asked the Minister for the Environment the proposals, if any, he has to make a visit to the Sellafield nuclear complex in Great Britain with a view to satisfying himself that the management of the installation is in no way a threat to the environmental condition of the Irish Sea; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

While I have general responsibility for environmental matters, specific issues relating to the nuclear industry, including the Sellafield issue, are appropriate to my colleague the Minister for Energy. Accordingly, I have no proposals to visit the Sellafield plant at this time.

I am aware, however, that the Nuclear Energy Board visited the plant in December last and subsequently advised that, in view of obsolete design and shortcomings in the light of modern safety criteria, the Government should call for closure of the Calder Hall reactors and the Magnox reprocessing lines

A report published last year by the United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive following a safety audit of the Sellafield reprocessing plant states that it did not appear that the management of the plant has been in sufficient command of all the matters for which it was responsible and in possession of all relevant resources. The safety executive concluded that the potential for a serious incident exists and that it could not be quite satisfied that all the relevant hazards have been estimated and that protective systems preventing escalation are fully satisfactory. In these circumstances, the Government have pressed for the closure of the Sellafield plant as the only way to ensure the safety of our population.

At a meeting of the EC Environment Council on 21 May, I drew attention to Ireland's concerns about radioactive contamination which relate particularly to the proximity to our shores of a number of major nuclear installations in the United Kingdom. I pointed out that the Irish Government take a serious view of this matter and are pursuing it bilaterally and through relevant international bodies. At the same time, we maintain that at Community level, a Community Inspection Force should be established under Chapter III of the Euratom Treaty to determine independently whether installations within the Community are safe. At that meeting, I called for greater firmness in addressing the issue of Commission involvement in the licensing and supervision of nuclear installations and indicated that we will continue to pursue this fundamental point.

The closure of the Sellafield plant was called for by the Irish delegation at the meeting in Cardiff this week of the Commission of the Paris Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land Based Sources. Unfortunately, the motion did not receive widespread support from the participating countries. However, I understand that a further motion which we presented calling for the application of the best available technology in order to minimise and eliminate as soon as possible any pollution caused by radioactive discharges from all nuclear industries, including reprocessing plants, into the marine environment is likely to be ratified today. While the motion is not legally binding, its ratification would greatly increase the pressure to improve the technology in use at Sellafield. The Government will, of course, continue to press for closure of the plant as this, in our view, is the only real solution to the problems it poses.

Like you, Sir, I am conscious of the time and, with your permission, I wish to ask one supplementary. Will the Minister not agree that in view of the widespread concern in this country about the total incompetence with which the British authorities appear to be running Sellafield, and in view of the fact that this House has unanimously called for its closure, a visit by him as Minister for the Environment representing all the Irish people, would lend strength and publicity to this demand? In view of that position from which the Minister can only draw strength, would he not think it appropriate that he should make arrangements for such a visit in order to highlight the common position which we all share on this matter?

I am pleased to recognise the support that exists in this House, particularly since last December, for the closure of Sellafield. If I thought my going there would speed up the closure of that reprocessing plant I would go right away but I am not satisfied that it would. However, I take the Deputy's point and I will consider this further. The important point to be made here is that the safety executive report which concluded that the management at Sellafield was not up to scratch, also brought home to British Nuclear Fuels Limited that they have one year to meet the requirements of the Health and Safety Executive. We all agree it may not be possible to meet that deadline and, if not, we will redouble our efforts to have the Sellafield plant closed finally. I thank the Deputy and the other Members of the House who joined with us in making this a unanimous call for the closure of Sellafield.

That concludes Questions for today.

I was disappointed, but I understand the reason you disallowed my Private Notice Question to the Taoiseach about the inquiry being carried out by the DPP in relation to the rape case in Cavan. It is sad this House is seen not to be able to debate issues which are vitally important to the public as soon as possible after they occur. There is no other vehicle open to this House——

I am sorry, Deputy Barrett, but——

I respect the fact that you have disallowed my question——

I cannot allow you to make a statement on this matter at this time. There are other ways open to the Deputy.

I am aware of that. I ask the Taoiseach if he will consider giving a small amount of time to discuss this matter — tomorrow, early next week or even this evening.

The Deputy might raise this on the Order of Business.

Deputy Barrett intervened before I called the Order of Business. If Members permit me to deal with the Order of Business, then I will hear questions of this kind.

I thought this was the best time to raise it.