Maeve O'Connell (Dublin Rathdown, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for attending. I have a number of questions for them. I commend them on having those roadshows about neutrality. It is useful to try to engage. They made a point that we should be having a discussion about what sort of future Ireland we want. That is important. My view on many of these discussions is that this is really the first stepping stone. Perhaps there could be a similar series of roadshows with a wider discussion. Neutrality is a limited focus. As an academic, I know that would result in a self-selected audience as opposed to the wider discussion of where we want Ireland to be and the explanation to people about how the world is changing. From talking to people, I find that they are terrified about how the world is changing. They are looking at what is happening in Gaza and Ukraine and at our close former allies and how their attitudes are changing, and they are wondering where the world is going. That is part of a wider discussion that we need to have. I see this debate as part of that. It is a step on the road to try to put us in a position where we are better able to engage in this changing this world.

Where UN Security Council approval may have been useful in the past, we are no longer finding it useful because of the reasons that have been articulated by many previous witnesses. The witnesses here talked about the vetoes. Many witnesses who have come before us have said that if it is thought that something will be turned down, it will not even be pressed to a vote. That is why votes are no longer being taken on these things. That has been restricting us as a country from participating. As another witness said, it has resulted in us being regarded as unreliable partners with the people who we regard as close allies and countries we want to work with on this.

The witnesses quoted Éamon de Valera, saying that he did not want us to be the tools of any great power. Is that not effectively where we are at the moment by having the triple lock? Are we not giving our power to the five permanent members of the Security Council to decide what we do as a country? It fundamentally goes against everything that Éamon de Valera would have stood for himself. In my view, it completely undermines our independence and sovereignty. Does any other neutral country require this or are we alone on this?