Clare Daly (Dublin North, United Left) | Oireachtas source

The first amendment in the group seeks to amend the Minister's proposal and substitute "stop a person at the airport for the exercise of any of his or her powers under this section". This amendment is based on certain fears I have. In the air traffic and navigation legislation, the wording is quite specific. People are concerned that stopping a person in this context gives one a total carte blancheto stop anybody anywhere for any reason whatsoever. Our amendment stipulates that a person can be stopped only for the exercise of powers under the relevant section. The Minister may feel that is implied in any case. Perhaps it is - I do not know - but the fact that we are specifying it is helpful.

The second amendment is to delete a section that refers specifically to the inclusion of part of the by-laws that are already in existence. One could say we know the by-law exists in any case, but my point concerns why a bit of it is being brought into the main body of the legislation. That has caused extreme concern. Is Shannon Airport to be singled out for special treatment? Is the measure being introduced to enhance the powers of the State or authorised officers, which this section deals with, in order to deal with the legitimate community protests in the area in question?

The next two amendments, Nos. 21 and 22, are linked and deal with "human trafficking, smuggling, kidnapping or other illegal transportation of persons". As Deputy Wallace mentioned, the amendments deal specifically with rendition and other unlawful activities which, it has been established without question or doubt, have been facilitated through allowing the use of Shannon Airport. To confirm this, we have only to read the editorial in The Irish Timesfrom April of last year that deals with the research that was carried out on rendition flights from the United States. It made the point that much of the practice was facilitated by Ireland. Under human rights and civil legislation, we have a responsibility to incorporate what I propose in this body of legislation that is dealing with Shannon Airport. If we do not do so, it will be a little remiss of us.

The next amendment, No. 23, implies that if an authorised officer encounters any activity he believes to be facilitating human trafficking, rendition or another such activity, he has a responsibility to intervene immediately and seek assistance for those concerned.

The most important amendment in the group is to include in the legislation the power of an unauthorised officer to search. In the context of all the points I made and the fact that Irish people have spoken out time and again about their desire for Ireland to adhere to its policy of neutrality, there is an onus on us to carry out searches. There is no way the aircraft, which travel around the world, land in Ireland twice a day for nothing or that they are not carrying arms and are not involved in anything. Given the volume of traffic, one might believe those in the US military have a large number of holidays. Clearly, that is not the case. The dogs in the street know the military personnel are carrying weapons and that Irish neutrality is being breached. In much the same way as Deputy Dooley put it to the Minister, I put it to him, in the remaining hours of his brief, that we are not looking for anything extra. Under the Chicago Convention and the Air Navigation and Transport Act, we have the right to control our own airspace and establish our own conditions. We want the Minister to include the condition I propose, which is lawful in any case. He should do so in the body of the legislation on Shannon Airport, because one cannot talk about Shannon without talking about the US military.

See this speech in context