Vol. 482 No. 2
3 Mr. Kenny asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands the action, if any, she has taken or will take following her statement of 8 September 1997 regarding the fact that Ireland will lead on the creation of a global sanctuary for whales; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [17351/97]
The statement to which the Deputy refers, in which I called for moves towards the creation of a global ocean sanctuary for whales, was made in the context of dialogue which took place during the run-up to the 49th meeting of the International Whaling Commission which is currently under way in Monaco. In light of a number of misleading reports in the media that Ireland is in some way abandoning its pro-conservation stance in relation to whaling, I want to state clearly that this is not the case. All the proposals put forward by Ireland are intended to ensure that fewer whales are killed and that any killing which may be carried out will be strictly regulated. In light of the confusion which exists about Ireland's position in this matter, I will set out matters clearly.
Ireland became a member of the International Whaling Commission in 1985 with a clear objective to promote the conservation of whales. Ireland does not engage in whaling and our waters were declared a sanctuary for whales in 1991. Nevertheless, we recognise that it is part of other cultures to take and use whales. In that context, Ireland's role in the IWC is to ensure that any whaling which takes place does so in a manner which provides that no population of whales is endangered.
Following a long period of over-exploitation, several populations of whales were endangered and a moratorium on commercial whaling was adopted by the IWC in 1982. However, it is no secret that there are major difficulties facing the IWC, particularly as it has no power to regulate scientific research whaling or to overrule legal objections by member states such as Norway to the moratorium. The number of whales taken increased from more than 380 in 1992 to approximately 1,050 this year. This trend is very worrying.
Ireland continues to believe that the populations of whales have not been given sufficient time to recover fully from excessive catches in the past and that it is not appropriate to agree to the resumption of commercial whaling. We believe, however, that between the extremes of zero whaling and full commercial whaling there may be scope to reach a consensus of all parties to limit whaling in the medium term.
Ireland put forward its proposals for discussion at the IWC meeting currently under way in Monaco in the context of the impasse at the IWC, the need to complete its revised management scheme, the threat posed by a fragmentation of the IWC and the continued increase in unregulated whaling. These proposals in no way represent a change in our long-standing policy of being against wholesale commercial whaling. It is not realistic at present to expect every country to cease whaling totally. We are trying to minimise the level of whaling and to ensure that any whaling which takes place is strictly regulated.
Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund and the International Fund for Animal Welfare in a joint statement in Monaco, stated;
Whaling is growing rapidly and is out of the IWC's control. Unless firm action is taken to bring the situation under control, unregulated whaling looks set to increase even further.
The proposals put forward for discussion by Ireland at the meeting are as follows. The IWC revised management scheme should be completed and adopted. The scheme must be conservative and provide in particular for inspection and observation procedures that will engender public confidence. Where quotas are justified under the RMS, these should be restricted to coastal areas only. This would result in a de facto sanctuary over the oceans of the world. Quotas should be issued for local consumption only. This would avoid the pressure on whaling which would arise from international trade. Lethal scientific whaling should be phased out over a period. Regulations for whale watching should be prepared to minimise the impact of disturbance on whale populations.
These proposals have been put forward for discussion among all interests in attendance at the IWC meeting in Monaco. They do not represent a definitive solution to the issues facing the IWC. However, they have been put forward in an attempt to focus deliberations at the IWC meeting on the requirements for whale conservation in the medium term. I stress that there is no question of negotiating a deal that allows coastal whaling without agreeing to a ban on pelagic whaling and trade and the phasing out of scientific whaling.
Our proposals are designed to help ensure that fewer whales will be killed and that any killing which may be carried out will be strictly regulated.
I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply. Is she aware that the environmental investigation agency said that the Government's representative in Monaco, Mr. Canny, has his finger on the trigger of the harpoon gun but the agency does not want the blood of thousands of whales sloshing around. Under the law of the sea 40 per cent of the world's waters are covered by the definition of "coastal waters" in which most of the world's whale population is found. If the Government's proposals are carried and commercial whaling is resumed in coastal waters up to 200 miles, the level of whale killing will seriously increase. The blue whale, which number approximately 1,000, is almost extinct. A modern whaling vessel can butcher and process a whale in less than an hour. The monitoring by satellite or otherwise of modern fishing vessels which have flagrantly breached the laws laid down in the moratorium is simply not on.
For many years Japan has used the scientific research clause to take thousands of whales. These whales have ended up in restaurants, not in science laboratories. This gives an idea of the difficulties we face. Given that 40 per cent of the world's seas are covered by the definition of "coastal waters", if the Irish proposal to resume commercial whaling in coastal waters, where most of the whale population lives, is agreed there will be increased slaughter.
I do not accept the Deputy's emotive language. These proposals are being put forward for discussion at the conference. Unfortunately, many countries, particularly Norway and Japan, do not share our view that there should be no commercial whaling. Because of this different view and the threat of fragmentation of the IWC something must be done. It would be very easy for us to take an absolutist position and say; "This is our position and that is that". However, we must try to minimise the killing of whales. We are in the business of trying to rescue the situation.
As the Deputy said, some countries have flagrantly breached the regulations and gone against the views expressed. Commercial whaling in coastal waters will not lead to increased slaughter and further difficulties for the simple reason that most coastal nations have no desire to carry out whaling and have no domestic market for whale meat. By excluding international trade our proposals will tie in to the moratorium nations which already carry out coastal whaling, thereby making the seas safer for whales.
If the moratorium is lifted and whaling is allowed in coastal waters under certain conditions it will reward those countries which have flagrantly breached the existing regulations. That many countries want nothing to do with whaling increases the opportunity to breach the laws and regulations. Irrespective of the regulations, in 40 per cent of coastal waters, where the vast majority of the whale population exists, there is indiscriminate slaughter of whales.
I do not accept that. If that was the case there would be no point in taking part in a commission to try to find a consensus to save as many whales as possible and prevent indiscriminate slaughter, which unfortunately is the practice in some countries. As regards the observer status, there will be an international observer on each whaling vessel and vessels will be subject to satellite tracking. DNA samples will be taken from all animals killed and it will be possible to check whale meat in the market to ensure it has been legally obtained. Because illegal meat will be confiscated, pirate whaling will be uneconomic. The application of modern technology will ensure a level of control never available before. That is why we put forward this constructive proposal.
I accept the Deputy's view that certain individuals and nations have used scientific whaling as an opportunity to indiscriminately kill whales. We would like to see lethal scientific whaling phased out over a period, but there must be a consensus that nations voluntarily take whales. Everybody within the IWC does not think alike. If that was the case there would be no need for those provisions. I hope at the end of the discussions in May the position whereby many whales are under threat will be improved. The number of whales taken has increased from more than 380 in 1992 to almost 1,050 in 1997. We can sit back and do nothing, which might make us feel more comfortable in many instances, but if we are interested in looking after the whale population and ensuring conservation, we have an obligation to put forward these worthwhile proposals, particularly as they relate to quotas for local consumption. When the revised management scheme of the IWC is completed and adopted we can find a medium-term solution to a problem which is increasing in terms of the whale population.
Has the Minister communicated her concern and protested to the Japanese and Norwegian ambassadors about the blatant breaching of IWC regulations as they relate to whaling?
Ireland is represented at the Monaco conference and the chairperson of the discussions is Michael Canny, an official of my Department. It is obvious from the views expressed not only by him but by other nations that there is tremendous concern about the approach taken by countries such as Japan and Norway. The stance taken by Ireland and other nations on this matter is no secret. We are trying to reach a consensus to change the position for the better.
Will the Minister make available the report of the Monaco meeting when it is concluded?
I will be happy to send all such information to the Deputy.
