Ms Niamh N? Bhriain:

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear to discuss the defence industrial reinforcement instrument set up by the Act in Support of Ammunition Production, ASAP, regulation. We welcome the opportunity to engage with the committee on this matter. My comments today will focus on three areas. The first is the context in which the ASAP was approved, the second is the problematic nature of the ASAP and the third is why Ireland should refrain from participating in this initiative.

Starting with the context, in July 2023 the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly to approve the ASAP. This regulation was designed to provide for the faster delivery of armament to Ukraine and the replenishment of EU member states’ stockpiles, with an initial €500 million being allocated in the form of a ramp-up fund to incentivise European arms companies to increase production. In advance of the parliamentary vote, MEPs were provided with a parliamentary briefing on the key aspects of the ASAP. It read more like a commercial risk assessment for arms investors. The only concern raised in the entire briefing was not that the Ukraine war would continue causing massive loss of life and devastation, but perversely, that the war would end, in which case "demand for ammunition may drop off instantly".

This is indicative of the war-frenzied logic that has taken hold in Brussels, leaving virtually no room for voices for peace. Ireland must be one of those voices. Despite the EU signing off on a multimillion euro injection of public money for highly lucrative private arms companies, Jan Pie, secretary general of the AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe, ASD, expressed regret at the "limits ... of the financial envelope".

The second part of my contribution is on the problematic aspects of the ASAP. The provisions of the ASAP set a very dangerous precedent in terms of law-making in Brussels, not least with regard to Article 41(2) of the Treaty on European Union, which prohibits such spending. The ASAP proposal included just one sentence in its fundamental rights section on the right to life. Meanwhile, three paragraphs were dedicated to how the regulation intersects with the freedom to conduct business and the right to property. This is deeply troublesome when the subject at the centre of this legislation is lethal war material.

The ASAP refers to the urgency and exceptional circumstances of the Ukraine war to permit member states to derogate from norms on labour law, environmental standards and public contracts, encouraging them to use "defence related exemptions [...] to mitigate possible obstacles". It includes a bail-out mechanism to address potential financial losses to the arms industry should the concern that the Ukraine war end become a reality. It is a co-financing instrument, meaning in its implementation it will be supplemented with other sources of public funding leading to ever-expansive pools of public finance being funnelled into the private arms industry. With the expected co-funding from other sources, the overall budget exceeds €1.5 billion.

Moreover, in their approval of the ASAP, MEPs voted themselves out of having any scrutiny of how it is implemented, meaning there is no oversight whatsoever of it. Urgency was cited here as a justification. Finally, because of the urgency, national parliaments were denied the opportunity to scrutinise the legislation before it was enacted, hence us being here today retroactively scrutinising it after the fact and almost a year later.

Moving to where Ireland stands on this issue, Ireland is a neutral country. We do not start wars, we do not participate in them and Article 29 of Bunreacht na hÉireann calls for the peaceful settlement of international disputes. Participating in the production of lethal weaponry used to prolong wars goes against the principles on which our nation and democracy were founded. It is, therefore, our firm recommendation that Ireland immediately withhold finance for this and all other defence and military initiatives, as permitted under the Treaty itself in Article 31(1), emanating from Brussels and we instead, in line with our Constitution, use our voice and our public resources to call for diplomacy and peace. I thank the committee.