Joint Foreign Affairs Committee - 12th December 2007 - Cluster Munitions: Discussion with Pax Christi Ireland

Joint Foreign Affairs Committee - 12th December 2007 - Cluster Munitions: Discussion with Pax Christi Ireland.
Senator David Norris: I welcome Mr. D’Costa who I have heard speak on this issue a number of times, including to the previous joint committee. I welcome his return before the joint committee today. The striking feature of this morning’s proceedings is that all three speakers, namely, Deputies Billy Timmins, Michael D. Higgins and Darragh O’Brien, spoke eloquently, clearly and from the same hymn sheet. No discord in this regard was apparent and members appear to be agreed on the devastating nature of these weapons. They are evil in intent because they are directed at a civilian population and have no real effective military application, which is acknowledged by military sources. They are a weapon of terror and, as Deputy Timmins noted, they hit children in particular in a post-conflict scenario. Mr. D’Costa has appended to his statement a couple of eloquent testimonies to this effect.
As all members appear to be in agreement, I am happy to second Deputy Michael D. Higgins’s formal proposal. In light of such agreement on the part of the principal Opposition parties and Government spokespersons, which thus far appears to be unanimous, I suggest that members should consider the adoption of the suggested motion that Mr. D’Costa put before the joint committee last year. As this means the joint committee has had a year in which to consider this motion, it is not without notice although I acknowledge the presence of new members. I suggest the joint committee should consider passing this motion because it will only assist the Government towards the objective it has declared clearly in its programme for Government. It contains nothing antagonistic to the Government and might be of assistance to it. The motion appears on the script supplied by Mr. D’Costa.
I tabled this motion on the Order Paper last year in the aftermath of the highly effective briefing given by Mr. D’Costa. I appended another item to it to ensure that no public funds would be invested in any company involved in, or associated with, this inhuman practice. Unfortunately it is widespread and the Israeli situation, with which I am familiar, was mentioned. Cynically, several million of these devices were dumped in Lebanon in the final days of the most recent conflict. Deputy O’Brien mentioned this point, which is true. Moreover, the Americans also are up to their ears in this practice in Iraq and Afghanistan. Consequently, this will not be the easiest of fights, as Deputy Michael D. Higgins pointed out from the perspective of his great knowledge of the workings of the United Nations. The passage of domestic legislation would be useful in this regard. I suggest, should any member wish to second it, take it up or assist in it, that members should pass this motion, which has been before the joint committee for the past year or 18 months.
I wish to ask a direct question of Mr. D’Costa. The work of Pax Christi is extremely valuable. It does its work in concert with Government agencies and this work is welcomed and appreciated by the Government. Does Pax Christi receive funding from central funds and if so, is it sufficient? If not, can members assist by using their good offices to try to secure funding for Pax Christi?

Chairman: We can come back to the wording of a statement afterwards. We will make a statement. In respect of passing a motion, apart from the fact that it is probably not necessary, it would require certain procedural time. What we would do in that situation is make a statement—

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: I am giving notice that I shall submit a formal motion for the next meeting. I intend to do this because it is my intention to proceed with this motion. I have no problem with issuing a statement from this meeting.

Chairman: The Deputy knows the procedures for the committee.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: That is what I am suggesting.

Chairman: He knows that. However, there is nothing stopping us issuing a statement which conveys everything wished for by the Deputy.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: I have just said that I have no difficulty with a statement but out of courtesy to the Chairman, I am telling him that I will submit a formal motion as well.

Chairman: Okay.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: This is not an “either or” situation. We can do both.

Chairman: That is fine.

Senator David Norris: This has been before the committee for a year.

Chairman: The Deputy is breaking the general consensus when he says that he will submit a motion.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: No, we are not.

Chairman: We are talking about a unanimous statement from the committee. If any other member wishes to subsequently put down a motion, he or she is entitled to do so.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: We can agree a statement. It is unfortunate that it is being presented like this. The reality is that we are all in agreement. Let us keep it like that in respect of issuing a statement today. However, anybody putting down a motion is perfectly entitled to do so. We can do it formally. I am long enough in the committee to know that. I have just told the Chairman out of courtesy that a motion will be submitted to him. Nobody is hiding anything. The motion will call on the Minister for Foreign Affairs to submit to the Government heads of legislation so that we are prepared.
I spoke of a twin track approach. At the beginning of these early meetings, there is no question of adjusting anything we are entitled to do formally. There is a consensus so let us respect it. I am required under the formal process to follow a process in respect of a motion. I have told the Chairman that I am happy to do that but I am not required to adjust my intention to propose a motion to a statement of anybody, including the Chairman.

Chairman: Let us be clear. The Deputy asked for a statement in the first instance in which we call on the Government to take action. We can do that today and finalise its wording. Senator Norris then proposed that it be turned into a motion.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: No, I proposed it as a motion and Senator Norris seconded it. I am telling the Chairman that I have no difficulty—

Chairman: No, the Deputy did not do so.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Yes, I did. I said that I would like to propose. Those were my words.

Chairman: Yes but—

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: I have told the Chairman that it can arise for the next meeting.

Chairman: The Deputy would have the response from everybody to that proposal, which was that everybody was agreed in respect of the proposal and we would go ahead. There is no difference or problem. First of all, we agree—

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Let us not make a problem.

Chairman: We will agree a statement today. All I was saying to Senator Norris was that we cannot go ahead with the motion today.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: I have said five times that I am submitting it for the next meeting.

Chairman: That is fine. We will agree a statement today.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: We will agree it. Obviously, we must work on it.

Chairman: Any member is entitled to put down a motion for the next or any subsequent meeting.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: That is true.

Senator David Norris: The Chairman is ill-advised to say that Deputy Higgins and I were breaking the consensus. That is not the case. We are simply agreeing and trying to give a focus to the very generally expressed sentiments. The only person who broke the consensus was the Chairman when he suggested that we were being divisive which we clearly were not. We are being helpful.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Absolutely, that was our intention.

Chairman: We will finalise the wording of it subsequently. At this stage, it is a matter of asking Mr. D’Costa to reply.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Senator Norris raised a question. The part of Mr. D’Costa’s submission where he spoke about Pax Christi possibly seeking assistance from Irish Aid in, for example, carrying out research on legal matters is a very practical suggestion and I am sure that it would have the support of all members.

Chairman: He is going to reply to the suggestions that were made.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: I think I know what he is going to reply to.

Mr. Tony D’Costa: At the United Nations General Assembly this year, the Foreign Minister of Austria raised the question of why the disarmament agenda has gone down. That is quite true in many countries. We are facing similar difficulties here because there is very little funding for the amount of work that is required. Many of my colleagues in other countries say that they cannot continue this work because they have families and children and, unfortunately, have abandoned this work. Global military expenditure is increasing. Last year, it was €1,024 billion. It went down a bit after the end of the Cold War but is increasing again. Even a fraction of that money can address the issues of global poverty and the millennium development goals.
We face similar difficulties because there is no budget line in respect of our kind of work. There are certain guidelines in respect to Irish Aid’s funding. It has to be “dacable” so it becomes difficult for us to access that funding. Not many organisations are doing this work because there is no funding. Much of the work is done quietly and includes a considerable amount of research and lobby work. There is no money available here for this kind of work. It will be a great support and help if we can get some support from our Government to do this work. At the same time, we work very closely with the Irish Government and have been doing so for many years so we have a very good relationship. However, there is no budget line where we can get any support.

Senator David Norris: How much money are we talking about?

Mr. Tony D’Costa: We are talking between about €50,000 and €60,000 per year.

Senator David Norris: That is very modest.

Chairman: We will write to the Minister and make the request. Has Mr. D’Costa any other points to make? It is not very difficult for him in that sense because everybody is totally in favour of what Pax Christi is doing and highly commends the work it has been and is doing. The Minister has been working fairly assiduously in this area.
Deputy Michael D. Higgins has recommended that, in the first instance, we send a statement to the Minister and that a motion can subsequently be considered. We want to ensure that one way or another, come May, in respect of whether one can get core agreement, and the Minister has played a big part in trying to achieve this, we must be ready to go ahead at that stage. Hence it is important that the heads of the Bill are ready and that one is able to proceed without necessarily upsetting the diplomacy of the work that the Minister might be doing at that time. That is a very appropriate suggestion which we will all support.
I thank Mr. D’Costa for appearing before the committee and for the work he has been doing. We had a fairly good exchange today which brought us back to the subject at a very appropriate time. It is encouraging to learn of the work that is being undertaken by Ireland within the Oslo process to secure a total ban on cluster munitions. I am sure everybody on the committee will join me in supporting the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, in his efforts to bring more countries within the Oslo process to ensure that cluster munitions are eradicated from man’s arsenal, which is already too destructive. It is quite clear that the committee fully supports the work of Pax Christi and that of the Minister. I again thank Mr. D’Costa for his informative presentation which will be helpful to us in our work.

The joint committee went into private session at 1 p.m. and adjourned at 1.40 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Thursday, 19 December 2007.