Helen McEntee
Meath East · Fine Gael · Ireland
“There are no new missions, so there is only so much we can partake in. In regard to UN requests over the past ten years, in September 2019, we had 14 Defence Forces personnel deployed to a UN mission in Mali as part of a joint operation with the German armed forces.”
“I thank the Deputy for his continued engagement on this matter. It is appreciated and I reaffirm our shared commitment to truth and justice, not least for Private Rooney, but in particular for his family.”
“I thank the Deputy for raising the matter. I know he is committed to this issue; I am too. I have in recent months spent some time travelling to different barracks and Army bases and meeting with personnel. What I see all over the country is their professionalism, dedication and commitment.”
“I disagree that people are being pushed into the courts. The situation is exactly the opposite. I have said in the Chamber many times since I started taking these questions that the State Claims Agency is there and wants to mediate and work directly with people in order that cases do not go directly to the courts.”
“We are all committed to strengthening recruitment to and supporting retention in the Permanent Defence Force. The military authorities have advised that the strength of the Permanent Defence Force stood at 7,823 personnel on 31 May, the most recent date for which we have a figure available.”
“It is the case that no mission is the same, so it is also a matter for the Defence Forces to assess and scope out the mission and then to decide whether it is a mission we can partake in. A question keeps being asked about what it is we would not be able to be a part of if we were to keep the triple lock.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,132 lines we hold for Helen McEntee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 43.
“Because of our own experiences on this island, we feel a deep and personal affinity with those who seek self-determination, and who simply seek to live in dignity and peace. The actions that the Government is taking, including the progression of this Bill, are designed to advance these central objectives. On 19 July 2024, the ICJ delivered an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of the policies and practices of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, a case in which Ireland and more than 50 other states made written and oral submissions. The court concluded that states should "take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that assist in the maintenance of the illegal situation created by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory".”
“Let me be clear: at the same time, this Government has consistently condemned the appalling terrorist actions of Hamas on 7 October and the need for those responsible for the brutal murders of innocent civilians to be held accountable. I must also reiterate the Government's view that the appalling and worsening situation in Gaza, the accelerating and rampant settler violence and settlement expansion in the West Bank, coupled with the ongoing situation in Lebanon can never be justified and demand serious and concrete actions in response. The Bill will contribute positively to Ireland's efforts to uphold and comply with international law, including the findings of the 2024 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, ICJ.”
“The Bill we are discussing will contribute positively to Irish and international efforts to prevent unilateral actions that impinge upon the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and upon the viability of the two-state solution. I thank Senator Frances Black and others who have supported this legislation and other Bills for bringing them forward. The two-state solution is the only viable long-term solution. It is as important for Israelis as it is for Palestinians. Those who reject it appear to have no alternative plan. The current cycle of violence cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely.”
“We are committed to working with those who want to achieve a just and lasting peace where Israelis and Palestinians live side by side in two states, Israel and Palestine, in peace, security and dignity based on the 1967 borders. The cycle of violence that has brought suffering to both Palestinians and Israelis needs to be brought to an end. During my visit to Rafah earlier this year, I announced that we would continue to provide the humanitarian assistance that is urgently needed but I would again use this opportunity to reiterate the need not only for Ireland or the EU but for international partners to continue that support.”
“In April, the Israeli security cabinet approved 34 new West Bank settlements, the largest approved by any government at one time. The planned E1 settlement near Jerusalem threatens to cut the West Bank completely in half, calling into question the viability of a Palestinian state. The actions of this Israeli Government consistently contravene international law and are part of an established pattern to create a new status quo in the occupied Palestinian territory. Their actions are explicitly designed to bury the idea of a two-state solution. This is happening by design; not by accident. Ireland will continue to defend a Palestinian state consisting of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the right of Palestinians to self-determination, a right already enjoyed by Israelis.”
“Intolerable conditions persist, as mass displacement and poor shelter conditions expose civilians to rising public health risks linked to pests and rodents, alongside ongoing Israeli strikes, shelling and gunfire. The food security situation remains precarious, while essential services are at risk of collapse. That is why Ireland has consistently and persistently provided and called for unhindered humanitarian access to people in Gaza. The situation continues to deteriorate in the West Bank. We are witnessing the massive expansion of settlements alongside rampant and escalating settler violence, which continues in an atmosphere of impunity. The scale, speed and severity of displacement and demolitions is unprecedented.”
“On one side, we had warehouses full of food that was going out of date because the labelling was not correct, significant volumes of medical supplies that could not be provided because there was metal in them and it was being suggested they were weapons and children’s toys left sitting there. All that was left ready to deliver on one side while, on the other, more than two million people in Gaza were enduring conditions no one should be forced to survive. Men, women and children have lost their lives, countless more have been injured and entire families and communities have been utterly devastated. Behind every statistic is a human life cut short, a child deprived of a future and families living with unimaginable grief. Today, the people of Gaza continue to endure unimaginable suffering.”
“I am also very conscious that behind every debate we have in this House are people whose lives are shaped by the decisions of governments and institutions. It is in this context that I would like to clearly set out the purpose of this Bill, including the motivation behind it and what we hope to achieve by enacting it in this way. I would like to address the situation on the ground in Gaza and the reality for ordinary Palestinians more broadly, which is the backdrop for our debate. I have mentioned many times my visit to the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and the Gaza Strip earlier this year. This is something that will always stick with me particularly because of the painful contrast.”
“I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time". I am pleased to introduce the Bill for the consideration of the House. I am conscious that the Bill has been the subject of much debate not only in this House and the media but also among the wider public. The Government fully understands the depth of feeling in Ireland and in this House on the subject of Palestine. We share these deeply held concerns. They are a product of our history and of our shared humanity. I personally understand and share the depth of feeling in this House. It is consistent with our core values - respect for human rights, dignity and international law - and it is the approach that this Government, and many Governments before us, have taken to different situations around the world where human rights and international law are not respected.”
“Let me be very clear that is not what this legislation is proposing. So, all of the misinformation and the attempts to suggest this is suddenly going to open us up to becoming a warmongering country is completely wrong, completely inaccurate and is trying to sow a level of misinformation that muddies the waters here. The legislation is very clear. How do we make sure we can continue to deploy our troops in peacekeeping missions? How do we make sure that other countries - Russia, the US, China, France or the UK - do not have a say in how we deploy our troops? How do we make sure that we, as a sovereign nation, the people here, democratically elected to this Chamber, are the ones who decide, with the advice of the Defence Forces, on exactly how we deploy our troops to peacekeeping missions? That is what the focus of this legislation is.”
“I am very happy to debate this with anybody. I am very happy to outline what is actually in the legislation. It will be published in due course. The legislation will be very clear. It will outline how we will deploy our troops for peacekeeping missions. It will outline how we will deploy them in line with UN principles and with international law. It will not allow for any other type of deployment that goes beyond those areas. It will allow for a smaller number of troops to be deployed to ensure that where our own citizens are at risk in conflict areas, they can be taken out, removed and brought home safely. Beyond that, to be very clear, nothing in this legislation will allow me, as Minister, this Government or anybody in it to decide we are going to send troops to a conflict zone to take part in a conflict.”
“It makes no sense to me and I think the vast majority of people to whom I speak see what it is that we are trying to do here. We are trying to make sure that we have a mechanism in place to continue what is a long and proud tradition of our peacekeepers and to ensure that we are not impacted by the decisions of others that very clearly have ulterior motives and objectives at hand.”
“The men I met in Rome only a few weeks ago are highly regarded because of their contribution to operations like Operation Irini and now they will no longer be able to contribute, so what is actually being eroded is our ability to contribute and to continue to be held in such high regard and the only people who are losing out are us. We are losing out and our Defence Forces personnel are losing out. Regarding our military capabilities, knowledge and experience in working with other partners, we are going to lose out if we cannot continue in these types of missions. This suggestion that we are giving away our sovereignty is completely contradictory when it is other larger military powers that are able to dictate where we send peacekeeping troops.”
“We are seeing this happen on a number of fronts at the moment where there is a claim that Government is eroding our sovereignty and that we are allowing other people to essentially make decisions for us with the migration pact or now the triple lock. Currently, other countries, like Russia, which has been waging a war on European soil in Ukraine for almost five years - longer than World War I - could actually prevent us from keeping peacekeeping troops on missions. That is what has happened in the past two weeks alone. The Deputy says that our reputation is being endangered. We have an excellent reputation.”
“There has been extensive engagement between my Department and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel about the drafting of the Bill and it is my intention to bring this to the House. It was approved by Cabinet today that we would bring it forward for Second Stage to debate this even further and to have a wider debate with colleagues as soon as possible.”
“As I mentioned earlier, it has been demonstrated in a real tangible way as well through the UN Security Council resolution that underpinned the EU mission Operation Irini, which has come to an end for Irish troops but for nobody else that has been involved in that overall. We also know that this clearly illustrates the extent to which Ireland's ability to contribute to international peace and security efforts can be affected by factors outside of our control. That situation is not sustainable if we are to retain a meaningful and credible capacity to participate in international peace support operations in line with our values and I think this is in line with our own interests and the democratic will of the people of Ireland who have entrusted us as their representative.”
“I repeat that in the past two weeks alone, our troops have had to come home from a mission on which they have been working for a number of years now and where they have been held in such high regard by their fellow defence force members and the Mediterranean Operation Irini because the UN mandate has not been renewed. This is what we are talking about. We are not talking about going off to war anywhere. We are talking about peacekeeping missions. We are very clear that our neutrality is to be protected. We are very clear as a Government that this is not what is being impacted here.”
“We now find ourselves in a situation where one in five of the permanent members of the Security Council can decide whether or not our Irish troops can travel to engage in peacekeeping missions, be it in Lebanon, the western Balkans, the Mediterranean or any other part of the world. It is simply not acceptable to have a situation where Ireland's sovereign decision-making with regards to the participation of our peacekeeping troops in peace operations can be impacted by the geopolitical interests of other states. That is exactly what is happening.”
“It is not a constitutional mechanism and is not enshrined in our Constitution. It was a political commitment during the Nice and Lisbon treaties process. It is clear, therefore, that as I and my predecessors have stated a number of times on the floor of the House and as I have stated a number of times this evening, amending the legislation that governs how we deploy our Defence Forces overseas does not require a referendum. It does not require a national plebiscite. We are talking about a very different time when the legislation was developed. The world has changed. The UN structure itself has changed since. It is not working. We can accept that. We all know that it is not working in the way that it should. The geopolitical environment has changed as well.”
“I propose to take Questions Nos.132 and 133 together. I am pleased to discuss this issue and to expand on some of the areas that we have elaborated on. This key legislation is a priority for me and this Government but it is important that we have an opportunity in the House not just here during Parliamentary Questions but through the legislative process to debate certain elements of this Bill. There have been a number of calls for a public plebiscite or a referendum in relation to what is being proposed in the Bill with regards to the triple lock. Again, I highlight the fact that there has been a lot of conflation as to what is actually being proposed and what is actually being suggested. The triple lock is a statutory mechanism. It is set out in the Defence (Amendment) Act 1960.”
“Our Naval Service already monitors the shadow fleet so the very fact that this is now not being continued and the UN mandate is not continuing is because countries like Russia do not want us to. The Deputy is being disingenuous in saying that this is about our neutrality. There is nothing in this that impacts our neutrality. We were a neutral country before the triple lock was introduced and we will be a neutral country if and when this changes. I hope that we can change it as soon as possible.”
“The Deputy is being completely disingenuous by consistently and continuously linking the triple lock with our neutrality. We were a neutral country before the triple lock was introduced. Does he accept that? We were a neutral country before the triple lock was introduced. It was introduced at a time to make sure that we could send our troops across waters to peacekeeping missions. In many instances, that is not possible so, again, does the Deputy accept that in the past two weeks alone, we have had troops who have been active on a mission in the Mediterranean who have to come home because we now no longer have a mandate. The Deputy can say it has changed and the mandates changed. Our Naval Service monitors shadow fleets across the EEZ at the moment-----”
“What we are actually talking about is amending legislation. We are not amending anything that is in our Constitution. We are talking about changing legislation that was agreed by this House many decades ago. I believe the onus is on us now, as Members of this House, to change the legislation in the same way so that we can continue doing what the legislation set out to allow us to do in the first instance and we are now being prevented from doing.”
“That is something that happens at the moment, but we need to make sure we have this included in the legislation as well. Where there will be a requirement to seek Government approval where the number of Defence Forces personnel is over a certain number, Dáil approval will still be triggered. There will still be a mechanism here in the Dáil to make sure. At the moment, the number is 12. The legislation proposes to increase this number to 50 but even at that, there will have to be engagement at the end of the year with a final report and there will be engagement with the committee through different stages. All of this can be discussed when this Bill comes to the fore. Again, I will make a point on referendums. A referendum is to change the Constitution. What are we talking about putting in here?”
“In terms of what will be in the proposed legislation, we will have an opportunity to discuss and debate in this House on Committee Stage, as we should do, anything of significance. This is significant because it will allow us to continue a practice we have had in place for many decades. The absolute priority here is to make sure that any future deployments for operations are put forward and that they adhere not just to the principles of the UN Charter but also to international law. We are very clear. We are not going to start proposing sending troops on any other missions that do not adhere to international law and are not peacekeeping missions. There is a proposal in the legislation that would allow for UN troops and smaller numbers to be able to remove people safely from conflict zones.”
“I believe we can have that debate here without allowing an outside force that has nothing to do with anybody and that has not been democratically elected by a single person in this country to decide what we do with our peacekeeping troops.”
“The Deputy asserted this evening that we are suddenly deciding out of nowhere, as a Dáil, that we are going to put forward our troops for missions that do not align with international law and are completely outside of the UN Charter. The legislation that is being proposed is very clear and specific in providing that any mission we would propose our troops for would have to align with international law and the principles of the UN Charter and that it would be a decision for this House. We are all democratically elected Members. We represent the people who voted for us, so we have a duty to make sure we reflect their views and wishes.”
“-----now preventing us from continuing on these peacekeeping missions. Therefore, I do not understand or fathom how we could find ourselves in a position now where we would sit, do nothing and allow larger countries that have nothing to do with, and nor should they have anything to do with, how we deploy our troops to prevent us from continuing in missions and see us now having to come off missions that other member states are on. There are no other countries within the EU that have this position. There are no other countries that are neutral. Austria, for example, will not sign up to a military alliance in the same way that we will not, but if it is putting forward members for peacekeeping missions, it does not have to go through the same triple lock mechanism.”
“What is now happening is that we have the bizarre situation whereby those very countries like Russia, which is waging a war, and the USA, which is obviously actively involved on the ground - I do not dispute that - are-----”
“I thank the Deputy. I would say at the outset that times have changed. We should be allowed to debate the fact that we are in a different world now from when this was first introduced. At the time when the triple lock was introduced, those who opposed its introduction said that it was going to drag us into wars; that the US, Russia, China and the permanent member states of the UN were going to drag us, through the triple lock, into all these wars in which we were going to partake; and that we would lose our neutrality. These were debates that were actually put forward at the time. That did not happen. It did not transpire. We have had decades of peacekeeping troops on the ground that have contributed to peacekeeping missions and that has been it.”
“As we have locations in Cork, Dublin, Limerick and Waterford, it stands to reason that we would look beyond those areas to see what we can do. While a decision has not been taken yet, I believe there is merit in the proposal the Deputy is suggesting. Obviously, we need to go through the various different processes to get to that point.”
“The Deputy is right: the Naval Service Reserve is organised across five different units. There are units in Cork, Dublin, Limerick and Waterford. The fifth unit is a technical support base, so it is not based in any specific location rather than the Naval Service HQ. If there were to be an expansion, we would be looking at other areas that currently are not covered. Again, the Deputy is right; the maritime security strategy was clear in outlining that we need to look to see if there is a need for another base from a maritime perspective. That work is already under way. I published the maritime security strategy only a few months ago. I am really ambitious that we move on as many of the actions as possible. One of those clear recommendations is that we would scope out the need or requirement for another potential naval base.”
“Integral to that is the expansion and overall growth of our Reserve Defence Force members. We have seen that in other important structures of our State, notably An Garda Síochána, where our reserve members, coupled with the civilian forces, have helped to grow and expand and have really complemented the work. That is no different here for our Defence Forces.”
“I concur with the Deputy's initial point, which is that we have 24-7 monitoring of Irish waters, of our exclusive economic zone. This is happening in the air and at sea, and it is supported on land mainly by our base in Haulbowline. We have increased and expanded our capacity, capabilities and ability to monitor what is happening above our seas, but also to monitor what is happening below our seas, in particular to protect our critical infrastructure, which comes across the Atlantic and goes through Ireland on to mainland Europe and beyond. It is an absolutely essential component of the work of our Defence Forces that we ensure we have the right numbers, that we grow our capacity within our Naval Service and that we continue to invest in our capabilities while working more closely with our European and international partners.”
“I hope it will conclude soon. Once that work is done, we will be able to identify where there might be options for what the Deputy outlined.”
“The current position is that options are being examined in the context of the wider transformation of the Defence Forces. I mentioned earlier to our colleague the three force design teams, whereby we are looking at restructuring and modernising our Defence Forces. There is one each for the Army, the Air Corps and the Naval Service. They were established by the Defence Forces. An overarching strategic force design office has been established. These teams are working collaboratively to develop a force design for the entire Defence Forces. This will include members of the Reserve Defence Force and civilian members. Work is ongoing at the moment to try to complete this. The Chief of Staff will submit a report on force design to me for consideration. Based on that, the selection of locations can take place. There is a body of work happening.”
“This in itself contains 27 individual actions designed to operationalise the recommendations contained in the Commission on the Defence Forces report for the Reserve Defence Force. The regeneration plan recognises that the transformation of the force structure is required for the development of the RDF. Action 22 of the plan relates specifically to the transformation of the Naval Service Reserve. As the Deputy is aware, another key recommendation from the plan is to increase the future RDF establishment strength to include a minimum Naval Service Reserve of 400 personnel. The military authorities have advised that, under this expansion, additional Naval Service Reserve units may be considered in suitable coastal centres where there is already port access.”
“I acknowledge the important role played by members of the Reserve Defence Force, RDF, and thank them for their continued commitment and the way in which they consistently support the members of the Permanent Defence Force. The strategic objective for the Reserve Defence Force is the development of a reserve force that can seamlessly train, operate and deploy on a voluntary basis with our Permanent Defence Force, both on the island and overseas. As the Deputy mentioned, this is strongly reflected in the report of the commission. A key recommendation for the RDF was the establishment in 2022 of the Office of Reserve Affairs to oversee and support a more holistic approach to the revitalisation of the Reserve Defence Force. In July 2024, that office published the RDF regeneration and development plan.”
“There is a huge amount of work, coupled with the cultural reform and change and the body doing that work. It is really important that all these aspects be progressed at the same time, supported and coupled with financing. That is why we have seen the 55% increase in our capital budget and the 40% increase in our current budget. To come back to the Deputy's original question, once the process that is under way is concluded, a decision on the HQ will be taken.”
“I probably was not aware of it myself until coming into the Department, but there is a significant body of work happening, following on from the Commission on the Defence Forces, to look at what we need. The commission has set out how we reach level of ambition 2, how we increase our numbers and what type of capabilities we need. There is also other work being done to look at our overall footprint, where we need to invest in different barracks, how we need to expand and grow, and which areas we need to look at from a maritime perspective and from the perspective of our Naval Service, our Air Corps and our Defence Force personnel. Then, taking into account the reform of the triple lock, the question is how we make sure that an integral part of our Defence Forces work, namely, peacekeeping missions, can continue into the future.”
“On top of that, there is €13.5 million for maintenance and running costs. There is an absolute commitment to make sure that our barracks and critical infrastructure for our Defence Forces members are up to scratch, modern and fit for purpose. Any new decisions for a new barracks or new accommodation will have to be taken once the overall process is done, but I will be determined to ensure that we have more money and that we invest in any of these new buildings or any new expansion that is required.”
“I will refer to what the Deputy has referred to as well, but there is also the significant increase in funding that has been agreed by this Government, specifically investment not just in the men and women, but also in our overall structures within our Defence Forces system. I have visited quite a number of barracks in the past few months. I have been in Aiken Barracks in Dundalk, the accommodation in Renmore, Galway, the Gormanstown campus and Haulbowline. All of these are areas where we are seeing significant investment in accommodation, dining facilities, gym equipment and the overall environment. Making sure that that investment continues will be a key priority for me. I think €170 million has been spent in the past five years alone, but this year close to €70 million has been spent.”
“What is important for me is that any force design process will include a transitional plan with incremental steps beyond current numbers to the 11,500 force recommended by the Commission on the Defence Forces. As the Deputy will appreciate, because this is a significant body of work, there is a huge amount of effort by all involved. It is once all of these measures have been put in place that we will be able to identify where the location might be.”
“On completion of the force design work, the Chief of Staff will submit a report on force design to me for consideration. No decisions have been made on where the Army headquarters will be located, but it is important to say - and this is the reason I have outlined all of this in terms of the force design - that this process has to be gone through before any decision can be taken on the Army headquarters. This is complicated and challenging work that we need to get right. We need to make sure that if we are looking at modernisation and restructuring of our Defence Forces, we take the time to do this correctly, and that is the work that is happening at the moment.”
“This plan sets out an ambitious programme of work to move to level of ambition 2 by 2028 and the significant and fundamental change for the Defence Forces that will be delivered across the commission's recommendations approved by the Government. The commission recommended: The Chief of Defence to initiate an immediate force design process assisted by external experts with access to international military expertise, and to include a detailed force design process. The Defence Forces have established three force design teams within the Army, Naval Service and Air Corps. An overarching strategic force design office has also been established. This work is ongoing, with all force design teams working collaboratively to develop a force design for the entire Defence Forces.”
“As Minister, I am committed to the ongoing work of ensuring that our Defence Forces are modern, agile and fit for the world we live in to defend the State and meet the challenges of today and the future. That obviously means investing not just in the Defence Forces as personnel but also in our infrastructure. That is a key commitment in our overall capital plan. The Commission on the Defence Forces recommended in its 2022 report significant changes to the Defence Forces and defence provision in Ireland. It covers high-level Defence Forces structures, defence capabilities, organisation, culture and human resources, the Reserve Defence Force, and funding overall. In February, I published the second detailed implementation plan for the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces.”
“Obviously, where we can work together on purchasing, perhaps jointly, different types of technology or capability, we should always look to do that as well.”
“We will assist through the introduction of counter-drone technology through the Defence Forces and throughout the year there will be further technologies provided. However, we will have what we need in place for the beginning of the Presidency. That training is under way. I assure the Deputy of that. What I spoke of with my colleague Ms Vautrin last week was other ways in which we could work more closely together. Are there other ways in which we can share our knowledge, experience and training? I think we underestimate the level of knowledge that our Defence Forces members and gardaí have in using these types of equipment. It is important that we work together and share our experience and knowledge.”
“To answer the Deputy’s question, the capability will be in place by 1 July for our Presidency. Training is under way. I was with my French colleague just last week in Paris and we discussed not just the radar programme but other ways in which we are working more closely together. The French have been supporting and working closely with our Defence Forces personnel around the training on how to use this. This is just to assist. I stress that again because there is often a perception that it is the Defence Forces which are going to be carrying out all of these security measures. What they are putting in place will be to supplement and assist the work of An Garda Síochána. An Garda Síochána already has significant levels of counter-drone technology in place and more that they will put in place during the Presidency.”
“There were tenders agreed last year for the sonar programmes, that is, the radar programmes under water. That will be complemented by the sonobuoys, which will be worked from our helicopters. The longer-range equipment required on our ships will take a little bit longer. This is being done in stages. This is an absolute priority. We want to make sure we can move along the various stages as quickly as possible.”