Seán Haughey (Dublin Bay North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. They were very balanced and they explained the position in so far as it is possible for them to do so at this stage. I will concentrate on the CSDP as well. I was taken by what Professor Cottey said. He suggested there is considerable flexibility for nation states in respect of the policy. I think this suits member states. As he said as well, most member states are happy to rely on NATO, particularly those in central and eastern Europe. I believe the Government has the balance right in respect of the CSDP, despite the urgings of Dr. McDonagh in the context of perhaps needing to define and expand this aspect more. I am sure we could probably do so. Undoubtedly, what happened in Ukraine changed everything and the mindset relating to security and defence matters. For example, as the witnesses will be aware, under the European Peace Facility, EPF, we have given €77 million, but this was provided in the form of non-lethal equipment. As was also mentioned, we are involved in the EU military assistance mission to Ukraine. These are new developments for Ireland and the Russian invasion of Ukraine is responsible for this.

I ask the witnesses to comment on the legal position regarding Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality. This is what I call it rather than non-alignment. If the Cathaoirleach does not mind, I will read out one or two things. From a legal perspective, we need to examine the EU treaties. I refer specifically to the Lisbon treaty. We must also examine the Constitution. As the witnesses will be aware, a protocol to the Lisbon treaty states it "does not affect or prejudice Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality". Article 29.4.9° of Bunreacht na hÉireann, which was added following the defeat of the first referendum on the Lisbon treaty, states: "The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence pursuant to Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union where that common defence would include the State." We can make what we will of that. It is interesting to note that the word "neutrality" does not appear in the Constitution. Equally, there is also Article 42 of the Lisbon treaty, which makes provision for a mutual defence clause. These are the legalities I can find concerning military neutrality. What would the witnesses say is the legal position in respect of Ireland if, for example, consideration were given to joining a military alliance? This is not something I am advocating. There is talk, though, of having a referendum on neutrality. This is a complex question, and I would welcome hearing the views of the witnesses on the subject.

My second question concerns the triple lock, and I know this does not specifically relate to the EU. What are the witnesses' views on this mechanism, whereby for a foreign mission to be undertaken there needs to be a UN mandate, a Government decision and a vote of the Oireachtas? The Minister for Foreign Affairs has said this needs to be examined and that Russia has a veto over Ireland's UN agenda. This is something that needs to be looked at.

Regarding cybersecurity, will the witnesses briefly outline, if they can, what exactly is now being done at an EU level on this topic? I thank them very much.