Gerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister is very welcome to the committee. I congratulate him, Prime Minister Sunak, and the European Union on the wonderful achievement yesterday. The measured responses that we have had since are vitally important at a time like this so that we stall the horses, as it were, and let us not annoy anybody at this stage. We must give everybody time and space to absorb the wonderful achievement that has been made. I congratulate the Minister, as the Chairman has, on the Minister's own work on this.

Staying with Northern Ireland for a moment, DeputyBerry and I, with others in the Oireachtas, are working with a group called MAPS, which is a military and police support group in Omagh. Since the announcement of the inquiry into the Omagh bombing an inordinate number of people have come forward looking for counselling. These are members of the security forces generally. MAPS has found itself in a situation where they are completely overwhelmed by demands for support and counselling services. This is a cross-Border issue. There are people on the southern side of the Border who are also using this service and the services of Brooke House. I do not want to put the Minister on the spot today but I wonder if some emergency funding from the shared island fund, which is a fund available to the Minister's Department, could be made available to help this worthy initiative. My own view is that while something in the line of the Omagh inquiry has to take place, there is no hierarchy in atrocities and there is no hierarchy among the things that happened in Northern Ireland. To single out Omagh has now placed a lot of people into serious distress and mental illness problems. I would appreciate it if the Minister might address that.

On the vexed issue of neutrality, I believe that Ireland is best described in international terms as a non-aligned country. The Tánaiste will be aware that 120 countries are part of the non-aligned group. This group was established in 1961. I believe that the principles underpinning non-alignment are fully consistent with Ireland and its role in the international world. Those principles are: mutual respect for each other's territories; integrity and sovereignty; mutual non-aggression; mutual non-interference in domestic affairs; equality and mutual benefit; and peaceful coexistence. The group has been in existence since 1961. Why has Ireland not signed up to the non-aligned grouping? It is ideally suited to us. My colleague has just spoken about a referendum to enshrine neutrality into our Constitution. While that may be attractive for some people it is deeply unattractive where a country's hands are tied at the outset in a constitutional situation where the country is prohibited from engaging in alignments of any sort. At CyCon 22 in Tallinn last year we discussed all things to do with cyber security. There is no border in the cyber world. To tie ourselves into a situation where we cannot align with like-minded countries to defend not just our country and its economy but also our foreign direct investment attractiveness would, to my mind, be absolute nonsense. It would be deeply worrying for the future of this country if we tie a Government's hands so it is not free to react. If the Minister feels comfortable dealing with that today I would be interested in hearing his views.

Speaking of sanctions, we have had a situation where ten aircraft owned by an Irish leasing company were sold to Russia. From media reports, I know that neither the Minister's Department, the Central Bank, or the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment were contacted about the sale of those aircraft. Will the Minister tell the committee if there has been any follow-up to establish by what right these aircraft were sold on the market? How does this fit into the sanctions regime?

On the issue of peacekeeping, Ireland has a proud record in peacekeeping. Sadly, our Defence Forces are in a very poor state at the moment. With regard to the withdrawal of troops from the Golan Heights, I believe we had no choice. Brigadier General Ger Aherne gave an example on Sunday of what is required to provide troops in each one of areas we are operating in.He said we would need to take the number that are on the ground and multiply it by three because one group is getting ready, one group is serving, and one group is recovering when they come home. There must always be that sort of number available. In my entire time in the Oireachtas, which is coming up to nine years, the first positive statement that has been made was made by the Minister, Deputy Martin, in the last few weeks in the context of housing for members of the Defence Forces. The Minister Deputy Martin, is not here to discuss defence today but it falls into our peacekeeping role. Unless we fix issues around the working time directive, the 2013 pension, and allowances, we will find ourselves in a situation where we are not able to fulfil peacekeeping missions. Right now we are in a situation whereby what was once voluntary is now becoming a detailed duty. That is very difficult especially when people are getting very short notice. A hole in the management structure has not been filled. Some 600 commissioned officer vacancies is just not acceptable. It eats into our role in peacekeeping. The Minister is proud of this role and the Chairman is extremely proud of it. I and other members of this committee are very proud of our blue berets and those who have served with European forces in the cause of peace. We may find ourselves in the not too distant future in a peacekeeping role in Europe as the Ukrainian war, I hope, draws to an end.

My final question is on the issue of arms for Ukraine. I am aware that Ireland is providing non-lethal military equipment. At the moment we did this we did away with any neutrality. The Minister has also said that we are not neutral in the case of Ukraine. Ukraine is not looking for offensive weapons from us but they are looking for defensive weapons such as weapons that can be used to shoot rockets out of the sky and weapons that can be used to take out a tank. Those are defensive weapons and are there to save human life, not to take human life away. Will the Minister go back to look at the defensive side of what weaponry we have and how that might be used to assist Ukraine and stop the slaughter of people? I will leave it at that and I thank the Chairman for the time.