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

I will do my best. We were told the Minister would speak for a short time, but his contribution went substantially over the odds. We all have a responsibility to balance our comments.

This debate is one of the twilight zone discussions that often occurs here, where we say one thing and the reality is something entirely different. The Minister talks about supporting our neutrality and then acts as a cheerleader and advocate of us being, in effect, an outpost of US imperialism. In reality, our approach to this issue is very much like our approach to abortion, where we say there is no such thing as Irish abortion and we provide a constitutional right for an Irish woman to have an abortion, but we do not allow her to have it in Ireland. It is the same sickening hypocrisy which has stood over this debate. I would have far more respect for the Government and Fianna Fáil if they told the truth, namely, that they are happy for us not to have a position of neutrality, because that is the reality of their actions. They do not do it because they understand very well that it is at variance with the will of the Irish people as indicated in repeated opinion polls.

Our neutrality probably has a lot more to do with the war against Britain, nationalism in the early days and trying to free ourselves from the yoke of British imperialism, but it has developed from that into something which Irish people hold very dear. When they go on holidays they like to be recognised as not being English or from an aggressor nation. They are very much affiliated with the idea of being part of the peoples of the world rather than facilitating world powers. We do, because of that, have the potential to punch way above our weight in terms of international affairs, something which we have abandoned.

As Deputy Mick Wallace said, we are curtailed in what we can say in the run-up to our court case but we will have the full benefit of that after it is over. Deputy Mick Wallace will move a similar Bill in about two weeks time. We will develop some of our points at that stage. One of the key reasons put forward by the Minister as to why he could not support the Bill, which was ably echoed by his Fianna Fáil colleague, was the alleged basis that this would limit our willingness to respond to international situations. That is rubbish.

Obviously, the Government is worried that if the amendment were to be included in the Constitution, it might clip its wings somewhat, the actions of the State and its ability to kowtow and breach our neutrality. I am not surprised that Fianna Fáil supported the Government because Wiki leaks was very clear in exposing its role. Former Deputy Dermot Ahern came into the House and gave repeated assurances that Ireland was not involved in rendition, but we found out later that he was going to the Americans to express his sincerely held belief we were involved, through the use of Shannon Airport, in that project. We will be pursuing these issues and the complicity of certain sections of the Irish establishment in actively breaching our neutrality.

It is unfortunate that Fianna Fáil compared Ireland to Sweden when we all know about the active involvement of Sweden in NATO and despite the wish for us to remain neutral. These are very important issues. As Deputy Mick Wallace said, it is not just a matter of non-participation, it is also a matter of non-discrimination. By affording the US military the right to use Shannon Airport, if we were really neutral, we would give the same rights to Libya, Russia, Syria and anyone else on the way to bomb the United States, which, obviously, would be ludicrous because it would set up Shannon Airport as a potential battlefield.

We know from history that applications have been made. I refer to the example in 1959 of the British Government seeking permission to use Tory Island in refuelling helicopters on naval exercises. The response of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade at the time was illustrative:

It is difficult to see how this request could be acceded to. The islands mentioned [Tory Island was also mentioned as a location] are as much part of the national territory as Stephen's Green. It is known that we give permission for the landing in our territory of unarmed military planes engaged on peaceful duty, e.g. US army planes carrying US personnel for leave in Ireland or in transit to the USA. It is quite another thing to give permission not only for aircraft engaged on warlike exercises to land on our territory but also to use our territory as a refuelling base for such exercises.

Traditionally and in the 1950s, US troops went on their holidays to their garrison bases in Germany not involved in conflict, but that changed in 1999. The scale of movement of US personnel through Shannon Airport gives rise to no other conclusion other than that they are involved in military exercises. The total last year alone was 55,000. Over 600 exemptions were sought for military aircraft to land at Shannon Airport, or almost two flights a day, while over 700 exemptions were sought to carry weaponry on chartered aircraft transiting troops to the Middle East to the slaughter and horror under way there.

In deference to other Deputies I will conclude. The Minister should read the ruling of Mr. Justice Kearns in the High Court in the case of Horgan v.Ireland. He ruled that there were rules on neutrality, but that it was a matter for the Dáil rather than for the courts. We need to revisit this matter and consider boosting our legislation by means of a constitutional amendment. It is my belief the Government does not wish to do so because it wants to keep on doing what it is doing - doffing the cap to the US establishment in return for a few sandwiches or cows.

See this speech in context