Vol. 521 No. 4
7 Mr. Currie asked the Minister for Public Enterprise if she will outline her expectations of the OSPAR Commission meeting to be held this month, particularly in relation to the closure of Sellafield; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [17630/00]
At this point I cannot predict the outcome of the meeting of the OSPAR Commission to be held in Copenhagen shortly but it presents us with a good opportunity to advance an intense campaign to bring about the eventual end of nuclear reprocessing. Ireland is not alone in seeking this objective and there is undoubtedly a strong level of solidarity among the Nordic countries and ourselves about the need to place additional pressure on both the UK and France to move away from this outmoded and hazardous activity.
Both Ireland and Denmark have tabled draft decisions for discussion at the meeting. In parallel with consideration of these draft decisions, the meeting will also discuss how participating countries will implement the OSPAR strategy on radioactive substances which has as its objective the virtual elimination by 2020 of radioactive discharges into the sea. Ireland's draft decision for discussion at the meeting highlights the increased public concern following the publication of the UK nuclear installations inspectorate's report last February. It also identifies reprocessing plants as a significant source of pollution to the marine environment.
I have previously stated that as a result of my contacts with Ministers in Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Finland and my discussions with the Danish Minister in Dublin there has been some interaction concerning a potential consensus decision which could be binding on all countries, including the UK and France. If we do not achieve unanimity at the OSPAR Commission meeting, a qualified majority decision would be binding only on the countries which vote in favour of it. It is worthwhile making considerable effort at the meeting to see what can be done to secure a unanimous decision which is binding on both the UK and France. This in no way dilutes our national policy which is trenchantly opposed to Sellafield reprocessing operations and which seeks to minimise and eliminate the risk to Ireland of all nuclear activities at the site.
I take heart from a recent report of the House of Commons Trade and Industry Select Committee on BNFL. I do not have time to elaborate on that, although I would like to do so. I hope the recommendations of the House of Commons committee, together with the international pressure being placed on the British Government at OSPAR, will give the necessary impetus to a radical rethink of the UK's nuclear reprocessing policy. I wish to see some breakthrough in our campaign against Sellafield at the OSPAR meeting but there can be no guarantee there will be the necessary shift in policy by the UK and France. There can be no doubt, however, about the strong feelings of many neighbouring countries about reprocessing activities. The Irish delegation will work closely with other delegations to achieve a positive outcome.
Is it correct to assume the Minister of State will be present at the meeting?
That is not correct.
I am disappointed.
I wish I could but I will explain that to the Deputy.
I assumed the Minister of State would be present. Will he explain to the House why he will not be present? His presence would add considerably to what must be the best opportunity ever to close Sellafield. Does he agree that the bad publicity around the world over the fabrication of the records which focused attention on the Sellafield operation, the cancellation of the US business because of excessive costs and the recent decision by the German Government to phase out its nuclear stations over 20 years and to end reprocessing by 2005 offer the best opportunity to close Sellafield? In conjunction with my suggestion that he should attend the meeting, will he indicate, without disclosing too much, whether it would be better and more helpful to the common cause to support the Danish proposal rather than our own? This suggestion has been made by Greenpeace.
I would love if there was a ministerial dimension to the OSPAR meeting. I discussed that matter with Minister Svend Auken from Denmark when he met me in Dublin recently. As the Minister of the host country, he undertook to pursue the possibility of a ministerial segment to this session of OSPAR. I also discussed that with each of the Ministers of the other four Nordic countries whom I travelled to meet. It has now transpired there will not be a ministerial segment to that meeting, which I regret. Nevertheless, I have confidence in the personnel representing Ireland at official level. There will be a principal officer from my Department, who is vastly experienced in this area, and the deputy chief executive of the RPII, which has been representing us. I will keep in constant touch with them up to and throughout the discussions. There will be a hot line available at all times. We have been endeavouring to capitalise upon all the events that Deputy Currie has outlined. We have raised the level of the campaign and I am grateful for the co-operation I have received from this House and the other House which was not always forthcoming but without which I would not have been able to raise the campaign to the level at which it currently stands. I expect the campaign to continue. This is another mechanism to continue that strong campaign and to make it even more potent. I hope we will get a result from this OSPAR session.
I am very disappointed the Minister of State will not be present. No matter how good the officials are, there is no substitute for ministerial presence.
The Deputy is commenting.
The Minister referred to a ministerial segment. If it did not exist it ought to have been created in these circumstances. Also, the Minister did not reply to the question I asked earlier about the Greenpeace suggestion on the Irish and the Danish proposal.
The Minister must be very brief.
Co-operation is the keynote here. The Deputy might not have been listening to me when I gave him a comprehensive answer as to the structure of OSPAR and when there is and is not a ministerial segment. There is not on this occasion. I would have preferred that. I strove for it but it is not to happen. Co-operation at international level, which I have been endeavouring to put in place, is what we require. That is the way it has been deemed this matter will proceed.
Greenpeace has written to me on the subject of going along with the Danish proposal. That is a matter for internal negotiation. There is very little difference between the Danish and the Irish proposals.
We must proceed to the next question.
I am calling for cessation and the Danes are calling for suspension. We are of one mind in that regard and we will be endeavouring—
I am calling Question No. 8.
—in the course of negotiations to secure the ultimate and optimum outcome to our campaign.
Civil servants will not be able to negotiate that.
