Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

62. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence when he intends to bring forward proposals to abolish the triple-lock neutrality protection. [28123/24]

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is to ask the Minister for Defence if he intends to bring forward proposals to abolish the triple-lock neutrality protection.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On 30 April last, the Government approved the proposal to draft the general scheme of a Bill to govern overseas deployments into the future. Work on drafting those proposals is well under way. This involves, where required, further consultation with the Office of the Attorney General and across Departments and key stakeholders.

I will be reverting to the Government shortly with the general scheme of the Bill. Once approved by the Government, the scheme will be referred for pre-legislative scrutiny consideration by the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence to determine if pre-legislative scrutiny is required. As this legislation advances, there will be ample opportunity for Members of the Oireachtas to scrutinise and debate its contents within the Dáil and Seanad.

It is important to emphasise that any legislative proposals will remain fully consistent with the principles of the UN Charter and international law. Any modification to the triple lock will continue to require Government and Dáil approval for the dispatch of Defence Forces personnel to take part in peacekeeping and similar missions and will do nothing to change Ireland’s traditional position of military neutrality, which is characterised by Ireland's non-participation in any military alliance.

That has been our consistent position for a considerable time. Amending the triple lock in no way undermines our military neutrality. I take issue with the way the question was even tabled. I do not accept the assertion about "the triple-lock neutrality protection of our neutrality" because our neutrality has always been defined in terms of our decision not to join NATO or, indeed, be part of a European mutual defence pact, which we are not.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The triple-lock protection of our neutrality is the cornerstone of Irish foreign policy. That is a fact.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would dispute that.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is our independent foreign policy, a legacy of Ireland working for a nuclear non-proliferation, humanitarianism, contributing to the drafting of the convention of human rights and fundamental freedoms, peacekeeping and our proud record as our United Nations peacekeepers in Lebanon, Congo, Chad, South Sudan and elsewhere. Yet eight months ago, the Minister instructed officials to prepare legislation to remove that cornerstone without delay and did that with no mandate, having campaigned on this at the general election and agreeing to a programme for Government that would keep the triple lock. Even the chair of the consultative forum the Minister held last year put in her report that there was no public appetite for a change on our position of neutrality and no appetite to change the triple lock. I spoke to the Minister earlier at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence when he said that he hoped to bring draft legislation forward in the next two weeks.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can I counter that the triple lock is not the cornerstone of Irish foreign policy. As a member of the Fianna Fáil Party, I have knowledge of the historic role that Fianna Fáil Ministers played in establishing an independent foreign policy. In fact, Frank Aiken was the key first signatory of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and we have a very proud record on nuclear non-proliferation. That does not depend on the triple lock at all. As there is no connection, why do people keep saying these kinds of things when there is no basis in fact for them at all? Nuclear non-proliferation will continue after any amendment to the triple lock. Our great work on human rights internationally in multilateral forums will continue after any amendment to the triple lock. Our commitment to multilateralism and the UN Charter will continue after any amendment to the triple lock. Above all, one of the most defining manifestations of Irish foreign policy, namely, peacekeeping, will continue after an amendment to the triple lock and could be enhanced by amendment to the triple lock because we will no longer have to depend on a Security Council resolution to participate in peacekeeping missions in the future. I really would prefer a more honest approach.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you. We are out of time. I call Deputy Cronin.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would love if the Minister could be honest with the people and if he would put it to the people in the form of a referendum and to enshrine our neutrality in the Constitution. The Minister stood on a platform of protecting the triple lock in his last manifesto. Irish people are proud of our military neutrality. They are not embarrassed by some of the invited guests in the Minister’s consultative forum last summer. Irish people cherish our neutrality and the triple lock and we in Sinn Féin also cherish it. The consultative forum had no appetite to change our position on neutrality. There was no appetite to change the triple lock either. I was there for that debate which was held in Dublin Castle. It is bizarre that the Minister is trying to change it now. Why not put it to the people if he wants to remove the triple lock? It has not prevented us from engaging in any peace-keeping missions.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There has not been a peacekeeping mission approved by the Security Council of the United Nations since 2014. It is now 2024. The Security Council is paralysed. The idea that we would depend on Russia, China or the US to decide on whether Ireland should send troops to a peacekeeping mission, particularly given the role of like Russia, is completely outdated and absurd. That Russia would have a veto on whether Ireland would deploy troops to peace-keeping missions? That is where we are now. The world is changed. The Security Council is paralysed in how it may behave. Again, the Deputy has decided to equate the triple lock with neutrality. There is no question of changing our policy on military neutrality. We have been very clear on that. We are not joining any military alliance - we have no intention of that – and we are not part of any mutual defence pact. We do have to clarify the whole legislation in respect of having more than 12 people go to an evacuation zone, for example, to get our citizens out of a place like Afghanistan, Sudan or some other place where war breaks out, which is increasingly a feature of our need to intervene in given situations. We need far greater flexibility on that front.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I now call Deputy Stanton for Question No. 66.

Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Sorry, I had intended to introduce Question No. 63.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sorry, I was not aware. I will come back to Deputy Moynihan.