John Gerard Hanafin (Fianna Fail)

I am pleased to support the motion. The use of cluster bombs is quite obscene in terms of the havoc they can wreak. Cluster bombs are designed to be sprayed over a wide area. The principle is simple: a large container is filled with small bomblets, the container opens, and the munitions are scattered over a broad area, creating a blanket of explosions which can cover several hectares. In fact, this type of munition is a permanent threat to a civilian population and a violation of international and humanitarian law.

Ireland is well placed to hold the convention and to take a lead on this. Ireland is one of the countries that spends very little on armaments. Its economic and social development and its position on the human development index have risen consistently. We may compare this with states that spend huge percentages of their gross domestic product on armaments. Many of these are very poor countries that can least afford to spend anything on weaponry. Even our nearest neighbours spend up to 3% of GDP on armaments. Over the past 20 years this has amounted to a significant cumulative total being spent on an industry that is of no further benefit to the community. I suggest the reason Ireland is high on the human development index and is among the best countries in the world in which to live, according to The Economist, is that we have consistently gone on the right path. This is shown today in the fact that there is cross-party support for banning particular types of munitions.

What concerns me is that even if we ban cluster bombs, the industry will come up with something else equally or more devastating. In the future I would like to see Ireland take the lead — and the Minister is the man to do this — in encouraging all countries to focus on military spending that is used exclusively for peacekeeping purposes. I know it is a big thing to ask. A total of €1.2 trillion was spent in 2006 on armaments. If we consider what could have been done with this money in terms of education, provision of food and helping those states that are most in need of help in terms of health, we can see that we have missed some wonderful opportunities, yet this amount was spent on armaments. In many cases it is a race to ensure a nation's neighbour does not have more tanks or armaments than the nation that is buying them or to maintain an equivalent level of destruction.

I have been thinking about something that happened in the 1980s which certainly educated me. My father said he had spoken to a banker who had told him that the next war would be between Iran and Iraq. I was fascinated by this because there was no indication at that stage of a deterioration in relations. There was nothing in the media to indicate that this would happen. However, the banker was quite adamant. He insisted he had seen the amounts being spent and the armaments that were being procured, not for defensive purposes but for assault purposes. Before 1 million people died in that war, which is now almost forgotten, the bankers knew it would happen from the large transfer of funds.

I have difficulty with this industry. For that reason, I believe Ireland has a role to play. It played a significant role in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which stands to this day. We spend on armaments for defensive purposes, for example, for our troops in Chad and for the proper tasks Ireland has carried out during its proud record in the United Nations. However, there are permanent risks with certain types of munitions, particularly those being discussed today. Civilians who live and work in affected areas run the risk of being killed by cluster bombs. Between 5% and 40% of cluster munitions do not explode on impact and remain intact on the ground, in trees or on roofs. They become de facto anti-personnel landmines, waiting for the slightest movement to explode. They create a lethal danger for the civilian population who encounter them in the course of farm work, deforestation, building and so forth. Children are especially at risk as they are attracted by the bright colours of certain cluster munitions. For those who are killed or maimed, sometimes years after the end of a conflict, there is no difference between an anti-personnel landmine and unexploded cluster munitions.

A further reason for banning cluster munitions is that they are a violation of international and humanitarian law. Cluster bombs violate the principle of international humanitarian law and make no distinction between civilian and military targets. Despite this fact and the ban on landmines, cluster bombs are still widely used. Several million cluster munitions have been dropped. It costs approximately $1 to produce a cluster bomb but it costs $1,000 to remove it. These figures are important when discussing developing countries or countries emerging from conflict. The use of cluster bombs is one of the most indiscriminate and inhumane methods of fighting a war. It represents war on the civilian population and the innocent.

I recall a young child being hospitalised in Pristina for the amputation of both legs. He had been playing with a cluster bomb. The children found the bomb and put it down a well. It did not explode so they continued to play with it. One day they took the bomb out of the well. The child's 14 year old friend was killed in the explosion while the child had both legs amputated. That is cruel and unjust. In Africa, one will hear children ask one if their arms will grow again. That is the innocence of the people who are suffering. However, the munitions manufacturers and the bankers continue to have the inside track.