This matter, which relates to the need for Ireland to accede to the Antarctic treaty, is familiar to the Minister. When I started exploring this subject, I was amazed that we had not acceded to a treaty now 44 years old. Perhaps the Minister will enlighten me but I could discover no reasons we should not have acceded to a treaty obviously drawn up for the good of mankind. I hope the Minister's reply will state that this was an oversight and that the Government is examining the issue and will come to an early decision to accede to it.
One of the strange things about this treaty is that Ireland is one of the few countries in Europe which has not acceded to it. Portugal and Luxembourg are the only others. We should ask why this is so. Ireland has strong connections with Antarctica, particularly because of the recent marking of the centennial of Shackleton's expeditions. We are proud of that connection and of what Shackleton, and also Tom Crean, achieved there. We have a strong heritage link with Antarctica which for some reason we are not prepared to acknowledge, pursue or to which we are not prepared to give a commitment.
A question we should ask is what is the purpose of signing this accession treaty? There are many reasons. The most important, apart from the heritage reason, is the scientific one. This treaty enables all the acceding states to share scientific information garnered as a result of expeditions to Antarctica. Nothing could be wrong with that. It would be to our benefit if we could share and indulge in expeditions and do research into atmospherics, human biology, medicines and vaccines as is being done by other countries. That sort of information would be useful to us and we could contribute our particular expertise in the area.
We could also benefit from geology and geophysics research going on in the Antarctic which is a unique, untouched area. It is a filing cabinet of the geological history of the world over millenniums. That makes it worth preserving it and it would be worthwhile to share in experiments and gain benefits for the nation and our environment. We are missing out and also being very selfish on this matter.
We could benefit in other areas. One of the prime areas through which Antarctica could tell us about the modern scientific world is climatology. Other scientific benefits of learning from Antarctica would be in the areas of glaciology and the greenhouse effect. We have excluded ourselves from these benefits by not acceding to the treaty. I cannot understand the negativity. We are losing out on information from which the Government, the people and our scientists could benefit.
The treaty is completely in line with the United Nations commitment to nuclear free zones. This is a UN and US sponsored treaty. It would be indicative of our commitment to nuclear free zones and to the anti-nuclear movement, with which we are one, if we committed to this treaty. Our accession would also be a general statement about our deep belief in the global environment, an issue pertinent now and since the Kyoto agreement and other agreements since globalisation. We should join other major countries in sharing scientific information and committing ourselves to a belief in the objectives of pursuing a clean, scientific and global environment for the benefit of the people.