Brendan Kenneally (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I also welcome this legislation which gives effect to the United Nations convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation 1988 and the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms on the Continental Shelf 1988 signed in Rome on 10 March of that year. One could wonder why it has taken 16 years for legislation to be prepared to give effect to these conventions. The Minister of State alluded to that and explained that it has been given urgency as a result of the recent atrocities in Madrid.

One of the biggest issues today for every country is security. We seem to debate it in one form or another almost daily. Recently in this House we debated Second Stage of the Private Security Services Bill, while Committee Stage was passed today. It has no direct relevance to the measure before us, but it is one more element of the huge subject of national and international security which reflects the changed nature of our society.

Section 2 encapsulates what the Bill is about, the giving of safe passage to commercial ships and the protection of fixed platform personnel with the normal laws by which society lives today. It prohibits anything which prevents or interrupts the safe passage of a ship, whether the taking of a vessel by force, damage to navigational aids, or damage to or destruction of a ship or a fixed platform in some way.

These acts must be deplored and any measure we can take, or any international assistance we can give, within the terms of our laws and Constitution, should be readily and generously forthcoming. If we have been taught anything by our recent history, it is that we must combat the threat regardless from what quarter it emanates.

Two words not far from people's lips might best be described as the "S" and "T" words. The "S" word in this instance stands for security while the "T" word is one which may sometimes only be whispered and, like the word "bomb", if uttered in the wrong company or place, could land a person in deep trouble and ultimately in prison. It stands for terrorism, a word and an act with which we in Ireland have been all too familiar over the past 35 years and which has a particular resonance in this country. Terrorism can, as it is designed to, strike terror into the heart of an ever-increasing number of people worldwide.

In America, it has been found necessary, in the wake of the events of 11 September 2001, to set up a Department of Homeland Security. This has happened in the mightiest and wealthiest country in the world, a country with seemingly limitless resources which was so distant from the land of its enemies that it thought itself secure from attack on its soil. This security disappeared on that fateful September morning two and a half years ago, when the world finally woke up to a global threat of a kind which had previously been the preserve of large countries with extensive resources. Instead, the threat, and ultimately the deed, came from a relatively small group of single-minded fanatics who were uncaring of the consequences of their actions.

America's confidence and the world's innocence disappeared in the cloud of dust from the collapse of the World Trade Centre. This new style of terror is not dependent on smuggling a large bomb aboard an aircraft in order to achieve thousands of casualties or to inflict enormous damage on buildings. In the case of the events of 11 September 2001, the bombs were already on board. All that was required was a trigger from a person who had no regard for his or her safety.

Just 911 days later, we were again reminded of how easy it is to inflict horrendous death and destruction on an unsuspecting public. We all saw the television pictures of the Madrid outrage. That is the kind of threat with which we are faced today and the type of fanaticism with which we have to contend. Measures such as those contained in the legislation before us, while modest enough in the overall scheme, should be embraced enthusiastically.

At any given time we do not know from where a threat will come. In today's climate it is not difficult to see why seemingly innocuous conventions take on a greater significance. It is essential that we ally ourselves with those who want freedom of movement in national and international waters and endorse these conventions by ratifying the Bill before the House. The art of terror has reached new heights, or perhaps I should say depths, in recent years.

Ireland is a maritime country, a fact which impacts on the cost of imported everyday goods. Anyone who has ever aspired to a foreign holiday is aware there is extensive water to cross before reaching his or her destination. Previous generations have told us of the social hardships endured during the last war through being isolated on the western fringe of Europe where we were dependent on a small but brave and dedicated merchant fleet. There will always be water between us and Britain and even more so between us and America. That may be stating the obvious, but it is a fact with which we have to deal daily and with which we will have to deal in the future.

We are totally dependent for survival on the safe passage of our ships and aircraft. The conventions we are considering can help to ensure the safety and security of air and sea traffic. It is also intended to extend those benefits to other signatory countries.

While the terrorist threat is uppermost in our minds at present, we should not lose sight of another threat to our health and safety, namely the presence of the environmental time bomb that is Sellafield which is a short distance across the Irish Sea. Anyone who watched the news bulletins last evening must have been struck by two of the main stories of the day. One related to the presence of vast and unquantified tanks full of plutonium stored at Sellafield. The second related to the seizure by police of half a tonne of material capable of being converted with relative ease into a massive bomb. If these two scenarios were put together one would have a situation which does not bear thinking about.

I briefly digress to commend the efforts of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to focus British minds on the problem of Sellafield and to put pressure on British Nuclear Fuels Limited to clean up its act. A two-month deadline has now been set for compliance. We must vigorously pursue this matter until it has been brought to a successful conclusion.

Those who think about the possibilities shudder at the prospect of a seaborne threat to the facility either from a hijacked or purpose-built ship. Such an attack appears all too easy to achieve. We must also consider the potential threat to ships which carry hazardous waste to Sellafield through the only channel available, the Irish Sea.

The act of crashing an airliner with a few tonnes of fuel to make a massive bomb may have seemed the ultimate terrorist act in the recent past. The same could be said of placing bombs on crowded commuter trains to cause a couple of hundred deaths. However, such acts pale into insignificance when compared to a successful attack on Sellafield. The most bitter irony is that we have no idea what chance of success such an attack would have. As we have seen in the past, there is every likelihood that grave short-cuts have been taken in the construction and maintenance of this greatly discredited nuclear facility. Sellafield is an inviting and potentially rewarding terrorist target with an unknown defence capability.

I have dwelled at length on the terrorist aspect of the legislation because it is real, proven and likely to be repeated. The British experience yesterday proves that. There is a real threat to shipping, one we are not convinced is being taken seriously enough. Neither are we convinced that enough is being done to counter it. Although they are limited in scope, the conventions can have a positive effect, but they need our approval.

Our dependence on the sea is vital to our national interest. We cannot allow any opportunity to pass to endorse our support for the free and safe passage of shipping. We deplore the reckless transport of nuclear waste and decommissioned warships with a hazard potential, which pass so close to our shores and which would occupy our waters if we allowed them. They are an ever-present temptation to hijackers and terrorists and should not be towed unprotected three thousand miles across the Atlantic.

Will the Minister inform the House of the new maritime security measures due to come into effect on 1 July? Where will they be put in place and will they meet this deadline? The sea is an essential part of our lifeblood. The Bill presents us with a tangible opportunity to assist in its protection and we should grasp this with both hands. I commend the Bill to the House.