Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)

Without doubt the ultimate purpose of this Bill is to allow the Defence Forces to join EU battle groups. EU battle groups are to be ready for deployment anywhere in the world within five days of an instruction from the European Council. EU battle groups do not require a UN mandate for their activities. Irish participation in battle groups, therefore, requires legislative change. Hence the Defence (Amendment) Bill 2006.

The public is dubious of any pretence on the part of this Government of a commitment to Irish neutrality. This Bill is being pushed through under the cover of night post haste. Sinn Féin has serious reservations about this legislation. We oppose the integration of the Defence Forces into EU battle groups, the effective elimination of the triple lock safeguards and the underhand manner by which this Bill will be passed at midnight.

Sinn Féin believes the UN must have primacy in international affairs above all other regional groups and organisations. The UN needs radical reform, particularly the veto system, which has been abused by the United States to prevent action against Israel. If the UN is further sidelined, however, as is proposed in this Bill, we will undoubtedly witness more illegal wars like that in Iraq and, by virtue of this Bill, Irish Defence Forces could be even more directly complicit in such wars. This eventuality would irreparably tarnish the proud record of the Defence Forces in international peacekeeping under the guise of the UN.

The Minister recently argued that entering EU battle groups is a way to enhance our commitment to the UN. In response to Deputy Ó Snodaigh's question on the State's existing commitment to the UN, he stated we offered to provide up to 850 personnel on overseas services and that this is the maximum sustainable commitment we can make to overseas peacekeeping operations. Each standing battle group, however, must have 1,500 combat soldiers, with an average rotation of seven to nine months for each soldier. Consequently there will be too few Irish personnel available for UN missions. The report of the Panel of the United Nations Peace Operations reinforces my concerns. It states that "the growth in European regional peacekeeping initiatives further depletes the pool of well-trained and well-equipped military contingents from developed countries to serve in UN-led operations".

The inevitable sidelining of the UN is to be accompanied by the promotion of NATO as a main player in global relations. A document from the Finnish Ministry of Defence states that in practice the battle groups will mostly be trained on NATO exercises. According to that document, the objective is to make the EU battle groups mutually supportive of and complementary to NATO and operational methods and procedures will be harmonised with their NATO counterparts.

Who does the Minister think he is fooling suggesting that EU battle groups would be better named "peace brigades" or speaking of them in convoluted terms such as "EU rapid response battle group concepts"? Battle groups do exactly what it says on the tin, they involve combat soldiers going into battle and they are equipped to do so. As Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the NATO Secretary General has said, battle groups could be used to go to war. Why did the EU create the battle groups? It was not just to help rebuild countries. They are not for building schools and we should not think the EU is for soft power while NATO is for tough power.

The Irish people wholeheartedly support the triple lock safeguards of our neutrality. This may be inferred without question from the Nice treaty referenda. The Government is now attempting to circumvent the triple lock with this legislation, particularly in sections 1, 3 and 8.

The Bill also introduces a form of secondary conscription. Until now members of the Defence Forces volunteered to undertake services overseas. This Bill removes the voluntary nature of such service by requiring it from members under orders.

We will oppose this Bill strenuously and I call on everyone here who has a conscience, particularly in the Labour Party, on Irish neutrality and sovereignty to oppose this Bill.

See this speech in context