Dáil debates

Tuesday, 4 July 2006

Defence (Amendment) Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage.

 

11:00 pm

Photo of Willie O'DeaWillie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)

I thank Members for the interest they have taken in this timely legislation. I appreciate their kind remarks concerning the work members of our Defence Forces undertake on overseas operations. Wherever they are our troops serve with professionalism, dedication, courage and unselfish humanity. Their commitment, service and loyalty to the traditions of the Defence Forces contribute extensively to the high regard in which Ireland is held throughout the international community.

In the five minutes allocated, I will not have time to cover all the points that have been raised during the debate. I am aware of the case raised by Deputy Ned O'Keeffe and I am already examining it. I am conducting some investigations into the case and I will be in touch with the Deputy shortly concerning the matter.

Deputy Timmins made the usual predictable speech about the triple lock. I cannot get my head around this. Deputy Timmins argued that the triple lock was excessive and that it is restricting and restraining us. Deputy Gormley says the triple lock has disappeared completely. Between the two of them I cannot figure it out. The maintenance of the triple lock as a traditional form is Government policy and will remain Government policy.

Deputy Timmins asked about the General Assembly. Under the 1960 Act, a decision by the United Nations to endorse a peace support operation can be taken either by the Security Council or the General Assembly. As I understand it, the practice has developed since the time of the Korean War that it is always endorsed by the Security Council and the General Assembly never seems to pass a resolution. I am informed that there is a debate within the United Nations whether the General Assembly can authorise the dispatch of an international peace force. Invariably it is endorsed by the Security Council.

Deputy Timmins has argued that the triple lock results in our abdicating our sovereignty to China or one of the other members of the Security Council with a permanent veto. That is not the case. The triple lock is a deliberate policy of the Government so that it is an exercise in sovereignty, not an abdication of sovereignty. We as a sovereign Government decide that we will not dispatch troops abroad without the sanction of the United Nations. That is an example of an exercise of sovereignty rather than the opposite which he argued would be an abdication of sovereignty.

Deputy Costello raised a number of interesting technical points. He accused me of organising the timing of the Bill. That is not true. I did not have anything to do with the timing of the Bill or the time arrangement.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.