asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the action, if any, he proposes to take to stop Irish waters being used by unidentified submarines.
22.
Ceisteanna—Question. Oral Answers. - Unidentified Submarines.
6.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the measures, if any, the Government intend to take to protect trawlers operating in the Irish Sea from the dangers posed by submarines, especially in view of the repeated incidents in which trawlers have been sunk or had their nets broken by submarines; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
44.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the steps, if any, he is taking to ensure that Irish fishermen will be compensated for loss/damage to vessels caused by unidentified submarines passing through Irish waters.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6, 22 and Priority Question 44 together.
Submarines travelling through Irish territorial waters in exercise of their right of innocent passage under international law are obliged to travel on the surface and to display identification. These obligations ensure that submarines do not remain unidentified while in our territorial waters and also have the effect of considerably reducing the risk of accident. The Government would obviously view with considerable concern any breaches of such obligations.
As I have said previously in the Dáil, the Government are of the view that the best possibility of promoting and enhancing safety at sea generally and of avoiding the type of incidents that we have seen involving trawlers and submerged submarines in the Irish Sea lies with the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). The IMO are the worldwide body whose aims and purposes include the encouragement of the adoption of the highest practicable standards in matters concerning maritime safety. An Irishsponsored initiative in this organisation, which focuses attention on the problems posed to fishermen by submarine traffic, was adopted by consensus by the General Assembly of the IMO on 19 November 1987. We hope that this resolution which now becomes part of the accepted code of recommended practice for mariners will contribute to greater safety at sea generally and more specifically help to avoid incidents involving fishing vessels and submerged submarines in the Irish Sea.
As far as compensation is concerned, payment for damage by unidentified vessels is clearly problematic. The Government will take whatever action is open to them to assist in the identification of such vessels, thus facilitating any action for damages that might be taken.
I hesitate to cloud the undercurrents of the Irish Sea but will the Minister not recognise and agree that the IMO are hardly the body that should concern themselves with these intrusions? After all, we are not exactly flooded with Liberian or Panamanian registered submarines and those countries have the bulk of commercially registered mercantile craft ploughing the Irish Sea. Will the Minister agree it is necessary for him to have direct negotiations with those nations who are most likely to have submarines creating damage in the Irish Sea? The nations in question are the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom in particular. Will the Minister indicate, in terms of compensation requirements, what specific inquiries have been made by the Government with regard to reported damages to fishermen's trawlers to the British authorities or the Soviet Union?
I do not fully agree with the Deputy in regard to the IMO. Matters have been taken up on a bilateral basis with the two countries mentioned and indeed with other countries. However, we put a lot of effort into getting this resolution passed by the IMO on 19 November last. It is a positive resolution but the bilateral aspects have not been as successful as we would have liked. Naturally, the countries concerned plead security considerations but at least the resolution was passed in a multilateral forum and we regard that as a very good start.
I thank the Minister for his reply and I appreciate the diplomatic difficulties surrounding this issue. Will the Minister accept that if compensation is to ensue — we are talking primarily about compensation in this instance — it can only come about by discreet diplomatic inquiries and exchanges on a bilateral basis between the probable countries involved? Will he give an assurance to the House that if individual trawlermen and the owners of trawlers were to make direct representations to the Department of the Marine and, presumably, to the Department of Foreign Affairs, his Department will make every effort to succeed in the proper diplomatic manner——
That is a very long question. I want to make progress with other questions.
I know, I tried to be succinct. Will the Minister not recognise that our economic interests are severely damaged by these——
We cannot debate this matter today.
I have been following that matter and I will continue to do so but there are obvious difficulties in getting down to the sort of situation envisaged by the Deputy where people will acknowledge liability to pay compensation.
Is the Minister agreeable to circulating the terms of the resolution passed on 19 November 1987?
I have the resolution here but it might be better to circulate it to the House.
Will the Minister indicate in what way it will seek to restrict the numbers or the manner in which submarines pass through the Irish Sea and whether it will have any effect on submarines which are nuclear powered, including the ten United States submarines that carry 16 missiles each and which are currently stationed in the Clyde Estuary and use the Irish Sea to such an extent?
That was an earlier initiative which we took which requires such countries to avoid well-known fishing grounds in regard to submarine passage. I appreciate that is more honoured in the breach than in the observance but the resolution is there as a result of an earlier initiatve at an IMO conference.
Is there any sanction a party to those resolutions can take with a view to seeing that the letter and the spirit of the resolutions are complied with? Is there any other action the Government could take in another forum in pursuit of those resolutions?
There is an obvious difficulty in this case. I do not have to elaborate on the practicalities of the matter. Security interests dominate to such an extent in this area that it is very difficult for a complainant country to get to the heart of the matter.