asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has had any recent communications with the British Government with regard to jurisdiction over the island of Rockall; the outcome of these discussions, if any; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Rockall Jurisdiction.
22.
There have been no communications on the matter since the Deputy last raised the question in the House on 29th November.
I take it the present position is that the Government still do not recognise Britain's claim but intend to do nothing to pursue a claim on our behalf? Is that the position?
The Government intend to pursue their position that the question of a claim to the Rock as such does not give entitlement to rights in the area around the rock. After the initial British action in regard to Rockall, its annexation in 1955, the matter has been let rest since. To pursue a claim at this stage would be to cast doubts on the very contention on which we are resting our case, that such annexation of such a rock does not, in fact, entitle people to such claim.
I appreciate that the Minister seems to be expressing a new concept of law and we will not argue that now. Could he give any indication what this Government intend to do to protect the interests if any, which we may have or could have in the resources around that island, apart from saying that they do not accept Britain's claim?
That is the necessary action to protect our position at this stage.
I am calling Question No. 23.
The Minister has said nothing beyond saying we question their claim. I am asking him what we are doing to establish our claim?
I should, perhaps, add that the question of the median line between Irish and British waters for the purpose of oil exploration, and so on, is something which we will be negotiating with Britain in due course and in that negotiation in the first instance we will be concerned with the Celtic sea.
Frankly, I cannot see anything concrete or positive in what the Minister has said. Could I ask him at least to ensure that the jurisdiction on this island would be a matter for discussion at the proposed conference on the law of the sea, if the Minister cannot resolve it in the meantime by establishing a claim to it?
A claim to what?
If the Minister cannot resolve it by discussing it with the British Government directly, would he ensure that this matter of the jurisdiction over Rockall is discussed at the international conference?
I think the Deputy is confusing a number of separate issues.
The Deputy is not confused at all. The Minister is confused.
Let us have the next question.
The Deputy wants us to attempt to annexe Rockall after 16 years of a Government that never took any step to do so.
That is not the point.
That is one proposal. If you do not do that there is the line you take as regards the implications of annexation and there is a negotiation of median lines between the waters of the countries concerned.
Could I ask one final supplementary?
We must pass on to the next question. I am calling Question No. 23. We are making no progress today.
The Minister does not accept there is no justification in international——
We must pass on to the next question. The Deputy is making a statement. He is not asking a question.
Does the Minister not accept there is no justification in international law for the thesis which he has proposed in the House this afternoon, that you can actually own an island or a rock without laying claim to the territorial waters around it?
We cannot debate this matter at Question Time.
I do not accept that thesis put forward by the Deputy in a manner prejudicial to the interests of this country. I suggest if the Deputy gave more thought to the interests of this country he would not be pursuing this question in this way.
The Minister should do something about it.
(Interruptions).
After 16 years of inaction.
The Minister knows well nothing is being done now.
Will Deputy O'Kennedy please allow Questions to proceed?
I can assure the Deputy it will not take 16 years to deal with it.