Vol. 502 No. 5
7 Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources the steps, if any, he will take to limit the passage of vessels carrying nuclear waste or materials through the Irish Sea; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8571/99]
The sensitivities of the Irish Government and public to the use of the Irish Sea generally for the transport of the materials mentioned by the Deputy to and from Sellafield have been made known on many occasions to the UK authorities and I have their assurance that in any event the vessels involved will not at any stage pass through waters under our jurisdiction. The same authorities have also stressed to me that voyages by such vessels through waters solely under UK jurisdiction are kept to a minimum and are already limited to one or two per year.
In these circumstances I have given particular attention to ensuring that the voyages that take place have regard to the highest possible level of safety in terms of the vessels employed and the operational requirements applied to them. In this connection the IMO Assembly, which I addressed in November 1997, agreed that the INF Code, which governs the transport by sea of the materials concerned, should be made mandatory. In the meantime, my Department has been discussing the development of improved reporting arrangements for voyages of vessels carrying such materials both within the IMO context and bilaterally with the United Kingdom and France.
I am glad the Minister reacted in a positive way to this serious problem. Where I live is as near to Sellafield as to Leinster House. Will the Minister agree his Department should be notified when nuclear material has been transported across the Irish Sea, even if it is inside the limits governed by the UK authorities? Did he have any discussions on whether it should be mandatory for countries who transport these materials to notify their neighbours of the transport of such materials?
Under the INF Code we got agreement that would be made mandatory. That code has certain requirements. It was drawn up by a joint IMO international atomic energy agency and United Nations environmental protection working group. It seeks to regulate the construction, equipment and operation of ships engaged in the carriage of irradiated nuclear fuel, plutonium and high level radioactive wastes. For the purpose of the code, ships carrying flasks containing such materials are assigned to three classes depending on the total radioactive quantity which may be carried on board. The ships are required to reach specific standards, depending on class assigned, in relation to damage stability, fire protection, temperature control of cargo spaces, structural strengths, cargo securing arrangements, electrical supplies, radiological protection equipment, ship board emergency plan and crew management and training. In addition, they must comply with the IMO's Safety of Life at Sea Convention, 1974, and the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code of the Convention on the Carriage of Radioactive Materials.
The flask used for the carriage of radioactive materials must be approved in accordance with the International Atomic Agency regulations for the safe transport of radioactive materials. That very detailed code existed in a voluntary capacity and we proposed that it should be made mandatory, with which the IMO assembly agreed. That was a huge step forward and a very important development. Ireland took the lead on that issue and it was promoted and negotiated by our experts, in advance of the assembly at which I spoke as the representative of Ireland. I was invited to speak at the opening stage and to make these proposals, to which they agreed.
We want to go further than that, along the lines suggested by the Deputy. There was a general agreement with Britain and France that we should have better notification and communication, which has happened since then, either directly to our Department or to us through the Department of Foreign Affairs. However, the number of occasions on which this is necessary is few and far between. The fewer and further between they are, the better from our point of view; nevertheless, we must recognise and deal with the realities.
