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 4 of 19.
“I ask the Irish Government whether it considers that the national council, the legislative council, of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is considered the legitimate representatives of the Sahrawi people. Does the Government recognise that?”
“I appreciate that and appreciate the sentiment, and I believe that where we can work together we should do so. As regards people feeling that progress is not fast enough, there is no progress. There is no process, in truth. The only process that exists is the peacekeeping mission that, in theory, is to facilitate a referendum but there is no sign of that. Ultimately, the Moroccan Government believes that it has got away with this, that it has ultimately succeeded in its objective, that it has occupied the territory and that that will not be in any way affected. I believe, therefore, that the Irish Government and like-minded governments need to begin to escalate this issue. The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is a full member of the African Union. It is recognised by dozens of countries around the world.”
“I appreciate that the Irish Government has taken the right position on many resolutions but it may need to take a more robust position because the positions of other governments are beginning to slide away from that principle of self-determination. That needs to be challenged by the Irish Government.”
“The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is 50 years old now. To put on record the context here, it is currently occupied by the Kingdom of Morocco. MINURSO was set up in order to safeguard and facilitate a referendum. That was in 1991. There has been no referendum. Discussions in the early and late 2000s about a referendum delivered no referendum. The fundamental principle here is that of self-determination but the Sahrawi people, the vast bulk of whom are in exile, with the bulk of the population living in refugee camps in southern Algeria, have been denied that right to self-determination for decades, for generations.”
“From one occupied territory to another, albeit one that probably has received less attention, maybe one of the least discussed occupations in the world. It certainly does not get enough attention. I refer to the issue of Western Sahara, or the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. It is considered to be a non-self-governing territory but it is largely occupied by the Kingdom of Morocco. The Irish Government needs to continue to take a firm position in defence of international law on this. Unfortunately, many other countries are moving away from that.”
“I absolutely recognise that if the European Union could act in concert in a way that delivers actual results and puts pressure on the Israeli Government, I would welcome it, but clearly it has taken three or four years for the Union to move an inch. There is legislation there and no reason not to enact it. The arguments in relation to services are paper thin. It is clear that the Spanish have been able to move on this. Will the Minister give a commitment that we will be debating the legislation on Second Stage before the recess?”
“I agree with that last point. However, my interpretation of the Minister's interview was different from what she is saying. I do not think we were going to hear anything about legislation in the next couple of weeks. It seems to me that what we have seen may have lit a fire under the Government, as has often been the case and as was the case in the first place when manifesto commitments were given for the occupied territories Bill. If that is the case, it entirely justifies the actions of people who are taking up initiatives such as the Global Sumud Flotilla. They highlight these issues and make it clear that governments have to act. Activists out there are having to take initiatives such as that to force governments to act.”
“The programme for Government and the Department of foreign affairs strategy to 2028 include references to the enactment of the occupied Palestinian territories legislation by 2028. This year's strategy talks about progressing the occupied territories Bill by 2029. The Government is putting it back by a year and talking about progressing rather than enacting. There seems to be constant watering down. The Minister is talking about a couple of weeks, but I am not sure she would have said that at the start of this week if we had not seen those scenes.”
“I will use the phrase "the occupied territories Bill" as shorthand. I appreciate the Government's Bill has a different title, but that is what it is commonly understood as. The Minister's statements are difficult to reconcile. She has come here and said we will have something in a couple of weeks. What I interpreted from her interview with Virgin Media during the week was that we will see what happens at a European level and then might act. There have been contradictory statements over the course of the past couple of years. If you look at it in terms of a timeline, there were commitments in parties' manifestos before the general election to pass the occupied territories Bill. There was no qualification or equivocation about trade or services.”
“The scenes in the last few days – I have a further question on the Global Sumud Flotilla, so we can perhaps discuss that further – underline the fact that the international community has allowed Israel to behave with absolute impunity. It continues to act accordingly. It continues to breach all the international laws dictating what is right and wrong. There have to be consequences. The occupied territories Bill needs to be a part of that, as far as I am concerned.”
“At the same time that the Government is saying that the triple lock has nothing to do with our neutrality, it is riding roughshod over neutrality by facilitating flights over Ireland and through Shannon Airport with weaponry, personnel and so on. The reality is that the Irish people take a lot of pride in neutrality but they also see that it makes sense for Ireland. Ireland is never going to be a major military power. The people know the best way we can exert influence is through standing up for international law and calling out breaches, whether by friend or foe, and whether we have a good relationship or a bad relationship with the country in question. The Government is failing on that count and it should stop itself from going further down this road by getting rid of the triple lock neutrality protection.”
“The triple lock does not prevent us from showing adequate respect to the men and women in our Defence Forces. It does mean that when Irishmen and Irishwomen serve as a part of a peacekeeping mission, they do so under a UN flag. They have done so with pride and distinction for generations. We ought to be proud of them. In recent weeks and months, they have faced enormous risks as they hold their position in Lebanon, which is being attacked by an Israeli Government that is hell-bent on occupying south Lebanon and expanding into more of it. This is an Israeli Government backed to the hilt by the United States. For a generation now, the Government has facilitated the US military's expansion, attacks and illegal wars. There was an under-reporting of 250 flights over Ireland last year. Some €20 million in dual-use licences have been handed out.”
“The reality is that the triple lock does not prevent any of those things. It does not prevent the Defence Forces participating in humanitarian evacuation, the rescue of civilians, training, drug interdictions or any of those things, nor does it prevent us from investing in our Defence Forces. As far as I am concerned, Ireland should be strong on defence and neutrality. This Government is neither. Allowances agreed with the Defence Forces have been unpaid. Several personnel are down by thousands of euro. Overtime is not being recorded properly, and, therefore, personnel are not getting the overtime they ought to be getting. That is the reality of the Government's relationship with the Defence Forces. They have been neglected and more people have left than joined in recent years.”
“He and the Minister of State and their Government are the ones talking about deploying Irish personnel. We hope they will be deployed on peacekeeping missions, but it is very likely that they will go on other kinds of deployments outside international law and without a UN mandate. That is what this is about. People talk about the Security Council. There is an awful lot of talk of vetoes and so on. The reality is more complex. At the end of the day, it is not the case that there is going to be some high-minded UN-led missions that we are not going to be on. The mission would not proceed otherwise. There is no UN peacekeeping mission without a UN mandate. There are a lot of other myths. People talk about Irish citizens at risk, humanitarian evacuations, drug interdictions and different things.”
“We get some daft talking points in this place, but that is right up there. I encourage the civil servants to drop that point. It makes absolutely no sense. The fact is that the triple lock is central to neutrality. The Taoiseach has said so numerous times. It is a cornerstone of our foreign policy. Those are his words. The Government sometimes in this debate likes to cast itself as far-seeing and wise, and suggests that those of us on this side of the House do not see the bigger picture. As far as I am concerned, what the Government is doing is reckless, foolish, careless and short-sighted. Ultimately, it will significantly diminish Ireland's place in the world. I hear the Taoiseach talking about the importance of multilateralism, international law and so on, at the very same time that he is undermining the UN.”
“There were a couple of lines in the Minister of State's speech that jumped out, but there was one in particular. The Minister of State said "the Private Members' motion today misrepresents both as it links the proposed reform of the triple lock with Ireland's policy of neutrality". I have heard that previously. The Minister of State is saying that it is unreasonable to link changes to the Defence Acts, which govern the deployment of Irish personnel as part of an international force, with neutrality. The suggestion is that it is somehow an unreasonable connection. The Government is amending the Defence Acts to allow a greater set of circumstances in which Irish personnel could be deployed as part of an international force and suggests somehow that this has nothing to do with neutrality.”
“The proposals to decriminalise medical practitioners who knowingly and willfully act illegally beyond the scope of the Act is an issue that we find problematic and troubling. Unfortunately, we have a long and troubling history in this country of scandals in women's healthcare right up to recent years. The law needs to be clear and there should not be carte blanche . The provisions in this legislation could have significant unforeseen and unintended consequences. We believe there is scope and a need for constructive engagement to ensure thoughtful legislation to address the issues and in particular to ending the three-day wait, which is an unnecessary obstacle to services.”
“It is undoubtedly the case that in large parts of the country women are not in a position to access abortion services. That clearly needs to be addressed. The three-day wait period, which Sinn Féin did not ever support, creates an unnecessary obstacle. It puts women in difficult situations, in particular women from minority backgrounds, or perhaps most of all those who are in a coercive control relationship, who may experience domestic abuse. Therefore, accessing any appointment is a challenge, not to mention having to access frequent appointments or multiple appointments. Our priority is access to services, which were voted for and endorsed by the people, and too many barriers currently remain. Tá gá é sin a réiteach.”
“I welcome the opportunity to have this debate. It seems clear to me that while the referendum and the legislation that followed it was a watershed moment, it does not represent the end of the discussion by any manner or means. It also seems clear to me that further reform is needed - reform that is evidence-based, thoughtful and compassionate - that will deliver better, less stigmatising access to abortion for women who need it for what it is, that is, healthcare. Sinn Féin supports removing the three-day wait period and replacing it with a right-to-reflection period. I welcome the opportunity to debate the shortcomings that exist in abortion services in Ireland, of which there are many. My colleagues have mentioned the postcode lottery.”
“More than 6,000 personnel are waiting to be paid €3.7 million under claims under local bargaining agreements. Those are agreements already made, reached and owed. The Department of Defence and the Defence Forces are backing the personnel in relation to this. Some senior technicians are owed up to €5,000 each. About 6,000 personnel are down money because the Department of public expenditure has refused to honour agreements that are already made. In the same vein and out of respect for the Defence Forces, will the Minister of State raise the need to release those funds with the Department of public expenditure?”
“How are we going to ensure that overtime is properly paid? If people are going to leave their families and their responsibilities at home, and be on campus for 24 hours or more, they deserve to properly compensated. They deserve that respect. That is what they would get in other jobs. They recognise that this is not the same as any other job. Of course there will be extenuating circumstances. However, there has to be a definition for what is appropriate overtime and how that is paid. Those issues in terms of on-campus are easy fixes. None of them are very expensive. I also want to briefly raise an issue that has come out of the PDFORRA conference. We wish the delegates the best in their deliberations and I am looking forward to attending later this evening.”
“The Minister of State will be aware that the Defences Forces are a significant part of the life of Cork city. I believe it is similar in his own county. Many personnel are stationed in Haulbowline, Collins Barracks and even in Kilworth in Liam Lynch camp. When I talk to people in the Defence Forces, they see a huge discrepancy and a gap between the kind of ambition that the Minister talks about and the manner in which the Defence Forces operate. They say the same that I have said, that the men and women of the Defence Forces are the greatest asset the Defence Forces have. They see a huge gap between that rhetoric and the reality on the ground. There are some positive elements in the Minister of State's response but it still does not really nail down that key issue. When are we going to get a clear definition of the working day?”
“This is leading to Defence Forces personnel not feeling valued. They are working in challenging circumstances, with very lengthy periods of work and lengthy and onerous periods of duty. If they are not shown the respect they ought to be in ensuring this is properly compensated, this will contribute to the recruitment and retention crisis that continues in the Defence Forces.”
“This is ultimately leading to Defence Forces personnel not getting enough payment for the work they are doing. They are being underpaid for their overtime. There are also very simple things that could be resolved in respect of when people are in barracks and on rest periods. Basic things such as gym equipment, TV subscriptions and Wi-Fi are meant to be in place in all of these 24-hour duty locations. They are simple things that the Government could easily resolve at very limited cost. These items need to be addressed. There has been some progress on the implementation of the working time directive, but until the working day is defined, until we get to grips with that, and the Government has been dealing with it for over three years, we are still going to have issues of people being underpaid and their overtime not being recognised.”
“The central point of that is that the Irish Government is refusing still to define what the working day is and what it means in terms of hours and duties. It keeps telling us this is complex but it has been dealing with it for years. If you refuse to define what the working day is, that has obvious implications for ensuring that overtime is counted, recorded and paid. We can go through the findings of the European social committee in relation to this, which found against the Irish Government. There are serious issues in respect of rest periods, ensuring that men and women in the Defence Forces get the daily rest period they are entitled to, that the average working time including overtime is not meant to exceed 48 hours, as well as various other issues.”
“At the minute, we are almost 4,000 personnel short of that. There is not a hope that this gap will be made up. We will be lucky to reach the established strength of 9,400. We will be extremely lucky to hit that target. There is not a hope we are reaching 11,000. The reality is that for all the big announcements and so on, the ultimate test of whether we are going to be able to recruit and retain enough personnel is whether we are showing enough respect for the greatest asset of the Defence Forces, that is, the men and women of the Defence Forces. Against the backdrop of these big announcements, the European Committee on Social Rights has found that the Irish Government is in breach of the European Social Charter because of failing to implement the working time directive.”
“There is a lot of talk at the minute and a shared desire across all sides of this House to ensure we invest in our Defence Forces. The Defence Forces have been profoundly neglected and that needs to be addressed. As far as I am concerned, Ireland should be strong in neutrality and strong in defence; both things go together. We hear a lot of big announcements from the Minister but, unfortunately, the reality is that big talk is not going to put feet inside the barracks door. Referring back to the last debate the Minister of State had on the various targets being set and Government's desire to hit those targets, the reality is there is not a hope in the wide earthly world that the Defence Forces will meet the target of 11,000 permanent personnel by 2028. That is under level of ambition 2. It is not going to be reached.”
“I urge the Government to engage with them, to meet them without preconditions to ensure that they get what they have been waiting for for five or six years, which is recognition for the job they actually do in this modern day.”
“This is at a time when Irish nurses right across the world are desperate to return home to work in Irish hospitals to do what they can to assist in what is, in my view, still a crisis in our healthcare system. How can it be anything other when we have exploding waiting lists, growing numbers of people on trolleys, and appointments, elective surgeries and diagnostics constantly being postponed and cancelled? I find it difficult to understand why we could even be contemplating a potential freeze on recruitment for clinically front-facing posts, which could include nurses. That needs clarity. The other people I am thinking of today who serve our communities are our paramedics.”
“Nurses are held in huge esteem in this Chamber and right across the country. It is worth asking why that is. The reality is that it is because they perform their duties with compassion, dedication and commitment to public service and to the communities in which they live. We all hold them in huge esteem. The problem is that, far too often, esteem and respect are not followed through in policy. I am concerned at the situation we are facing in Cork and others are facing in other regions where this new control on spending could potentially - I want clarity on this - lead to a freeze on recruitment. There are some 5,000 vacant midwifery posts across the State, hundreds of them likely in Cork and Kerry. We have just had the busiest April for some time when measured by people on trolleys. The waiting lists in Cork are absolutely exploding.”
“Clearly, the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice makes it clear that states have an obligation to ensure they audit their processes, relations and trade to ensure states are not complicit. We can and should do this. There is nothing constraining us from doing it. This is the minimum we can do in the context of a situation that daily erodes the rights of the Palestinian people.”
“Tacaím leis an mBille agus tréaslaím leis an Teachta Ó Snodaigh as a chuid oibre air seo ar feadh tamall fada. I commend Deputy Ó Snodaigh on his work on this over a considerable period of time. We have had many debates in this Chamber and, unfortunately, some attention has slipped away from Palestine and from the appalling atrocities that continue there despite so-called ceasefire. People are being killed daily but more fundamentally in a long term way the ground for a Palestinian state is being eroded constantly by the actions of Israel. Often there are debates about what we can do since we are a small country but there are actions we can undertake.”
“Ireland needs to speak up for international law not only in this region, but in general. The Minister of State might comment on the issue of Israel breaking sanctions against Russia in relation to stolen Ukrainian grain. It is important that the EU make a clear statement against that. Along with its occupation of south Lebanon and its genocidal policies in Gaza, these breaches of sanctions against Russia need to form part of the case for suspending the EU-Israel trade agreement.”
“Collective bargaining is a particular example. That is also something that needs to be addressed. I will return to the issue of values. If any area has shown up the flaws and hypocrisies of the EU at times over the last number of years, it is the area of values. I refer particularly to Gaza and Palestine and the unconditional and unqualified support for Israel from Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas on behalf of the EU at a pivotal point. That gave political cover for the genocidal destruction that subsequently unfolded. In addition, the EU leaders' muted and almost non-existent response to people from the Global Sumud Flotilla being effectively abducted on the high seas and in international waters, completely contrary to any international law, is completely unacceptable. This should be a priority for the Irish Government.”
“It is true that we need to ensure competitiveness. In my view, from an Irish point of view, we need to ensure that our reliance on energy from other sources, in terms of fossil fuels, is reduced, that we build up our renewables capacity and that we invest in infrastructure and a whole lot of other areas. Too often, the competitiveness agenda becomes a proxy for deregulation and undermining workers' rights. I am particularly concerned, as is the trade union movement, about the Irish Commissioner, Michael McGrath's file and the proposal for a single unified legal entity for companies across the EU. There is a danger that this will allow companies to sidestep Irish labour law. I encourage the Minister of State and the Government to be watchful for that. There are also areas in which we are falling short of EU norms.”
“That was something we welcomed at the time and something Sinn Féin and others lobbied for at the time. It was an important step. Clearly, that will be an important part of the constitutional debate at that moment in time. It is my view that it is reckless and short-sighted of the Government not to plan and prepare for Irish unity. No one says that this needs to be rash or rushed, but if we fail to do anything at all, that is the reckless and the thoughtless approach. I think there is scope to have some discussions with other member states about the role the EU can play. I think it will play potentially a crucial role in the event of Irish unity, and we should be thoughtful of that and consider it. There are other items we need to discuss, but this should be part of the debate. The other issue is the whole area of competitiveness.”
“The Presidency is an important opportunity for Ireland to demonstrate leadership and to identify some of the items of most particular concern to Ireland and Ireland's interests, but also to redress what I think is a serious deficit on the values side as well. I will return to that. In relation to our own interests and priorities, I will raise two items that maybe have not got as much attention. In my opinion, there is an opportunity, or there should be an opportunity, in the context of the EU Presidency in terms of Irish unity. I say that in the context of a thoughtful, considered approach to that. Previous Irish Governments, under the former Taoiseach Enda Kenny, ensured that were the North to reunify with the South, it would access the European Union without any particular constraint.”
“Tosóidh mé le rá go n-aontaím leis an Aire Stáit gur rud an-dearfach agus gur ábhar dóchais é go mbeidh an Ghaeilge in úsáid mar theanga oifigiúil le linn na hUachtaránachta. Tá sé sách tábhachtach go mbeadh an Ghaeilge feiceálach agus in úsáid anseo, sna hinstitiúidí Eorpacha agus in imeachtaí na hUachtaránachta. These statements on Europe are an opportunity to reflect on what the EU was intended to be, its purpose, our place in it, what it is not intended to be and where it is failing. There is no doubt in my mind that Ireland's place is in the EU and that there have been benefits, but there is considerable scope for criticism as well in terms of democracy, the rule of law, human rights and a wide variety of other issues.”
“Paramedics and emergency medical technicians, EMTs, play a crucial role in the healthcare system, despite the fact that they are incredibly stretched, with personnel numbers approximately 1,800 short of the target. They are often running on fumes as they try to respond to situations. They are going on strike on Tuesday, as things stand. They do not want to be on strike. They want to be out there responding to emergencies but the reality is they feel that they have no other option because the report that has been sitting around for six years with recommendations to ensure they get basic pay that reflects their responsibilities and duties has not been implemented. Will the Minister for Health intervene to ensure this strike is prevented, there is dialogue and paramedics and EMTs get the pay and conditions they deserve?”
“One category of them, not the most recent, is actually on lower pay than the class coming just behind them because of the recategorisation. It is a small category. Some sort of ex gratia scheme or approach should be made to support them because it is not fair to have one class on a lower scale even though it is a year advanced than the next category.”
“I would love to hear about local bargaining. Local bargaining seems to be the solution to cadet pay, the service commitment scheme and to specialist staff. However many per cent it is, the scope clearly does not exist to expect it to be like the miracle of loaves and fishes and solve all the problems. There is scope to do a bit with local bargaining but ultimately the Department needs to recognise that these are strategic considerations in the development capability and the personnel numbers of the Defence Forces. This is intolerable. Deputy Ó Fearghaíl is entirely correct. If people are coming from a different sector to become cadets, it will not be sustainable for them to keep up mortgage payments on that kind of pay. I will give a brief mention to something else in another training sphere, namely Air Corps apprentices.”
“It is crucially important they are supported. I understand RACO has said it has been left with little alternative but to recommend that cadets enlist as a recruit in the Defence Forces before entering a cadetship, which unnecessarily lengthens the progress of their career.”
“The Minister has given indications in the past and she has talked about addressing this issue but it has been six months since she took office and ultimately nothing has changed. Cadets are still paid well below the minimum wage. That is damaging to recruitment and retention. Their pay is the lowest in the Defence Forces at €503 per week. That compares with €550 for a recruit. Considering that is weekly pay, there is a considerable distance between the two. Recruit pay rises to €627, which is considerably above that €503. They remain on this pay for the entirety of their first year, earning 40.7% less than enlisted counterparts. This has a knock-on impact on pension contributions so it has a whole-career impact. This is undermining recruitment and retention. These are the future leaders of the Defence Forces.”
“When will she make a decision as to whether the Government will put in place a process such as there was in Australia - a study of health outcomes, identifying whether there is causation and ensuring support for people who are very sick? Among these people, there have been heart conditions, colorectal cancer and suicides. Clearly there is a need for things like routine cardiac screening. These are all things that can be done without any reference to the court cases. When will the Minister make a decision on a solution for the whole category?”
“If there is a pattern, we are not going to find that out in the High Court. That will be found out through a process the Department seems to be considering. A memo was due to be brought to the Minister in the first quarter but we are past the first quarter now. That is what I recall the Minister saying. Has the Minister considered this memo in relation to a whole-category approach? I ask the Minister to not go back into the legal cases. The clear example is in relation to Australia where the Australian air force saw that there was an issue, it engaged with the group and the people retained their right to take cases as they saw fit but there was health screening, an accountability mechanism and health supports. There is nothing preventing the Minister from doing that.”
“I am not asking for an update on the legal side, although I think there are issues in relation to the State Claims Agency's approach. What I am asking for is what the Minister proposes to do, and which we discussed previously, in terms of the whole category, a potential package of health supports and health safeguarding, including forms of screening, and an accountability mechanism. There has to be an accountability mechanism as well.”
“To be honest, that is a frustrating response because the Minister is well aware that I have outlined the point in the past. I would say there are issues in relation to the handling of the State Claims Agency of these cases. It is not appropriate for us to get into individual cases. I have never asked the Minister to do so. I have never tried to discuss individual cases in this Chamber, with the Minister or her predecessor. The issue here is in relation to a category of people who were acting in the service of the State. They were supporting the Defence Forces in terms of maintenance of aircraft. As the Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors group outlined, there have been 130 potential premature deaths. Clearly, we need to get to the bottom of that.”
“Since our last engagement on this issue, we have had the "RTÉ Investigates" documentary, considerable reporting by Neil Michael from the Irish Examiner , and many disturbing and worrying disclosures and descriptions of what was going on. It is clear that Air Corps personnel were exposed to unsafe working conditions and to dangerous chemicals and there seems to be a strong correlation to very serious illness and bad health outcomes. These are people who served the State. They should get support. What does the Minister intend to do about it and how does she intend to ensure that they are looked after?”
“It is not difficult at all to see circumstances where if we remove the triple lock, pressure comes on a future Irish Government to deploy troops to a scenario or theatre that would clearly endanger our neutrality. The Minister has said that the Irish people support neutrality. This potentially brings future Irish Governments into a position where they are pressurised into deploying troops in situations that would undermine our neutrality.”
“The Minister spoke about the SCDP and potential deployment. Could she elaborate on that? Is she saying there would potentially be a CSDP deployment to Lebanon in place of UNIFIL? Could she please clarify that? The issue in relation to the protection of future Governments is crucially important. That is my view, and I think it is the view of the people. Our troops have served under the UN flag with incredible distinction. I think it is profoundly dangerous that UNIFIL is coming to an end. I really regret that decision. It is important that we continue to push for UN reform. I would like to hear the Minister say some more about that. Ultimately, if we are not deploying troops under a UN flag, they are going to be deployed in another context.”