Seanad debates

Tuesday, 25 November 2008

Cluster Munitions and Anti-Personnel Mines Bill 2008: Second Stage

 

5:00 pm

Photo of Dan BoyleDan Boyle (Green Party)

This is a significant Bill and at a time when we live in a world full of economic and environmental crises, the ability to consider legislation that has consequences towards bringing about a safer world, however far it goes down that particular road, should be welcomed by all Members. This Bill recalls the proud role played by previous Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Governments in trying to inform and persuade the international arena regarding better moral standards in the conduct of international affairs. It is not going too far to compare it to the role performed by the then Minister for External Affairs, Frank Aiken, in respect of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. It also is worth remarking that in that work, while he did not bring an end to nuclear weapons, he informed the beginning of a debate that such weapons were morally repugnant. Sadly, that debate still is ongoing. Likewise, this Bill and this international treaty will not bring an immediate end to the use of an odious class of weapons. However, it starts that process and the role played by the Government in this regard, including officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs, the current Minister and his predecessor, Deputy Dermot Ahern, must be acknowledged in the debate.

Like Senator Norris, I wish to concentrate on a particular aspect of the Bill, namely, the provisions on non-investment in companies engaged in the practice of producing cluster bombs and anti-personnel mines. Sections 11 to 15, inclusive, put in place in Irish law for the first time principles of ethical investment in the spending of public money. I class this as being one of the Bill's more important aspects. As a Member of the other House, I introduced a Private Members' Bill to have the principles of ethical investment adopted as formal Government policy and in particular to have those principles included as part of the terms of reference of the National Pensions Reserve Fund. As the latter is not mentioned specifically in this Bill, perhaps this can be considered on Committee and Report Stages. However, the sense of the Bill pertains to any level of Government spending in this regard. It even would cover the point made by Senator Norris in that I cannot discern how, were we to spend money engaging in defence activities with other countries that use such weapons, this would be compatible with sections 11 to 15, inclusive, of the Bill. The legislation makes a clear statement of intent regarding the spending of public moneys that is in any way related to the use of cluster bombs and anti-personnel weapons. Moreover, these principles should be expanded into wider legislation. While such legislation would not be dealt with directly by the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Department of Finance, which I presume has been consulted about these provisions, could examine the wider ethical context of how public moneys are invested. When one begins to so do, one begins to add more weight to the conviction one expresses in international organisations and during the framing of international agreements.

It is somewhat unusual, because of the active involvement of the Government and the Department of Foreign Affairs in this Bill, that Members are ratifying legislation for an international agreement so quickly. However, circumstances demand they do as Ireland has been a forerunner in bringing about this agreement and has hosted a conference in Croke Park. The necessity to be among the first countries to ratify and sign this convention is something in which Members should take a great deal of pride. However, it also is fair to put down a marker that Ireland does not always tend to do this in respect of international agreements. Perhaps the process involved in publishing this Bill and bringing it through both Houses of the Oireachtas could be put in place as a new standard or a new set of goalposts for Members to play with to ensure that wherever and whenever they can implement international treaties of this type, they so do as quickly as possible. Ireland's record in this regard is not always the best and I could cite environmental agreements in particular.

There are a number of exemptions in the Bill that Senator Norris rightly has pointed out. We could take the moral high ground and produce a Bill outlining Ireland's opinion that these weapons should never be used from tomorrow on, but it likely would be an empty, rhetorical and moral statement.

We have produced an international treaty through the efforts of Government officials. The next step is to ensure the agreement goes further and a timetable is put in place to eliminate these odious weapons once and for all. The moral credit earned by Government officials by being part of the process from the beginning will make that elimination inevitable. Everyone should take pride in this and legislators should recognise what is a great achievement for Irish diplomacy.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.