Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 11, line 6, to delete “and” and substitute “or”.

My first few amendments are concerned with interpretation, and it may be the same issue throughout. The wording of the section is due to the language being mapped from the convention. However, the convention dates back to the 1980s and we have had a body of interpretation on same. That is why I want to be very clear about the Irish Government's interpretation of the convention.

My amendment relates to places where the section mentions the words "exploitation" and "exploration" and, therefore, seeks to insert the word "or" before "exploration" in order that offences may be so deemed if the act is done in connection with the economic exploitation "or" exploration of the non-living natural resources of the exclusive economic zone. To be clear, the provision should read "exploitation or exploration". I want the Minister to check the interpretation so that we do not have a situation where, for example, offences that are committed during the exploratory phase would somehow be excluded or slip through the net, pardon the pun, because they did not involve exploitation but simply exploration.

I tabled my amendment because there is solar research and other things that are not connected to financial exploitation or particular exploitation such as oil or gas extraction yet still be extraordinarily damaging and, therefore, can constitute offences. To be clear, I refer to acts done with exploration even if it is not associated with exploitation and, similarly, if we have acts of exploitation that are not connected with exploration. We must be clear that any one of those can be prosecuted under this provision and that it does not require a combination. My amendment seeks to address the Government's interpretation of the language, which I know is the UN convention language.