Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 9, lines 10 and 11, to delete “in relation to a political matter or matter of Government policy” and substitute “in relation to a matter of political controversy”.

Section 11 relates to section 103 of the principal Act and sets out limitations on the actions of members of the Defence Forces. My amendment deals with the prohibition proposed in the section 11, which states:

"(1A) Without prejudice to the Defence (Amendment) Act 1990 and any regulations made thereunder, a member of the Permanent Defence Force shall not–

[...] (i) make, without prior authorisation from the member’s commanding officer, a public statement or comment in relation to a political matter or matter of Government policy.

That is my first amendment to this section. I want to delete the phrase "in relation to a political matter or matter of Government policy" and insert that of “in relation to a matter of political controversy”. I tried to think of the best wording for this because it would be an extraordinary restriction that a member of the Defence Forces could comment on a matter of Government policy. If it were a matter of political controversy, I could understand. That is why I would go so far as to say that we put in a reference to political controversies because I do not think it would be appropriate for members of Defence Forces to be involved in political controversies of any kind. However, to preclude them from a matter of Government policy might mean they could not be in favour of climate change legislation. The Chief of Staff or any other member could not say they have a greening agenda for the Defence Forces if that is Government policy. That is too broad a net to cast. The Tánaiste might say that is not what is intended. It does not matter what is intended. Legislation is there per omnia secula seculorum, and there will be other Ministers who might have a different view of these things. We should try to craft our legislation in as defined a way as possible. I submit that, as currently proposed, the provision is far too broad.

I will also comment on amendment No. 4, which relates to the prohibition to "attend a protest, march or other gathering in relation to a political matter or matter of Government policy". I again submit that a prohibition on any member of the Defence Forces being involved in a protest march or other gathering relating to a political matter or a matter of Government policy is too broad. The wording should again be restricted to "in relation to a matter of political controversy". There will be public presentations and protests about issues that are not a bit controversial, which would be prohibited by this. Maybe nobody intends to act against them, but we should try to craft the Bill in as defined and narrow a way as possible to meet the objectives of ensuring that members of our Defence Forces are not involved in political controversy, but is not so stifling that it would trample on the human rights or expressed rights of any individual under the European Convention on Human Rights.

I will come back in on the other amendments later.