David Norris (Independent)

I accept the good intentions and practice of the Ministers involved and their advisers. The view of the House clearly is that these are unacceptable weapons. Most people, including those on the Government side, would accept that although they have been defined as being beyond the scope of cluster munitions, to any ordinary person they clearly are cluster munitions and they have at least some of the abhorrent effects specific to cluster munitions. I do not accept that if my amendment were accepted all weapons would be gone. I would be delighted if that were the case to be quite honest but it is impractical. The convention deals specifically with cluster weapons and we are narrowing down the restrictions on cluster weapons. I can feel that the Minister of State does not like these things as they are.

They are still cluster bombs. Let us suppose there was a smart element technologically in it and one of the nine actually struck home and hit the target. If it were aimed at a specific target only one would be necessary. Nine would not be needed. Let us suppose one of the nine hits a bridge or a tank and does its job, what happens to the other eight? This is the very problem of cluster bombs and is why people like myself and those on the Government side are so against them. There is a reduplication of effect after the initial target may have been hit. It can also happen that a child may pick them up. I really insist on the point that these are still cluster munitions.

In terms of the language, there is no question or doubt. I did not bother to go out and look it up in my definition. I gave the Minister of State a definition. As I used to be a teacher of English at third level, I have a fair idea what words mean — that used to be my job. I can assure the Minister of State that if he gets the Oxford English Dictionary, Chambers Encyclopaedia or any such reference books, he will find a definition of cluster that will include these. I can assure him they will be cluster munitions.

I will not press this matter to a vote, but I will probably press the last one to a vote. To show good will and to encourage the efforts of the Minister of State I will not push him on this matter. However, I would like him to indicate that the efforts are not finished and that this battle has not been finally won. I accept we have had a splendid success on which I congratulate people. Let us push on and let us not leave it here. Let us drag the other bleeders with us. I noted that Deputy Higgins quoted Talleyrand on this. Again it is the difference between politics and diplomacy. I feel we could have set a higher target. In the previous convention to ban landmines, former President Clinton's crowd got in and lobbied very hard for a weakening of the definitions. However, we stood up against them and we prevailed.

I would hope that in the light of the work that has been done, we can get a commitment to continue to pursue the matter to a point where this kind of munition is outlawed and where the use of anti-personnel mines attached to anti-tank mines is also outlawed. It is the same principle. I do not like the idea of what these courageous people must do. We saw it frequently in the North and all over the world including in Iraq. I do not agree with the invasion of Iraq. The people who try to neutralise bombs are extraordinarily courageous. I would not do it. I would run like hell in the opposite direction if I thought there was the smallest possibility of being hit by any of these things. I cannot comprehend the courage of people who professionally will attempt to disarm these unpleasant objects. I have no time for the argument that claims an anti-personnel device is acceptable if it is attached to an anti-tank bomb. It is all part of the same thing.

I will not push a vote on this matter. However, I would like the Minister of State to give a commitment to pursue this in the direction that the majority of Irish people would like it to go. I believe pretty much everybody in the House would support the Minister of State in doing so.