Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I was following the debate from my office and I listened with interest to the various speeches. Our party will not be voting for the motion. Our position is along the lines of that expressed by Deputies Clare Daly and Mick Wallace, namely, that the best contribution we can make to countering terrorism, which I understand is the key objective in the establishment of the fund and the distribution of moneys, is to use the position we have - a very good position - in our relationship with people in the Middle East, particularly the Arab world. Yesterday, along with the Ceann Comhairle, a delegation met an Egyptian parliamentary delegation. It was here because we visited Egypt last year. At the sideline meeting, I happened to meet the Sudanese and Moroccan ambassadors and a number of others from the Middle East. I was reflecting that the only way of developing a long-term secure relationship between Europe and the Middle East, which is the area of concern, is through the diplomatic and political culture we bring to the relationship. We are in a unique position to try to provide a different perspective on what provides security.

While I am a strong supporter of the European Union, I believe it may be making the wrong investment and taking the wrong approach to security, particularly on border control. The way to deal with the very complex and difficult migration problem we face is ensuring security, stability, demographic advancement and the peaceful development of all the countries on our southern border. A security-led approach will not work.

I listened to what Deputy Jim O'Callaghan was saying on fighting terrorism. Have we learned anything in this country? We have learned that the way to address terrorism is to address the root causes. A security-led approach to the fear and threat of terrorism will be counter-productive. That is not to denigrate the good work of the Garda and the need for it to maintain intelligence and other resources. We are genuinely capable of presenting a different perspective on how to proceed. We will vote on that basis, standing up for investments in overseas aid and really close political dialogue and co-operation, and not holding up our noses to any one regime. It is a matter of trying to listen and of talking to regimes one would not necessarily agree with. One is better to engage in dialogue and peaceful diplomatic processes. That has been the strength of European Union. I fear that while we need to strengthen and develop our Union, the right way is not in radical, rapid, advanced security co-operation, as seen with PESCO and the likes of this fund. There is talk in Europe about even deeper co-operation in a range of areas. We oppose the motion and support an alternative - a positive, more practical and workable approach to the provision of security.

A friend of mine did aid work for many years in Afghanistan. She was working with the American Army there. I asked her what the generals thought. Having been in the country for five or ten years, one general at a high level told her that if he had only 1,000 workers, they would be worth 10,000 marines. That is true. We bring that political perspective. It goes right back to our roots. Irish nationalism was born in the early part of the 19th century. There is a lot in common between Irish nationalism and Arab nationalism. We have that position in place. We can help to address the terrorism issue by applying that thinking rather than going down the route of heavy securitisation.

See this speech in context