asked the Minister for Transport if he is aware that illegal dumping at sea is being carried on in or near Irish territorial waters; the arrangements that have been made to monitor such dumping; and if any new arrangements have been entered into with other countries to guarantee against a dumping mishap.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I am not aware of any illegal dumping at sea being carried out in or near Irish territorial waters and no report of any such dumping has been made to me by the Department of Defence, who have arranged that any suspected illegal dumping observed by the Naval Service will be brought to notice.

The Dumping at Sea Act, 1981, which came into full operation on 21 September 1981, gives legislative effect to the Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft 1972 (the Oslo Convention) and the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Matter (the London Convention). These conventions prohibit the dumping at sea of certain specified highly toxic substances and strictly control the dumping at sea of any other substance or material.

I am hopeful that it will be possible to ratify both conventions before the end of 1981, and this will strengthen our co-operation with the other contracting parties in controlling dumping at sea.

Would the Minister inform the House the number of licences granted by the Department for dumping at sea and enrolled on the register in the Department?

(Cavan-Monaghan): I am informed that no licences have been issued for any significant or serious dumping at sea. I am told the licences issued cover harmless and insignificant dumping at sea.

Is the Minister aware that 12,500 tons of British and Belgian nuclear waste was dumped off our south coast in the last few months?

(Cavan-Monaghan): It follows from my reply that I am not. I hardly think if dumping of that size and seriousness took place it would not have been noticed by the Naval Service and that my Department would not have been notified.

Would the Minister tell the House the total tonnage of nuclear waste dumped off the south coast to date?

(Cavan-Monaghan): That is a separate question and if the Deputy puts down a question I will answer it.

I will inform the Minister: it is 130,000 tons to date. Is the Minister aware of the six ships that regularly carry Japanese nuclear waste to the Windscale plant up and down the Irish Sea? What monitoring of those ships is taking place?

(Cavan-Monaghan): The agent for monitoring any suspected dumping at sea is the Naval Service. As I said, I am not aware of any illegal dumping at sea.

Question No. 16.

A further supplementary, please.

I am being very lenient. I have already allowed four supplementaries.

Would you agree that this question is of considerable public importance — that ships are plying the Irish Sea carrying high toxic nuclear waste to the Windscale plant——

I will allow one final supplementary.

Is the Minister aware that plutonium nitrate is being ferried from the Scottish coast for reprocessing in the Windscale plant on a regular basis and that some of the Scottish harbour authorities are refusing this ship entry, even in an emergency? Still that ship can ply within five miles of the Irish coast. What does the Minister propose doing to safeguard the health of the Irish people?

(Cavan-Monaghan): These are specific instances and are not covered by the Deputy's question. If the Deputy puts down a question I will answer them. The Deputy has a duty to give this information to my Department and it will be followed up.

I am amazed at the Minister's lack of information about this very important area. What action is he going to take to ensure that this dumping will not continue? He should take the necessary steps to ensure that we are given the information we are looking for. Apparently there is dumping off our coast but he does not appear to know anything about it. What is he going to do?

(Cavan-Monaghan): I want to put the record right. I am not saying the Department do not have the information. I am replying within the terms of the question. Perhaps I had better read it: “Mr. Flynn asked the Minister for Transport if he is aware that illegal dumping at sea is being carried on in or near Irish territorial waters...” I said no, but that arrangements have been made to monitor such dumping. I told him the Naval Service monitor the situation and that, if any new arrangements have been entered into with other countries to guarantee against a dumping mishap——

On a point of order——

This has opened up a whole new debate and I cannot allow it to continue. The Deputy can raise the matter on another occasion.

The Minister should at least refer accurately to the second part of my question.

It is that part of the question which he intends to ignore because he is not doing anything about it.

Will the Minister tell the House about the disaster plan he has to guard against a mishap? That is part of the question and the Minister did not answer it.

(Cavan-Monaghan): It is not.

It is. The last sentence asks the Minister what arrangements he has to guarantee against a major disaster in the Irish Sea. What disaster plan has the Minister worked out with the Naval Services, or whoever, to guarantee our people that they will not be the victims of a nuclear waste fallout?

(Cavan-Monaghan): I had better read the question again.

The Minister must move to the next question.

The Minister does not have a plan.

It will be too late talking about this if one of those ships goes down in the Irish Sea.