Dr. Barry Colfer:

Deputy Carthy asked what comparative countries have that we do not and Mr. Fitzgerald will answer his question as he is expert in that area. However, I will reflect on what the Deputy said about the likelihood of an attack on the energy grid. When I was a scout, we were trained to bí ullamh. Our paper does not seek to say an attack will happen. In fact, we did not attempt to measure the likelihood of an attack on the energy grid but merely pointed out its vulnerability. Perhaps in the next phase of our research we could focus on the likelihood of an attack. We are not scaremongering and do not propose that an attack is imminent but simply point out that vulnerabilities exist so that this group and others are aware of that.

Senator Ardagh asked some great questions. On spending on defence being relatively limited, Mr. Fitgerald will pick up on that as well. The Senator asked whether the Garda are best placed to undertake matters of cybersecurity or whether there is cause for a new strategic body, and my colleague will also answer that question.

On regulating the Data Protection Commission and the wave of digital legislation that is coming our way, between the alphabet soup of the AI, the Digital Services Act, DSA, and the Digital Markets Act, DMA, there is a huge amount of public policy happening around the digital space and data protection in Ireland. Indeed, Ireland is trying to position itself as a frontrunner. From January, Ireland will take over the chair of the D9 group of digital EU countries. It is not a question of whether Ireland should; Ireland must take a leadership role given that it is something we are good at but also because we play host to so much data and so much of the global tech activities around the world comes through or is adjacent to Ireland. The short answer is "Yes".

With respect to the grey zone and disrupting elections, Mr. Fitzgerald only brushed up against the issue in his remarks but it is contained in our paper that, absolutely, there were disruptions to elections and disinformation. I mentioned in my presentation that the grey zone is any hostility or aggression that falls short of kinetic warfare, which mainly seeks to undermine confidence and faith in democratic institutions. Thankfully, in Ireland, compared with many countries, our institutions remain robust. We have a vibrant media and think tank landscape that helps with that but we must not be hubristic. The threats to our forthcoming elections from hostile actors and elections all around the democratic part of the world should be foremost in all our minds.

The next issue is the Russian vessels. In the exclusive economic zone or adjacent to our waters, it is not our fault that they are there. I do not think there is any shortcoming on the part of Irish policymakers that the Russian vessels are in or adjacent to our waters. I draw attention to the fact that we have recently had interaction with peer think tanks and policymakers in the Nordic countries, and it is something that peers in those countries are really seized with. It was covered by the national broadcaster this morning. There have been very unusual patterns of activity in the waters adjacent to our neighbours in the Nordic countries, which is potentially Russian authorities seeking to plot - and this is something the Cathaoirleach has been interested in - against the security of our subsea cables. That is something which is of major interest to Ireland, but not just Ireland, which is the point I am making. Norway, Denmark and Sweden have noticed this as well.

With regard to weaponising migration, this is indeed something the IIEA is working on as part of our Global Europe project. We are looking at the modern context of migration in Europe, which has obviously been a thing since Roman times and before. People have moved around Europe. However, we are in a different moment, and Ireland is experiencing a migration moment which we have not before with respect to refugees from the conflict in Ukraine, who have found refuge and help here in Ireland. It is a delicate matter to put it in the terms the Senator sought to, but I understand why she did . The idea of weaponising people, given that these are the victims of the conflict and that they are having to flee their homes and their communities, is a tragedy. The concern is to support these people rather than label it as part of any form of weaponisation. However, it is certainly something the Russian authorities have done in the past, and they will do again.

Regarding Deputy Cronin's question, I will make a couple of remarks, because there are some very interesting things there. Obviously, getting the message out is our core business. We deal in ideas at the IIEA, so we try to understand as objectively as possible, and to provide a space for debate around everything. I journey through the wide range of stuff that we talk about. First, getting the word out is absolutely our core business. However, with respect to the affordability of, for example, putting solar panels on people's homes, there are many people in Ireland, myself included, who would love to own a home where they can put panels on. That is obviously for policymakers. Would it not be great to have greater access to resources and funding to allow people to contribute to the energy resilience of the country by yielding energy from the sun? That would be great. When anything happens at scale, it becomes easier, so if the Government could support people doing it more often then things become cheaper. To use the Deputy's language, absolutely, access to electricity cannot just be for the rich. I am paraphrasing her a small bit. However, it certainly contributes to what we have been talking about, and what Mr. FitzGerald may come in on in a moment. To be more energy resilient, and more energy independent, allowing people to yield their own energy and to trade their energy, one of his recommendations on microgeneration is actually a fairly easy win for Government when it comes to this conflict we tried to describe.

I do not have much more to say, other than that the all-of-society approach really is important here. There is a lot of scary stuff. We all walk around with telephones in our pockets that can be easily exploited by relatively affordable technology. It is an easy answer for a think tanker to say. However, public information and education is needed regarding the very real threat we can all face through phishing, smishing and everything else. Part of it, I would like to think, starts now, and continues with public education in members' constituencies and at future committee meetings.