to discriminate between soldier and civilian and between adult and child. With their tendency to fail to explode on impact, these bombs end up lying in wait for innocent victims for many years.

Cluster bombs are also indiscriminate in terms of time. Many of the civilian victims of cluster munitions are killed or maimed long after conflict has ended. In Laos, four innocent boys were recently killed by a cluster bomb which had been lying in wait for more than 30 years. In this and the other examples given by my colleagues, we see that time can be meaningless with these munitions. The end of conflict and the cessation of hostilities should allow nations and people to get on with their lives and try to rebuild their homelands, but if we allow the use of cluster bombs to continue we will be allowing the continuation of killing long after official cessation of hostilities.

The real question is not whether cluster munitions are reprehensible. On both sides of the House we can agree they are unacceptable. The real question is what we are going to do about it. We as a State neither make nor use cluster bombs. That is why this Private Members' Bill is unique. We are not satisfied just to make noise on this issue. We want to tackle it comprehensively on a number of levels. In so far as we are eventually going to accede to the currently drafted convention on cluster munitions, we can commit in international law to prevent the fabrication, use or sale of these munitions in Ireland. This would merely be a symbolic and somewhat empty gesture and would have no effect in reality since Ireland does not make, use or sell these munitions. However, Ireland's participation in the Wellington declaration is still worthwhile, since it sets an example and emphasises the standards that we expect from civilised members of the international community. It also contributes momentum to the campaign for a global ban on these munitions.

I welcome action at the level of international law. However, what sets this Fine Gael Bill apart is that it proposes concrete action from the Irish State, action that will produce results on a practical level immediately. This Bill would prevent Irish banks and pension funds from investing in or financing companies involved in the trade of cluster munitions. There are few Irish people who would, if asked, say that they had invested in or financed the trade of these deadly weapons and even fewer who, if asked, would say that they wished to do so. Yet Deputy Timmins has calculated the total Irish investment in cluster munitions through public and private pension funds to be more than €100 million. A large number of Irish people are funding this deadly trade inadvertently. Their money is being used to finance death and destruction. This Bill allows us to make a practical and effective difference. It allows us to ensure that our money is not funding this deadly trade. It allows the Irish people to be confident that their pensions and investments reflect their social and moral viewpoints.

In the age of globalised trade and international politics, it can be hard for a nation of 4 million people to make a difference. It can seem as though we are powerless in the face of global conglomerates and international finance, powerless to have our voices heard and stand up for our moral convictions, powerless to shape the course of international affairs to our social and moral beliefs. This Bill is timely in that it goes some way in assisting and allowing us as a nation to have an opportunity to stand up for things we believe in, for the values and goals of our society that can be projected onto the global stage. That is something that should not be dismissed by the Government.

It is important that this issue, which has not received sufficient attention in Ireland or internationally, is now brought to the fore. We have an opportunity to set a standard that raises the bar internationally. Ireland has the opportunity to show leadership in setting higher standards for ourselves. I urge the Government to consider the viewpoint being put forward by Fine Gael. There is no need for Irish people to be duped into funding an arms trade they do not fundamentally support. This Bill offers a morally and socially improved approach to dealing with such issues. I have mentioned the scourge of landmines. My belief is that the deadly impact of cluster munitions exceeds that of landmines as it is not quantifiable or controllable. In contrast to the usual rhetorical idealistic statements that are put forward, which have very little substance, this Bill offers a real and meaningful opportunity to do something concrete on behalf of Irish citizens. I ask that the Government consider the viewpoint of the Fine Gael Party and its foreign affairs spokesperson, Deputy Timmins, who has a clear and deep understanding of these issues, far greater than the majority of Members of the House. I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the opportunity to speak on this motion and I commend the motion to the House.

Photo of Pat BreenPat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Like Deputy Creighton, I congratulate Deputy Timmins on bringing forward this Bill. As Deputy Creighton and other speakers have pointed out, Deputy Timmins has a vast wealth of experience in this area, having served in the UN and been a member of the Defence Forces. I am disappointed, however, that the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is unwilling to accept the Fine Gael Bill and instead is awaiting the deliberations of the Croke Park conference.

Ireland was in at the start of this process as a member of the core group of the Oslo agreement, with Austria, the Holy See, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway and Peru. We have played a key role in progressing this work to date, which is why I feel that Ireland should continue to push the agenda with the international diplomatic conference taking place in Dublin from 19 to 30 May next. This is our opportunity as a nation to convince those countries that are still not committed to an outright ban to come on board at the forthcoming conference.

Significant progress has been made since the late Princess Diana was photographed touring an Angolan minefield in a flak-jacket and helmet. Her actions at the time influenced the signing of the Ottawa treaty, which created an international ban on the use of anti-personnel landmines. Since that first conference, which took place in Oslo, progress has been made at further conferences in Lima, Vienna and more recently in Wellington, New Zealand. At the first ever meeting of African countries concerning cluster bombs, 38 of the 39 countries attending the meeting endorsed a strong political "Livingstone Declaration" committing them to negotiating a global ban on the weapons at the Dublin conference. South Africa was the only dissenting voice, arguing that cluster bombs are 98% reliant.

Other countries such as the United States, France, Japan, the United Kingdom and Germany are proposing transition periods and are making every effort to have any international agreement watered down. In the US the Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill 2008, sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator Dianne Feinstein, passed through the Senate. The Bill's provisions have been cautiously welcomed by human rights and humanitarian groups. However, the US ban is only for one year, while we want to see a complete ban on the use of cluster bombs.

I welcome the Minister's commitment to establishing a national committee on international humanitarian law, which will have a key role in making recommendations and proposals for incorporating humanitarian law treaties into Irish law. Although cluster bombs fall under the general rules of international humanitarian law, we still have no international agreement on their complete ban. It is important therefore that there is no further delay in setting up the committee. The work of preparing the legislative programme for the Dublin conference should get under way immediately because the conference will attract an international focus.

Sections 7 and 8 of the Bill proposed by Deputy Timmins provide for reporting requirements for banks and financial institutions and allow for the creation of a register of prohibited investment in cluster munitions.

The Minister's commitment that no public funds will be invested in cluster munitions by way of the National Pensions Reserve Fund is welcome. The Minister's promised legislation will be brought forward to give affect to this, but this provision is already incorporated in the Fine Gael Bill now before this House. Any amendments to the Bill could have been put forward on Committee Stage.

New Zealand also appears ready to support a similar move. The guardians of the New Zealand pension fund recently announced their intention to exclude companies that remain involved in the manufacture of cluster munitions. According to reports, an exclusion plan will be implemented when New Zealand signs the treaty prohibiting cluster munitions. I urge the Minister to convince all countries that sign up to any new treaty on cluster munitions to support this line.

Section 6 provides for the confiscation and destruction of cluster ammunition. While the provision is unlikely to have to be invoked here, many countries continue to suffer the consequences of unexploded bomblets long after conflicts have ended. The area, or footprint, as it is known, of a single cluster bomb can be as large as two or three football fields, as Deputy Creighton said.

Handicap International studied the effects of cluster bombs in 24 countries and regions, and found that civilians make up 98% of those killed or injured. Of that figure, 27% of the casualties were children. In 2003, 13,000 cluster bombs, including nearly 2 million bomblets, were used in Iraq. Most recently, it is estimated that Israel dropped 4 million bomblets in southern Lebanon and Hezbollah has also used cluster bombs on targets in Israel. During the bombing of Afghanistan, the Red Cross had to issue warnings to Afghan children not to touch or play with the bomblets that were dropped there.

In the village of Qala Shatar near Harat, for instance, a 12 year old boy picked up a bright yellow soda can and thereby lost his arm. He is not alone as civilians, especially children, continue to suffer. In the Rashd Valley in Tajikistan on the Afghan border, the Government is still battling to clear the bomblets. Two years ago, a ten year old boy called Samir went out to gather firewood for his parents. He picked up a shiny metal ball and was lucky to survive, although the bomb exploded shattering his knee and left him partially blinded.

On 12 June 2007, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia held that the former president of the Serbian Republic of Kranjina was criminally liable for deaths and injuries resulting from cluster-munition rocket attacks on Zagreb. In some attacks on Zagreb, civilians were intentionally targeted. In post-war Kosovo, unexploded cluster bomblets caused more civilian deaths than landmines.

The majority of casualties are from poorer countries where millions of such devices have been scattered over hundreds of square kilometres in many countries. The humanitarian suffering that continues in numerous countries plagued by the lasting effects of these bomblets is the sad legacy of years of conflict. Governments can no longer ignore the long-term effects of these weapons which can remain dormant for years before being detected.

The International Committee of the Red Cross has called for the urgent conclusion of a global pact to ban cluster weapons, even if the big superpowers like Russia, China and the United States are not ready to join. However, I do not want to see any exclusion or derogations from a new treaty. Countries should sign up to a complete ban and we must seize this opportunity to do so. Ireland can play an important role, which is why the Government should be leading the way by having our legislation in place before the Croke Park conference.

During her visit to the Angolan minefields, the late Princess Diana stated: "The world is too little aware of the waste of life, limb and land which anti-personnel landmines are causing among some of the poorest people on earth." We have banned anti-personnel landmines so now let us take the next step and ban cluster munitions. We must prevent the next large-scale humanitarian catastrophe before more countless innocent people are injured or killed. Deputy Timmins's Bill charts the way forward for the Government. I urge the Minister to take on board the proposals from this debate. I wish him well in striving to secure agreement at the international diplomatic conference in Croke Park in May.

8:00 pm

Photo of James BannonJames Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I join my colleagues in congratulating Deputy Timmins on bringing this legislation before the House and into the public arena. I am disgusted with the Minister for speaking from both sides of his mouth on this issue. While paying lip service to what is, I am sure, a genuine commitment to facilitate the total abolition of the production and stockpiling of cluster munitions, the Minister seems constrained by another agenda which, it is common knowledge, concerns the National Pensions Reserve Fund. What goes on behind the scenes or who is advising or constraining the Minister will not of course be revealed here.

I do not dispute the Minister's contention that he is passionate about this matter and I know he was referring to the former rather than the latter area of discussion on this Bill. Who could not be passionate about the elimination of one of the most diabolical forms of warfare ever invented? The Independent newspaper in London has welcomed the worldwide efforts to remove such an evil as "Cluster's last stand". It is to be hoped that this is the last stand and that Ireland can play its part in the total abolition of such weapons. It should not be surprising that cluster bombs were invented by the Nazis in the 1940s, when we consider the pure evil of these devices that have brought such a scourge to the world.

What distorted thinking could invent a weapon of destruction that has a fatal attraction for children? This is something to which my colleague, Deputy Breen, referred. It is horrifying to think that something is so brightly coloured and attractive that it calls out to be played with has killed or maimed so many children, including children here in Ireland. With 132 million unexploded bombs lying in wait for the unsuspecting in 20 countries worldwide, the prospect for future generations is appalling.

Cluster bombs are so called because as they fall they separate into dozens of small, bright yellow bomblets, each one being about the size of a can of coke. These weapons currently cannot be aimed at a specific target but it seems that President Bush's apparently soon to be released super cluster bomb is set to change that. It will have the capacity to take out a number of specified targets.

In January this year the United States said it was ready to create a rapid reaction force to defuse bombs left over from conflicts. It committed a new force to going at short notice to places where civilian populations were at risk. This represents progress on one hand but the reality is that too many countries are still stockpiling such weapons, in direct contradiction with such initiatives. The US is one such country and Russia, China and Israel are also to the fore.

The other side of the coin to be considered in this debate is the matter of the pensions funds. It is ironic and very sad that a pension fund, which should be associated with peaceful and safe retirement, can be associated with an area of horror and destruction. This Bill would allow for the elimination of any benefit from investment in the trade of cluster munitions, though it is horrifying that it should have to do so.

This Bill has been brought forward in the spirit of the removal of human suffering but the Minister's comment last night left me unable to understand his contention that this is a matter he feels passionately about. Which aspect, in particular, causes such a response? I certainly do not mean to imply that business concerns could in any way cloud the Minister's judgment, but what are we to think? On one hand there are admirable Government initiatives on this matter that will see a world focus from like-minded nations when Ireland hosts the Croke Park conference. I note the Minister, through his amendments, is procrastinating in true Government style on what should be a cut and dried matter. That is unless there is a subtext of which we are unaware.

The crux of the matter is the domestic ban but to say that in this House feels strange. It may not be politically correct to say so, but I remind the House that Ireland is a neutral nation. Matters of war do not concern us in terms of the stockpiling and production of cluster munitions. However, rationalise as we might, we are still guilty, to some extent, of the promotion of cluster munitions and this applies particularly to the Minister.

For the Government to vote against this Bill is to make a mockery of the Croke Park conference. As I said earlier, paying lip service is the name of Minister's game.

Photo of Andrew DoyleAndrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Timmins is my constituency colleague so I will desist from praising him, lest anyone should consider me guilty of favouritism. I have heard much praise from the Government benches tonight and to quote Marc Antony in Julius Caesar, "I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him". At least he was honest.

If we view the glass as half full, with regard to agreement on this Bill, we can say that we all see that cluster munitions are terrible things that create anguish, pain and suffering and do horrific damage. The issue is whether this Bill is premature, coming, as it does before the famous and welcome conference in Croke Park in May. I do not believe it is premature, it simply sets out to let the country make a statement, before it hosts a very important conference. We can state that we have taken concrete steps to ensure no financial gain shall accrue to any Irish citizen or the Irish Government from the trade in cluster munitions. We can also state that no money from this Government, or the people of this State, will be invested in the further development of this industry. This is the simple message behind this Bill.

People say that Ireland is only a small nation but I have heard Government spokespeople, particularly in the Green Party, speak of the power of one and the example we can set. What would be the harm of having this Bill in progress, if not enacted, by the time of the May conference? This Bill could be a statement of our intent and the serious view we take of this matter. Similar legislation exists in New Zealand.

Some €100 million of Irish money is invested in this industry, yet it has been suggested that this should not be reportable at the end of the year. I take issue with the Deputy who said we do not have to report. We have to report everything to the Standards in Public Office Commission at the end of each year. We must report that we are tax compliant, though we have heard enough about that issue through another matter that has gone on long enough in this House. It is incorrect to say we do not have to report — we do, and this is only right.

There are enough profitable companies in the world, including pension fund companies and banks, and if they cannot make a profit for investors without putting money in an industry that creates such mayhem and carnage, they are not fit to function.

Amnesty International made the point that there is no threat to Ireland's role as a UN peacekeeper. Contributions last night referred to a statutory instrument and amendments that would be made to this Bill on Committee Stage. The Bill deals in a straightforward way with the involvement of Irish money in the cluster munitions trade. It will allow Ireland to send a message that it wants no hand, act or part in the area, even if it is for financial gain.

Over the years I have seen demonstrations in Shannon and heard calls for bans on stopover flights. Many complicated issues have been thrown around because they were good for soundbites. Some people may consider this Bill boring and mundane but it is a concrete statement we can make so I commend it to the House.

Within nine months, after the Croke Park conference, the Government will move its own Bill, which will supersede and undermine this Bill. The Opposition has gone to some effort to bring forward a Bill that could win the agreement of the House; the sentiments of Government speakers so far indicate that this is possible. The Government should be magnanimous enough to embrace this Bill.

Photo of Michael KittMichael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome this debate and support the Government amendment. Over the past two days contributors have spoken of the untold harm caused by cluster munitions to civilians in many parts of the world since they were first used in the Second World War.

They are frequently used indiscriminately, harming civilians within range, and their high failure rate creates an enduring hazard of unexploded ordnance that can cause casualties and severe economic and social consequences, long after conflict has ended. At present, international humanitarian law does not adequately address these concerns. Inspired by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, the 2007-12 programme for Government commits us to "campaign for a complete ban on the use of cluster munitions. In the absence of a full ban we will seek agreement on an immediate freeze on the use of cluster munitions pending the establishment of effective international instruments to address humanitarian concerns regarding their use".

The Minister and the Department of Foreign Affairs have worked intensively over the past year to implement Government policy and to achieve progress through a legally binding convention prohibiting cluster munitions that cause unacceptable harm to civilians. As Deputies are aware, it is envisaged that the negotiations at the diplomatic conference in Croke Park next month will finalise just such a treaty. I understand that more than 150 member states will attend as well as an extensive number of NGOs.

Strong political momentum exists for action and agreement and we are confident that we are on track for the adoption of a Convention which will be comprehensive and effective and will get users, producers and cluster munitions-affected states on board. I have not heard anybody disagree with the broad thrust of the policy approach being taken by the Government or with the importance of this issue in the context of Ireland's foreign policy and significant contribution through peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance. Everyone believes in the importance of achieving agreement on an effective international instrument to address the unacceptable humanitarian impact of these heinous weapons. We all want to see a total domestic ban on cluster munitions.

The provisions of the convention should be carried forward into domestic legislation and policy, not just to prohibit the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions, but also to make provision for assistance to victims, for the clearance of areas contaminated by unexploded cluster munitions and for assistance in the destruction of stockpiles. We all agree that public funds should not be invested in companies involved in the manufacture of these munitions. The differences between us relate to how best to achieve the outcome we want and how to legislate for it. The Minister for Foreign Affairs made it clear last evening that this is something which should not divide the parties in this House.

The Government believes we should take a comprehensive approach to the issue and is determined to have legislation of the very highest quality. We should not pre-empt the outcome of the negotiations on the new convention and to enact legislation in advance of this risks failing to provide adequately for all the obligations the State will assume under the new instrument.

To ensure that the legislation is of the best possible quality, the Government has agreed to establish a new national committee on humanitarian law, which will have, as its first task, preparation of comprehensive legislation. The intention is that the committee will begin its work in advance of the diplomatic conference so that the Oireachtas will be in a position to enact legislation at an early date and enable Ireland's early ratification of the new convention. In consultation with all parties, the draft legislation will be given the necessary priority in the Oireachtas timetable.

Ireland was one of the first countries to ratify the Ottawa Convention and it would be an honour and a reflection of the views expressed throughout this debate for us to be one of the first to ratify the cluster munitions convention. In fact, 95 member states have said they agree.

I appreciate the motivation of the Opposition in wishing to provide leadership in advance of the Dublin diplomatic conference and to contribute to international efforts to outlaw cluster munitions. It will be equally important to lead the way in ensuring that each state implements the commitments undertaken in the convention in their own national legislation and practice. We will have an opportunity to set an example later in the year through a comprehensive approach to our own national law. As the Minister for Foreign Affairs said yesterday, we want this to be the comprehensive model for other nations sharing our determination to rid the world of these munitions.

The Government is proposing that the House should postpone the Second Reading for nine months, with a view to enabling a more comprehensive approach to the question of cluster munitions to be taken by the House. In the interim we will be pleased to keep Deputy Timmins and other interested Deputies briefed on developments. I ask that we all work together to achieve this and that Deputies on all sides support the Government's amendment.

Photo of John DeasyJohn Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputy Timmins.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Photo of John DeasyJohn Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My first point concerns the announcement by the National Pensions Reserve Fund about withdrawing €27 million investments from a number of companies that manufacture cluster munitions. I note that the fund uses the Norwegian Government's list to identify those particular companies. Norway is not a member of the European Union. I suggest that the Government attempt to make the step our National Pensions Reserve Fund has taken European policy. The Minister should raise the matter at the Council of Foreign Ministers and put it to our European partners that this is an issue that should be considered. My sense is that some of our EU partners will accept the concept but that others may not embrace it wholeheartedly. I guess that some of those countries' pension funds, particularly the larger nations, will have invested far more than €27 million in the companies manufacturing cluster munitions. How many of those member states will be members of NATO? Even so, some of those NATO members have already initiated bans. If one is to take a lead on this issue, one needs to address it where it counts, that is, where the money is.

Some years ago when I was a US congressional staffer, I was lobbied about the banning of personal landmines. I agreed with the lobbyist who was bringing it to the congressman's attention. I wrote a recommendation asking the congressman to sign my petition but he rejected it. He made it clear there were many manufacturers of armaments in his congressional district and they contributed a great deal of money to the local economy.

With regard to the US position, its reluctance regarding the banning of cluster munitions seems to be based on an idea that they can be an effective military weapon when deployed properly. The fact remains that regardless of proper deployment, whatever that means, they have a guaranteed disastrous effect on civilian populations. Even though the US did place a partial moratorium in December 2007 on the sale of cluster munitions, it is time it put a permanent ban on the sale, stockpiling and transfer of these weaponry.

A briefing paper I received recently on EU member states and their positions states:

Most EU member states have shown interest in the process while also expressing a desire for complementarity with the Convention on certain conventional weapons. Only Poland and Romania have refused to engage, although Finland also has difficulties and is unlikely to stay the course. Belgium, Austria, UK, Hungary and the Netherlands are among those states which have adopted varying degrees of national moratorium on the use of cluster munitions. Germany has been most active in trying to develop a definition and lead-in period for prohibition. In discussions recently, a number of European countries, including France, Germany, Denmark and the UK identified serious concerns about the provisions on definitions and scope.

It is clear from this there are members of the European Union who, for varying reasons, have different opinions on the different conventions. At the very least we should pose the issue raised by our pensions reserve fund at EU level. That is something that either the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Kitt, or the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, should do.

On the Government's unwillingness to accept the Fine Gael Private Members' Bill, it is disappointing the Government has no intention of judging this on its merits. Deputy Timmins is correct in saying there is no reason changes or additions to the Bill cannot be made on Committee Stage. In my opinion, the Government could have accepted the Bill. We would not have had any difficulty in deferring Committee Stage.

I wish to respond to a comment made last night accusing Fine Gael of potentially dividing the House by pressing the Second Reading of this Private Members' Bill. The Government's less than gracious and slightly patronising attitude towards the Bill is responsible for any potential division on this issue. There is no need for a vote on this and everybody knows that but it is entirely the Government's decision.

When looking at the issue I was struck by one statistic. A report was carried out which indicated that 98% of casualties from cluster munitions were civilians. That tells its own story. I was in Cambodia last year and I have an image of farmers working in the fields there. At the same time one can see the sign with the skull and crossbones beside them indicating a minefield. At the time the ground was hard but the position changes drastically when the rainy season comes because the ground is softer and the weight of a man, woman or child can set those mines off. That is the situation in which they find themselves but they have no choice. Effectively, by working they risk everything. When researching this issue, I was struck at the enormous amounts of bomblets and ordnance that have been deployed in places such as Iraq, Kosovo and the Lebanon and the lasting danger to the civilian populations in those countries. For example in Laos there were 9 million unexploded submunitions, many of which will continue to cause casualties. I have read the Government's amendment and I have no great difficulty with it but I do not think it is necessary. By tabling this amendment the Government has unnecessarily ruled out the prospect of the Irish Parliament supporting this issue collectively and that is unfortunate.

Photo of Billy TimminsBilly Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will follow the example set by my constituency colleague, Deputy Doyle, and take poetic licence with King Lear: "How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is, To have a patronising Government".

I will not embarrass the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Michael Kitt, by quoting from his speech during the Private Members' Bill on landmines when he was in opposition. It is not my intention to embarrass the Government.

Two and a half years ago I published the Good Samaritan Bill, debated during Private Members' Business. The then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform stated that the Bill was flawed. It was not flawed. The Law Reform Commission recommended that such legislation be introduced and proposals from interested parties have been sought. If that legislation had been introduced we would have more defibrillators in Ireland and people's lives could have been saved. The Minister did not agree because he displayed arrogance symptomatic of this Government in the past few years. I do not say that lightly.

I thank those on this side of the House who participated in the debate, particularly my party colleagues. I acknowledge the role of Fine Gael staff, including Jim Duffy and particularly Jennifer Carroll, who do much work behind the scenes. Fine Gael does not have the army of resources that the Government has. I thank Deputy Michael D. Higgins, who made an interesting contribution, suggesting that the matter could be addressed through statutory instrument. That would not have addressed the financial aspect. I thank Deputy Ó Caoláin, who spoke for Sinn Féin.

It took a long time to formulate this Bill. The timing is suitable but the germination of the Bill was set in train long before we realised there would be a conference in May. I thank Deputy Pat Breen, Fine Gael spokesman on human rights and the encouragement of Pax Christi and Mr. D'Costo.

I thank the Government speakers who raised many relevant issues. Deputy Barry Andrews spoke on the broad concept of ethical investment. No one in the House has a monopoly on concern for human rights. Fine Gael will not genuflect or bow to any party with respect to the issue of human rights. By the same token, we will not beat our chests expressing moral indignation.

We had a heated debate on Tibet and China today when every Member wanted the same goal. However, there was disagreement and intolerance on how this would be achieved. I regret that this happened. Fine Gael does not believe that athletes should be used for a meaningless gesture. In 2007 we had exports worth €1.2 billion and imports worth under €5 billion from China. We had several trade missions to China. In all the speeches today there was only one mention of human rights. We must go down this route and should keep athletes out of this matter. Momentum will build in this country to involve the Olympic Games. Let us not grant the Olympic Games to China but we should not involve the athletes in the issue.

I referred to Ms Hilde Johnson in my speech last night. She told a story in the opening address at the Wellington Conference on cluster munitions about children in southern Laos searching for little crabs who were blown up. Let us picture the young children in Curracloe running after a beach ball. In the sand dunes the children spot a little yellow object, an attractive object, as Deputy Bannon mentioned. All of a sudden there is an explosion and all are blown to kingdom come. That happened to several young children in the Glen of Imaal in the late 1970s. Three young children were killed when they came across an unexploded mortar bomb and, not knowing what it was, banged it against a rock.

Some countries have taken unilateral steps to give the process added momentum following the Oslo accord and in advance of the Croke Park conference. Britain has done it and the big, bad USA, which is not a party to the Oslo accord, has taken steps by signing legislation to deal with the issue to some degree. It has signalled its intention to move on this area. It is regrettable that we have not done so in Ireland.

Deputy Deasy referred to the Minister stating he did not want to divide the House. The power to divide the House does not lie with the Opposition but with the Government. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle was involved with the Civil Unions Bill, which was tabled in the last Dáil. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle was patronised by those who told him there would be a Second Reading of the Bill within nine months. Where lies that Bill today? It is not even in the vaults of Leinster House but in some shredder, as our Bill will be.

The Bill adheres to all policy principles advocated on both sides of the House. The Bill is not flawed and if it was the Minister would not have agreed to a Second Reading in nine months' time. I appreciate that the Minister did not play politics in that respect. The Minister for Foreign Affairs referred to the concept of humanitarian assistance and mine clearing. We see these issues as more appropriate to the stewardship of Irish Aid. I await with interest the Minister's proposal to include these matters in his Bill. The Bill deals with the National Pensions Reserve Fund, €27 million, and the investment in such companies across the financial sector. Some €100 million, a conservative estimate, is invested in such companies.

Much legislation has been dramatically changed on Committee Stage. I predict that the Government legislation will go no further than this Bill. There is no difficulty with principle and no flaw in this Bill. Why will the Government vote against this?

While driving home last night, I heard a news broadcast at 10 p.m. It referred to the Government banning pension fund investment in companies that manufacture cluster munitions. In the Government motion, there is no reference to this. It refers to "welcoming the role being played by the Government", and "recalling the intention of the Government" but there is no reference to banning investments. The Bill clearly states it, yet the Government will vote against the Bill on this measure. There will be a conference in nine months' time. Austria and Norway have moved, yet Ireland talks about leading on the issue.

We have a patronising Government that resembles the Administration in Rome in its dying days. It is sad that on the day a new leader designate of Fianna Fáil is appointed, the Government does not have it in its heart to pull back without dividing the House. Despite the message sent out with spin yesterday, Members will vote against this Bill and against the provision withdrawing funding from investment in these companies. The Minister will probably walk to Croke Park with a Bill under his arm, albeit while waiting for the conference to tell him what to include. Surely we can be our own moral guardians, knowing how far we wish to go. If it must be added to, well and good, but I can guarantee that it will not be necessary.

I regret the Government could not support this Bill. It can put whatever spin and technical gloss it wants on it and engage in propaganda, but it is regrettable that it does not support the Bill and is patronising in its speeches. It does not support the Bill because it likes to take the credit, not for just one little thing or most things but for everything. I commend the Bill to the House and call on all sides to vote for it in order to ban cluster munitions and investment in them.

Amendment put.

The Dail Divided:

For the motion: 74 (Dermot Ahern, Michael Ahern, Noel Ahern, Barry Andrews, Chris Andrews, Seán Ardagh, Bobby Aylward, Joe Behan, Niall Blaney, Áine Brady, Cyprian Brady, Johnny Brady, John Browne, Thomas Byrne, Dara Calleary, Pat Carey, Niall Collins, Margaret Conlon, Seán Connick, Mary Coughlan, John Cregan, Ciarán Cuffe, Martin Cullen, John Curran, Timmy Dooley, Michael Finneran, Michael Fitzpatrick, Seán Fleming, Beverley Flynn, Pat Gallagher, Paul Gogarty, John Gormley, Noel Grealish, Mary Hanafin, Seán Haughey, Peter Kelly, Brendan Kenneally, Michael Kennedy, Tony Killeen, Séamus Kirk, Michael Kitt, Tom Kitt, Brian Lenihan Jnr, Conor Lenihan, Michael Lowry, Martin Mansergh, Micheál Martin, Jim McDaid, Tom McEllistrim, Finian McGrath, Mattie McGrath, Michael McGrath, John McGuinness, John Moloney, Michael Moynihan, Michael Mulcahy, M J Nolan, Éamon Ó Cuív, Seán Ó Fearghaíl, Charlie O'Connor, Noel O'Flynn, Rory O'Hanlon, Ned O'Keeffe, Mary O'Rourke, Christy O'Sullivan, Peter Power, Seán Power, Trevor Sargent, Eamon Scanlon, Brendan Smith, Noel Treacy, Mary Wallace, Mary White, Michael Woods)

Against the motion: 56 (Bernard Allen, James Bannon, Seán Barrett, Pat Breen, Tommy Broughan, Richard Bruton, Ulick Burke, Joan Burton, Joe Carey, Deirdre Clune, Noel Coonan, Simon Coveney, Lucinda Creighton, Michael D'Arcy, John Deasy, Jimmy Deenihan, Andrew Doyle, Bernard Durkan, Damien English, Olwyn Enright, Frank Feighan, Martin Ferris, Charles Flanagan, Terence Flanagan, Brian Hayes, Phil Hogan, Brendan Howlin, Paul Kehoe, Ciarán Lynch, Kathleen Lynch, Pádraic McCormack, Shane McEntee, Dinny McGinley, Joe McHugh, Liz McManus, Olivia Mitchell, Dan Neville, Michael Noonan, Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin, Aengus Ó Snodaigh, Kieran O'Donnell, Jim O'Keeffe, Brian O'Shea, Jan O'Sullivan, Willie Penrose, John Perry, Pat Rabbitte, James Reilly, Alan Shatter, P J Sheehan, Róisín Shortall, David Stanton, Billy Timmins, Mary Upton, Leo Varadkar, Jack Wall)

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Tom Kitt and John Curran; Níl, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Thomas P. Broughan.

Amendment declared carried.

Question put: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to."

The Dail Divided:

For the motion: 74 (Dermot Ahern, Michael Ahern, Noel Ahern, Barry Andrews, Chris Andrews, Seán Ardagh, Bobby Aylward, Joe Behan, Niall Blaney, Áine Brady, Cyprian Brady, Johnny Brady, John Browne, Thomas Byrne, Dara Calleary, Pat Carey, Niall Collins, Margaret Conlon, Seán Connick, Mary Coughlan, John Cregan, Ciarán Cuffe, Martin Cullen, John Curran, Timmy Dooley, Michael Finneran, Michael Fitzpatrick, Seán Fleming, Beverley Flynn, Pat Gallagher, Paul Gogarty, John Gormley, Noel Grealish, Mary Hanafin, Seán Haughey, Peter Kelly, Brendan Kenneally, Michael Kennedy, Tony Killeen, Séamus Kirk, Michael Kitt, Tom Kitt, Brian Lenihan Jnr, Conor Lenihan, Michael Lowry, Martin Mansergh, Micheál Martin, Jim McDaid, Tom McEllistrim, Finian McGrath, Mattie McGrath, Michael McGrath, John McGuinness, John Moloney, Michael Moynihan, Michael Mulcahy, M J Nolan, Éamon Ó Cuív, Seán Ó Fearghaíl, Charlie O'Connor, Noel O'Flynn, Rory O'Hanlon, Ned O'Keeffe, Mary O'Rourke, Christy O'Sullivan, Peter Power, Seán Power, Trevor Sargent, Eamon Scanlon, Brendan Smith, Noel Treacy, Mary Wallace, Mary White, Michael Woods)

Against the motion: 58 (Bernard Allen, James Bannon, Seán Barrett, Pat Breen, Tommy Broughan, Richard Bruton, Ulick Burke, Joan Burton, Joe Carey, Deirdre Clune, Noel Coonan, Simon Coveney, Michael Creed, Lucinda Creighton, Michael D'Arcy, John Deasy, Jimmy Deenihan, Andrew Doyle, Bernard Durkan, Damien English, Olwyn Enright, Frank Feighan, Martin Ferris, Charles Flanagan, Terence Flanagan, Brian Hayes, Phil Hogan, Brendan Howlin, Paul Kehoe, Ciarán Lynch, Kathleen Lynch, Pádraic McCormack, Shane McEntee, Dinny McGinley, Joe McHugh, Liz McManus, Olivia Mitchell, Dan Neville, Michael Noonan, Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin, Aengus Ó Snodaigh, Kieran O'Donnell, Jim O'Keeffe, Brian O'Shea, Jan O'Sullivan, Willie Penrose, John Perry, Pat Rabbitte, James Reilly, Alan Shatter, P J Sheehan, Róisín Shortall, David Stanton, Billy Timmins, Joanna Tuffy, Mary Upton, Leo Varadkar, Jack Wall)

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Tom Kitt and John Curran; Níl, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Thomas P. Broughan.

Question declared carried.