The Green Party will be pressing the Government on specifics relating to the OSPAR resolution on Sellafield and marine pollution when the Dail resumes in the autumn, its environment spokesman, Mr John Gormley TD, said.
Welcoming the decision on radioactive waste reduction, he said his party would be trying to determine what "historic levels" were, as itemised in the Sintra agreement, and what "close to zero" meant. However, the agreement was the first step in the right direction, and a vindication of his party's position on Sellafield, he said.
Referring to Labour Party criticism articulated yesterday by Mr Emmet Stagg, he said it would be "churlish of us not to welcome the outcome".
But Mr Gormley said that there was no room for complacency. "Let's hope that in hindsight we can say that the OSPAR resolution marked the beginning of the end for the nuclear reprocessing industry."
The "close-to-zero" date for radioactive discharges of 2020 was still a long way off, he said, and radioactive emissions from Sellafield would continue to lead to increased contamination of the Irish Sea, where levels were already outrageous.
Meanwhile, many environmental interests have united in paying tribute to the 15 European governments which signed the agreement, notably for "setting a new direction for nuclear management".
Substantial reductions in discharges must be made by the year 2000, and by 2020 radioactive concentrations must be close to zero, according to the Irish Greenpeace campaigner, Mr John Bowler. "Sellafield had planned to continue discharging eight million litres of nuclear waste a day into the sea for the next 20 years, but BNFL will now be forced to clean up and wake up to their environmental responsibilities."
The Irish environmental group, Voice, agreed it represented "the beginning of the end of nuclear processing". Its spokeswoman, Ms Iva Pocock, added: "It is now imperative that Ireland play a leading role in ensuring that the UK and France implement a plan of action to ensure that they can achieve the targets set."
According to the Green MEP, Ms Patricia McKenna, it "sent a clear signal to BNFL that its already uneconomical reprocessing business will have to end". As with her fellow MEP, Ms Nuala Ahern, she would have been happier if there was a more or less immediate end to discharges.
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) said it had already reduced discharges of principal radioactive substances to less than 1 per cent over the past 20 years. "Zero discharges are not technically possible from Sellafield, and we welcome the recognition in the OSPAR statement that technical feasibility and radiological impact should be taken into account.
"We further note that the objective distinguishes between environmental concentrations already present in the marine environment due to historic discharges and those from future discharges from plants like Sellafield."
The BNFL spokesman, Mr Bill Anderton, said: "Zero discharges are not an option for Sellafield, but close to zero, with the fact that you take into account the feasibility and with the fact that you take into the account the impact on man, yes, those are possible."
Earthwatch yesterday welcomed the OSPAR agreement, describing it as a landmark. However, a spokeswoman, Ms Sadhbh O'Neill, warned that the potential loophole created by the terms "subject to technical feasibility" and "radiological impacts" could create difficulties in implementing the decision. She added that the nuclear industry had already greeted these qualifications as an opportunity to haggle over the implications of the agreement.