Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire
Cork South-Central · Sinn Féin · Ireland
“That is important and the Minister and I share that view, much as we disagree on how it is not right to get rid of the triple lock. We have made that very clear and we think there is scope to deploy on peacekeeping missions elsewhere.”
“As I probably will not get more questions and it is my last contribution before the recess, I wish to take the opportunity to thank the staff of this institution and the Ceann Comhairle's office, who serve us so well.”
“We have all probably been guilty of the offence of going over time at different stages, I am sure. Despite our disagreements in relation to the triple lock, I think the Minister and I agree that peacekeeping missions are important.”
“In the context of the previous question, I submitted another question that was ruled out of order, which is fair enough. I probably did not word my question as precisely as Deputy Gibney worded hers. I record my concern about legal representation in that regard. It is important to say that. This question relates to another welfare issue.”
“The Minister said that she is not pushing anybody to the courts. I am not a doctor and cannot make a clinical decision, but if people suffered negative health outcomes that they believe have a connection to their clinical exposure, and they have never taken a case, how precisely is the Government going to help them?”
“The Minister talks about the need to ensure that Defence Forces personnel have the ability to deploy internationally and are not prevented from participating in rescue missions. I have no problem at all with head No. 7. Actually, most of the legislation is fine. It is just head No.”
The complete record
Every one of 902 lines we hold for Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 19.
“Does he at least agree that it is not an ideal situation to see two different Garda stations being served by the same unit, and that it would be a good use of additional resources to ensure every station, including those in Carrigaline, Ballincollig, Bishopstown and Douglas, have a unit of their own, ensuring those big areas of population - busy areas with young populations - have a full-time unit monitoring crime in the area?”
“The Minister will be aware that in April there was a lot of concern in the Cork city area about the amalgamation of units across four Garda stations into two units, in Carrigaline and Douglas, and Bishopstown and Ballincollig. Subsequently, and after many years of campaigning on behalf of the people of Cork, with public representatives and Cork Chamber of Commerce and so on, I am glad to see for the first time in a long time a decent allocation of gardaí in Cork. I know the Minister is going to tell me it is the Garda Commissioner who decides where Garda resources go, but I know he was briefed on this when he visited Cork in April.”
“Related to a previous question, one of the considerations should be former Defence Forces personnel who, for various reasons, have low incomes and find it difficult to find accommodation. Obviously it should have the same standards the Minister has in mind. That should also be a consideration when we are looking at residential blocks. I am aware there will be a detailed assessment of this, but are the issues primarily with layout and modern building regulations or are there many of these buildings where the problem is the actual fabric and the question is whether the building is salvageable, for residential use or otherwise?”
“Across the board it is similar enough, with 80 being uninhabitable of 153, which is a little over half. The Minister has outlined a plan of operation. Has he a sense, maybe, of the timeline? Is it his view it is desirable for some of these buildings to come back into use as accommodation for people to live in? What is his sense of it?”
“Some of what exists on the various campuses dates from a different time in the context of what is expected in terms of accommodation, but also with respect to family arrangements and so on. It is nonetheless the case there is a housing crisis so it is easy to understand why people feel frustrated. We have members of the Defence Forces who are struggling to find accommodation, especially when they are based near urban centres. Certainly in Cork it can be difficult for people, particularly if they are recent enough recruits and maybe on the lower end of the pay scale, to find accommodation near Collins Barracks, Haulbowline or Lynch Camp in Fermoy. Right across the State it is frustrating to see places that are described as residential buildings in this condition. As I said, in Cork 84% of them are uninhabitable.”
“Our Defence Forces camps have a large number of residential buildings, many of which are either not in use or uninhabitable. About 85% of the buildings in Cork are uninhabitable, while the number across the State is 153, with 71 buildings unoccupied and 79 uninhabitable. I appreciate that the circumstances are a bit different from those when they were first built, but there is still scope for more residential capacity and there is a question about whether they can be brought back into use for residential or other uses.”
“Irish troops currently participate in three of 11 peacekeeping missions. There are plenty of other peacekeeping missions to participate in. The Tánaiste referenced the Fine Gael manifesto. Certainly the Fianna Fáil manifesto was silent. I had to go back and check whether there was reference to the triple lock or legislation of that kind in the Fine Gael manifesto. There was no such reference in the manifesto. I looked at it and there is no reference in the manifesto to removing the triple lock or legislation of any kind. The Tánaiste can look at it again if he has forgotten what was in it.”
“I will raise three points. I have made most of my primary arguments but I have three matters to clarify. I am not specifically addressing Deputy Clendennen, but there has been talk of misinformation. Some Government Deputies have tried to say that the issue of the triple lock has nothing to do with neutrality. The idea that the legislation that references how Irish troops are deployed outside the State as part of international forces has nothing to do with neutrality is quite a statement. It is a remarkable suggestion that it has nothing to do with neutrality. My second point relates to where we send Irish troops on peacekeeping missions. It is important that we find other peacekeeping missions. It is important in terms of our standing internationally and the development of our Defence Forces.”
“As regards the committee, a lot of the issues that were instanced by Government representatives as reasons to get rid of the triple lock are not prevented by the triple lock. Carrying out duties as military representatives, filling appointments or postings outside the State, and secondments to international organisations are not prevented by the triple lock. Conducting or participating in training is not prevented by the triple lock. Undertaking monitoring, observation or advisory duties is not prevented by the triple lock. Undertaking reconnaissance or fact-finding missions is not prevented by the triple lock. Participating in supporting duties, inspecting and evacuating stores, undertaking military close protection or undertaking humanitarian tasks - none of these are prevented by the triple lock.”
“The Swiss and the Austrians have constitutional protections in terms of neutrality so perhaps that is a conversation the Tánaiste wants to have. Instead of legislation governing the triple lock then perhaps the Tánaiste wants to have a conversation about us looking at constitutional protection for neutrality. Let us have that conversation. I suspect that is not what is in the Tánaiste's mind. If the Tánaiste is concerned about sovereignty I suggest that the Government puts this proposition to the people, given there have been two referendums in which the Irish people were assured that the triple lock would remain in place and that it was attached in protocols to European treaties. If the Tánaiste is so confident on the issue of sovereignty then I suggest he puts it to the people.”
“It is not the case that there is a higher bar for Irish participation in UN peacekeeping missions. The requirement that we have put as a sovereign State is that Irish troops participate in UN missions. It is not the case that there are UN missions, which have international respect and that standard of law, that Irish troops cannot participate in. The UNIFIL mission will end. There will no longer be a UN presence. If there is anything to follow, and I doubt there will be, it will happen outside a UN mandate.”
“I will return to some of the things that we discussed in the committee but I might first respond on the issue of UNIFIL and what this means in terms of the UN. I wish to say clearly that I regret very much the decisions that have been taken in relation to UNIFIL. A lot of work would have gone on behind the scenes to ensure there was not a cliff edge. This was important so that the least worst outcome was avoided but it is still a bad outcome. It is a bad outcome for the regions and a bad outcome for the Irish Defence Forces. However, while it has not been said explicitly, the implication is sometimes carried by Government statements that there is a higher bar for Irish participation in UN peacekeeping missions, or something like that. Obviously that is not the case. There is no UNIFIL after the end of 2027. It ceases to exist.”
“One of the issues I have raised in the past - the Minister has talked about service level commitment schemes for certain ranks - relates to one of the roles that are most difficult to obtain and retain for the Defence Forces, namely, artificers. They are hugely in demand in the private sector. That needs to be looked at in the scheme.”
“On that, and it partially relates to my first question, it is important after the budget that the Department would publish a document outlining where we now stand with the revised capital development plan and to mark that against the report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. That would be a useful document if it were possible to achieve. One of the areas in which the gap between the current reality and the ambition is most stark is in our naval capacity. The Naval Service is still in a very under-resourced state. The manner in which it has conducted itself as regards some of the issues that have arisen has been exemplary but we still have the embarrassing situation where boats have been put to sea without a functioning main gun. That is primarily due to lack of personnel and expertise.”
“The Defence Forces have dealt with this appropriately but ensuring they have the capacity to continue doing so as these threats potentially increase is going to be crucially important. There is also the issue of the full radar picture which needs to be addressed from a capital funding point of view.”
“Addressing this in a way that is sustainable will require some current spending as well as capital spending and I might come back to that in my last contribution. The threats that are potentially faced are multiple. There are obviously the traditional issues that the Defence Forces faced in ensuring the protection of Irish waters in a fishing and general sort of sense but also as regards the issue of the undersea cables. I understand more than 95% of international data and voice transfers are routed through undersea fibre-optic cables. When you combine that with Ireland's particular situation in terms of the technology industry and the clustering of the tech businesses in Ireland, it makes Ireland particularly vulnerable. There is also the issue of an increasing number of shadow ships and so on coming into Irish waters.”
“The area of maritime security is one of the most salient to us as an island nation. If we are talking about increasing defence expenditure, we must surely ensure that our seas are safeguarded against traditional threats but also against new and expanding threats such as threats to undersea cables, hybrid threats and so on. A maritime security strategy is obviously something that is very timely but it is vitally important that the resources will follow it. Will the Tánaiste outline the timescale in question regarding the development of the security strategy and the funding commitments that will follow?”
“That is to be done by 2027. Are we on schedule for the officer training centre, incorporating some of the existing infrastructure, by 2027? Have the communication information services workshop and the new garaging facilities, which were meant to have been completed by this stage, in fact been completed?”
“To come back to some of the brass tacks in terms of the training objectives outlined in the report of the Commission on the Defence Forces, there was one objective for the future and another that I hope has been progressed a bit. Will the Tánaiste give an update on it? It was recommended that a new communication information workshop facility at the training centre would commence in 2024. The cadet school headquarters was to be completed in 2023. Will the Tánaiste confirm that those targets set out in the commission's report have been achieved and whether we are currently on schedule? It is proposed by 2027 to have the establishment of an officer training centre comprising the existing cadet school and a new officer candidate school, which would conduct potential late-entry officer courses and Reserve officer courses every two years.”
“The consensus is that the current location is in a state of disrepair and not fit for purpose. That is a challenge. There is a need to address the training infrastructure for new recruits at the other key locations of the Defence Forces training college, including locations at the Curragh and the Glen of Imaal, but also at Baldonnel and Haulbowline. I will come back to the issues relating to cadets.”
“I thank the Tánaiste. For the record, I appreciate there are constraints, given the window we are in, in terms of what the Tánaiste can tell me. What he will tell me is another question, maybe. In general, I put on record that we support increasing defence expenditure provided it is done in a wise and rational way. It is vitally important that we are investing in the areas of most relevance to us as an island nation, and also in building the Defence Forces on a stable foundation through training, equipment and ensuring that, with the recruits we are bringing in, we are able to arrest the slide in establishment numbers in the Defence Forces. We also need to ensure the equipment and the environment in which recruits are trained are to the highest standard. The issues relating to Gormanston have been well publicised.”
“I understand also that the technical team, led by Maroš Šefčovič, was in Washington this week for a potential meeting with Secretary Lutnick, but certainly with senior officials in the US departments. Is it possible to get an update on the outcome of that meeting that has been relayed to the Irish Government?”
“Our businesses domestically have some of the highest energy costs in Europe. From small to medium to big businesses, it is a huge drag on their potential to grow and to expand into potential new markets. I have two particular questions. I will mention one market. While it is one of our traditional markets, an important question for Britain is the potential for an SPS agreement. Does the Minister of State have an update on that? More particularly, on the US, I understand the Tánaiste was due to meet the US ambassador yesterday. What was the outcome of those discussions? Is there any further update from those discussions on the US Administration's position?”
“I return to the issue of vulnerabilities. It may be the case that the issue of new tariffs has come onto the table since the election of President Trump for the second time. It has returned to the agenda. Sinn Féin and others in the Opposition have made the case for many years that, even aside from tariffs, Ireland is vulnerable to a change in the economic climate because of the economic model we have. It has failed to diversify into new markets, and we are now talking about different trade agreements. The EU already has many free trade agreements in areas where we have a limited economic profile, including south-east Asia, southern Africa and South America. There are areas where there is huge potential for further growth. There is also our failure to build up our indigenous economy and to properly support that.”
“In addition, we need to ensure that the potential for distortions between North and South are avoided and there is good co-ordination with the Executive in that regard.”
“Aviation is also an area where there is a huge Irish profile and significant impacts for the industry here. We need to diversify the markets we are trading with, with a view to future trade missions. While the US, Britain and Europe will always be our main trading partners for reasons of language, culture and so on, there is potential to deepen trade with countries such as Mexico, south-east Asia and other emerging markets. What the Government has been talking about is not ambitious enough. For businesses, the Government needs to prepare export facilitation supports, language supports and energy supports and examine export credit insurance. We need to invest in our infrastructure, where there is a huge gap.”
“We need to: ensure Irish interests in our key sectors are considered at the heart of the European Commission; diversify our trade because we are too reliant on too few markets; develop support schemes for businesses most affected; avoid tariff distortions between North and South; and, crucially, invest in infrastructure. To expand on using our voice at European level, we need to ensure that any European negotiating policy has a clear eye to what Ireland’s greatest areas of exposure are. It appears as if whiskey and aviation are still on the EU retaliatory list. That is a concern. Whiskey has been hit time and again. It is an industry that has grown considerably in recent years, and potentially faces immediate risks in the event of further increases in tariffs.”
“Our energy, transport, water and housing infrastructure is far behind where it should be. We are in a housing crisis of historic proportions and have renewable energy companies redirecting resources to other markets because we are so slow to get off the mark. If tariffs come to pass and begin to bite, we will regret the failure of successive Irish Governments to address those issues. The Government urgently needs to step up preparations for potential tariffs. The date of 1 August is two weeks away. The approach of the Government should include five key elements.”
“While deadlines have been postponed in the past, there is no guarantee this will always be the case. The focus has to be on progress and achieving a deal to avoid the worst excesses of the potential of tariffs. Trade wars are bad for everyone. I do not believe they are in the interest of America or Europe, and the only way to win a trade war is to not be in one. We hope that cooler heads will prevail, but we must also have a clear eye. It may not come to pass, but we need to ensure we are prepared. Sinn Féin has warned for some time that the policies of successive Governments have left Ireland uniquely vulnerable to a change in the economic climate and to tariffs. That is due to Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil’s failure to invest in infrastructure, excessive reliance on tax incentives and failure to build up our indigenous industry.”
“Yet again this week, we have seen statements by US President Donald Trump in relation to bruising and punishing tariffs on European economies and, by extension, Ireland. The debate around tariffs has gone back and forth. Deadlines have been postponed, not met. However, we would be foolish to dismiss the risks to Ireland. For workers in the sectors most at risk, it is not an exaggeration to say that they hear such headlines and wonder about the future of their jobs, livelihoods and futures. They are in sectors such as dairy, agrifood, drinks, aviation, life sciences, medtech, pharma, tech, financial services and many more that have a large exposure to the US. In my own county of Cork, tens of thousands of people are employed in life sciences, medtech and pharma.”
“There are differences of opinion in terms of approach, but I urge the Minister to take this on as a key priority because what is happening is absolutely shocking.”
“-----but I am a bit distracted, to be totally honest. I want to address the Minister because I am appealing to her. The attitudes that are being encountered are so dismissive. It is not as if members of the medical profession, or a large section of the profession, were unaware or that this is a new disease or condition. It was not as if there was no knowledge of the best kind of treatment. The Minister has spoken forcefully in the past about us exporting issues relating to women's health. That is what is happening here. I know of instances where women have struggled to get the money they have expended back. That has been a difficulty. The attitude that is there needs to be addressed but there is also a systemic issue. What these women are facing is simply not good enough.”
“I, too, was at the same meeting as Deputy Gould. I have been going to political meetings since I was 17 or 18 years of age and I have never left a meeting more shook than I was by that meeting. Some of the stories would make your blood boil and some would break your heart, to hear the accounts of the pain and on top of the pain and suffering, the grief in some instances that some of the women were suffering. The attitude of medical professionals towards them was in some instances dismissive, in others careless and in some others frankly heartless and completely lacking in compassion. They totally dismissed what these women were going through. The Minister and I disagree on a great deal. It seems we disagree on the policy approach. Surely she must accept that something is fundamentally wrong. I apologise.”
“When these functions were still with the Department of enterprise, the Minister of State at the time, Deputy Calleary, responded to a question on export credit insurance and whether there was a need for a State-backed scheme. Ireland is unusual in not having this for historical reasons. At the time, the position was that the private market was covering enough. The situation has changed a bit in the past three or four years. What is the Government's position on such insurance?”
“I will raise two more issues, the first of which I have raised in briefings with the Tánaiste's officials and, in fairness, they are well aware of the importance of it. From an Irish point of view, the potential for distortions between North and South is a very particular risk that we face. It is not in anyone's interest. We could have a seesaw-type effect that might favour one side of the Border at another stage but, ultimately, it would create a distortion because that could flip. Many products travel across the Border multiple times before they hit the shop shelves. The other issue is one on which to proceed with caution and with our eyes wide open because of the fraught history relating to it.”
“The examination of potential supports for individual businesses is needed, whether it is export facilitation or whatever. Where is that at?”
“That is very important. A related but not identical by any means sector is life sciences and orthopaedics. This is another sector in which Ireland has a very significant footprint and which, unlike pharmaceuticals, is already affected by the 10% in that area. I would ask whether that has had an impact as of yet. I will briefly flag two sectors which, because they involve items that are on the shelf, do not have the same lead-in and are probably particularly vulnerable in the short run, that is, agrifood and, in particular, dairy products, and drink, including whiskey. They are very vulnerable sectors as well to any potential impacts. In terms of the reciprocal tariffs, some progress has been made on the dairy side but perhaps less so on the whiskey side. Preparation on this needs to step up.”
“Another week has brought another dramatic statement from President Trump. It is hard to interpret what will happen with his announcement of potential 200% tariffs on pharmaceuticals. We can all guess and gauge how accurate it is. People who work in pharmaceutical companies, life sciences and all these sectors are concerned. The direction of travel is in a particular direction. It is vital that we are alive to it and respond to it. What is the Government's response in preparation for the potential impact of tariffs and retaliatory measures?”
“Some of this is about political will and involves contacting the organisation, working through whatever issues exist and ensuring they are worked through quickly. That must happen in the context of the appeal because these are vitally important initiatives. I urge the Tánaiste to work through that with the Department of justice. I ask the Tánaiste to respond to the extraordinary announcement last night by the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, in respect of sanctions on the UN special rapporteur, Francesca Albanese. That kind of direct attack on a UN special rapporteur is appalling.”
“I would nonetheless make the point that the rhetoric employed by her and her office at that early juncture gave political cover to the Israeli Government and the US to undermine the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine, UNRWA, and put in place their own position. I welcome the fact we will be attending the emergency meeting because it is important to work with other countries. I will ask the Tánaiste to respond to two final points. I know the granting of visas is strictly a competency of the Department of justice but they are processed through the Department of foreign affairs. It is disappointing that the visas for the representatives of the Lajee Cultural Center and GAA Palestine have not been processed.”
“It is appalling. That accounts for about 80% of the people who have been killed in recent weeks. I regret to say that some cover was given to the Israeli Government by Kaja Kallas a number of months ago by her attitude towards UNRWA, which was reprehensible.”
“I welcome that. I thank the Department and the Tánaiste for ensuring that is the case. It is important. The approach required is to ensure Ireland is using its voice collaboratively with countries internationally and individually. The Tánaiste has articulated that in the past. There are far more actions domestically that we could take undoubtedly, and we have had many discussions on that, but the international component is vital. The Tánaiste made the point in relation to the occupied territories legislation. Many countries attending that event would be sympathetic to potentially advancing legislation of this kind that might expand the potential impact of that type of legislative approach. One of the biggest issues at the moment, although far from the only one, is the killing of people who are waiting for humanitarian aid.”
“An emergency meeting next week in Bogotá has been called by the Republic of Colombia and the Republic of South Africa. It will be attended by a variety of countries concerned at the current situation and the breaches of human rights. They include Spain, Portugal, Uruguay and many others. It has been called in response to the escalating violations of international law in the occupied Palestinian territory. Will the Irish Government be represented?”
“Can the Tánaiste comment on that and whether the Irish Government has raised its concerns with the governments potentially providing such support?”
“That point of awareness is very important here and at European level. We had discussions post-European Council recently. At a European level it does not seem to me that this is getting the attention it ought to either. I might ask that at future European discussions, Ireland makes sure this will appear on the agenda. I appreciate that lots of conflicts are being discussed there, including within Europe, but is important that it reaches that level. I note, and the Tánaiste mentioned it, that a significant part of this conflict seems to be sustained by external actors both through funding and supplying arms. A particular piece in the New York Times recently referred to the support being received by the Rapid Support Forces.”
“Sudan is a very significant country in the region with a large population of about 50 million. It is in that context that the scale of what is being faced is to be recognised. Different reports suggest that the number of people displaced is between 9 and 12 million, with some 24.6 million facing acute hunger. That is almost half the population. There are significant ramifications for the surrounding countries. I know many refugees have fled Sudan for Egypt, among other countries, and the conflict seems to be escalating. I welcome the commitment to aid. I might ask if the recent cutbacks in USAID have had any impact on projects in Sudan and support for them. I welcome the positions taken by the Government internationally. Has any discussion taken place on an arms embargo with regard to the conflict?”
“I wish to highlight that there is a defence committee meeting this morning, so I will take the Priority Questions and then I will have to depart to attend that. On my first question, the Tánaiste and I had a brief exchange last week in the committee regarding an area of huge human suffering and human rights infringements. Many people are facing hunger and displacement in Sudan, an area that probably does not get the attention it ought to. I invite the Tánaiste's comment with regard to the Government's position on that situation.”
“I have two quick questions the Minister of State might take together. The clauses of the EU-Israel association agreement are clear. Israel is in breach of clause 2, as far as I am concerned. This has demonstrated the difficulty, where international agreements are breached, to bring that to a conclusion. Is the Minister of State concerned, with regard to future potential agreements like Mercosur, for example, where commitments are given, that enacting and enforcing provisions to ensure compliance with the rules might be difficult to achieve in practice? Second, will the Government be represented at the ministerial conference in Bogotá next Thursday relating to the two-state solution and international law?”
“I will take the opportunity. One of the primary issues I raised was the tariffs. The picture is somewhat uncertain but I ask the Minister of State to give us an update in relation to the feedback the Irish Government is getting on the discussions with the Commission. I am interested not so much in the areas that are most vulnerable because several areas are thus. I am more interested in some of the areas that are most immediately vulnerable, namely agrifood and drink. As they are on the shelf, the impact could be quite sudden in relation to those particular products.”
“That needs to be a priority for the Irish Government. We need to use our voice at European level in defence of key Irish sectors, such as pharmaceuticals and life sciences but also some of the areas that would be most quickly affected, such as food and drink like whiskey and dairy products. They need to be right at the heart of the approach, as does preparation for supports. We have heard very little from the Government about what it is going to do to support businesses on the ground if this comes to pass. Finally, infrastructure is one of the key things businesses up and down the country are highlighting with regard to the fact that the opportunity was not taken. Our infrastructure is too poor in terms of energy, transport, healthcare and housing, and that is one of the key reasons we are uniquely vulnerable.”