Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 16 May 2000

Vol. 519 No. 2

Written Answers. - Commercial Whale Hunting.

Trevor Sargent

Question:

264 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands her views on whether enforcement is a key issue in terms of the management of whaling and that adequate provisions for this have yet to be agreed under the International Whaling Commission's revised management scheme; the way in which whaling under the Irish proposals could be legally or morally restricted just to Japan and Norway in view of the fact there is no legal provision under the International Convention on the Regulation of Whaling for so doing; and her views on whether an entirely voluntary agreement is feasible or if the real agenda is ultimately to allow commercial coastal whaling to resume in Russia, Iceland, or any other country which so decides. [13449/00]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

265 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands if her attention has been drawn to the large scale slaughter of small cetaceans which is threatening to exterminate the smaller species of whales not covered by the International Whaling Commission's moratorium; and the consideration, if any, she is giving to any actions to press for the provision of cetacean protection in the Irish proposals. [13450/00]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

266 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands the reason Ireland has not ratified CITES in order to add its vote against down-listing proposals by Japan and Norway which would allow the resumption of international trade in whale products which is something the government seeks to end through its compromise proposals put to the International Whaling Commission; and if her attention has been drawn to the fact that Iceland has just joined CITES providing another yes vote for the whalers' down-listing proposals and thereby revealing their determination to reopen trade in whale products. [13451/00]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

267 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands the reason the Government's proposals to the International Whaling Commission to allow the resumption of commercial whaling within coastal waters will apply for only 20 years; and the Government's reasoning for such an arbitrary time limit in view of the fact there is great concern that a whaling free-for-all will quickly follow. [13452/00]

Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Miss de Valera)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 264 to 267, inclusive, together.

I would draw the Deputy's attention to my reply to Questions Nos. 171, 172 and 173 of 16 February 2000.

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species has been signed but cannot be ratified by Ireland under current wildlife legislation. The necessary provisions to enable the state to formally ratify the convention are included in the Wildlife (Amendment) Bill, 1999 which is currently under consideration by the Oireachtas. As international trade in endangered species is a worldwide problem, the signature and ratification of the convention by as many states as possible, including Iceland, is to be welcomed. In relation to the recent meeting of the parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species held in Nairobi last month, I understand the proposals put forward to downlist certain whale species to facilitate trade were defeated. Ireland, though not a party to the Convention, was represented at the meeting and strongly supported the rejection of the downlisting proposals.

I would remind the Deputy that scientific whaling may legally be undertaken by any party to the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. In addition, Norway and Russia may legally engage in commercial whaling as they lodged an objection to the current moratorium on commercial whaling. Iceland is not currently a party to the ICRW but is considering whether to rejoin so that it is prudent to take account of its likely stance, which is to support resumption of commercial whaling and possibly to engage in scientific whaling. In these circumstances it is not realistic to propose a total ban on whaling and we can only secure the conservation of whales through a voluntary consensus. In this context the proposals put forward by Ireland for discussion at the International Whaling Commission meeting in 1997 represent a balanced package designed to stimulate real discussion between all interests in the IWC with a view to limiting and controlling all whaling and thus securing whale conservation in the medium term. The details, including the duration, of any agreement based on the Irish proposals must await detailed discussion among member countries to achieve the necessary consensus for the adoption of an agreement by all parties. The duration of such an agreement has not been defined but, while Ireland would like to have an agreement which would last forever, that is not likely to be come about in the immediate future. Ireland will seek to negotiate the longest term possible but I would consider that an agreement which eliminated the present free-for-all and reduced the number of whales being killed over a period of 20 years would be a significant achievement and would provide a platform which could be extended for further periods in the future. If such consensus can be reached, the intention is to draft suitable texts within the legal ambit of the International Convention on the Regulation of Whaling to reflect any agreement reached. While the proposals put forward for discussion pose difficulties for all sides to the debate within the IWC, if the necessary will is present, a suitable voluntary agreement is possible. From Ireland's viewpoint, any agreement reached regarding the control and regulation of whaling must ensure that the conservation status of any whale population is not compromised.

The Irish proposals fully recognise the importance of enforcement and providedinter alia for the completion and adoption of the IWC revised management scheme. This scheme must be conservative and provide in particular for inspection and observation procedures that will engender public confidence. I understand that work on this scheme at the IWC is well advanced and it includes proposals for satellite monitoring, DNA tracing of meat and international observers on whaling vessels. A transparent, effective, and strict monitoring system is a vital part of an acceptable RMS which should be strictly enforced.

I am aware of the threat posed by over exploitation of some populations of small cetaceans. While many member states, including Ireland, hold the view that the International Whaling Commission has competence in relation to small cetaceans, there is significant disagreement on this issue and many states do not accept IWC competence for small cetaceans. However, a modus operandi has evolved which allows small cetacean issues to receive attention within the IWC. In these circumstances there is little chance of achieving a consensus in relation to small cetaceans and it would not be useful to pursue this in the Irish proposals.