asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the details of a claim, if any, which the Irish Government have made at the Law of the Sea Conference for the seabed between Ireland and the United States of America and Canada, and which is beyond the edge of the Continental Shelf.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Seabed Claim.
17.
The Law of the Sea Conference is a multilateral conference at which claims against any particular state do not arise. It is not therefore appropriate for any claim of the nature suggested by the Deputy in his question to be put forward by Ireland at the conference in this regard.
Among the issues under negotiation at the conference are the definition of the outer limits of the Continental Shelf over which the coastal states exercise sovereign rights for the purpose of exploration and exploitation and the regime for the international seabed area beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. In this regard I would refer the Deputy to my comprehensive reply in the Dáil to a question on 22 November 1978 which sets out the stage of negotiations which the conference had reached at the end of the seventh session on these issues. The first part of the eighth session of the conference in Geneva ended on 27 April and will continue in New York in mid-July. The present stage of negotiations will have to be reviewed at the end of the present session.
In relation to the Continental Shelf the present text which is the basis for the negotiations at the conference, the informal composite negotiating text, contains articles which would give coastal states jurisdiction to the outer edge of the continental margin. There is pressure at the conference for a more precise definition of the outer limits of coastal states' jurisdiction than is given in this article. This arises out of the fears of some states of excessive claims or creeping jurisdiction by the coastal states.
Ireland claims jurisdiction over the geological shelf slope and rise to the outer edge of the continental margin. However, in an effort to meet the concerns of certain states regarding excessive claims and demands for a more precise definition of the outer limits to avoid uncertainty, Ireland has put forward a formula at the conference regarding the definition of the outer limits of the Continental Shelf which is satisfactory from our point of view.
By resolution of the UN General Assembly of 17 December 1970 the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction has been declared to be the common heritage of mankind. The deep sea-bed begins where the outer margin of the Continental Shelf ends and, being accepted as the common heritage of mankind, no question of sovereignty over it or claims to it by any individual state therefore arise.
Am I to take it from the Minister's reply that we are not going to make any claim to the area mentioned in the question?
The situation is, as I indicated at the end of my reply, that the deep seabed is part of what has been described as the common heritage of mankind. Therefore, the question of making a claim to it in respect of a country does not arise.
Is the Minister aware that the United States intend to mine the seabed between the American mainland and the Hawaiian Islands, a considerable stretch of water?
I am not aware of the intentions of the American administration, but the Deputy will have noted from my reply that the proposal which we put forward at the International Law of the Sea Conference would extend our area of jurisdiction beyond what is now regarded as the shelf. In fact, it would include the slope and margin to a considerable extent beyond it.
What is the extent in miles?
It is not possible to indicate that precisely.
Is the Minister aware that the German Government are framing legislation to allow them to take unilateral action to mine such areas?
We are getting into deep water now.
This was referred to in the question.
I accept the Deputy's concern in regard to this and I should like to assure him that not only are we not reacting to what others are doing but we are taking a very forward position in our own interests at the UN Law of the Sea Conference and we are gaining considerable support for that position.
My belief is that the Americans and Russians will not adhere to that type of arrangement. We should make a greater claim than we are making at present.
If our claim is accepted by the Law of the Sea Conference those nations will adhere to it.
Is the Minister including a claim to Rockall?
I am sure the Deputy agrees that I took the right step in relation to Rockall.