Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I am glad to have the opportunity to contribute to this debate and I thank the Tánaiste for providing a briefing to members of the Opposition this afternoon. In spite of that the Social Democrats continue to have concerns about the Government's response to the awful poisoning incident in Salisbury recently. In being prepared to believe that Russia is responsible for the poisoning, particularly in light of the supposed origin of the nerve agent, it would appear that the Government is relying solely on the word of the British Government. While we accept that the UK may have presented strong evidence at the EU Foreign Affairs Council briefing, we are not in a position to adjudicate on that evidence. We are not in possession of the information that was provided. Decisions of this magnitude in this House should be taken on the basis of clear and strong evidence. That is not available. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade is talking in terms of in all probability or in all likelihood. That is not strong enough for action of this sort to be taken.

If we are to accept that Russia is responsible, what is the purpose of expelling a diplomat in solidarity? The Minister needs to clarify what this will achieve beyond a statement of solidarity with the UK. There are many other ways we can state our solidarity with the UK in respect of this incident that do not require this action to be taken. The Minister must also clarify why this was the course of action chosen above any other. The expulsion of diplomats is a very low-effort response that seems to have no real purpose. How was that individual chosen to be expelled? Was there some reason for that? Did he or she pose a threat in some way to the State and if so why was that not addressed sooner? It seems to be an extraordinary coincidence that this individual's activities were brought to the attention of the authorities at the same time that the UK was asking us to take action by way of expulsions. While several EU states expelled Russian diplomats from their countries, not all did so.

Austria, Malta, Luxembourg and a number of other countries chose to take a different course.

The decision to expel this diplomat seems to be based entirely on a need to show solidarity with the UK. We have to question if this is an appropriate response in the first instance or, indeed, if it is the most effective way to show our solidarity regarding this terrible attack. Surely this awful incident in Salisbury should result in a redoubling of peace efforts on a pan-European basis. Ireland, as a neutral country, is ideally placed to provide the leadership in that regard. This was a missed opportunity. We were quite sheepish in going along with what the UK was requesting rather than stepping back, looking at what was in the interests of world peace and avoiding a new cold war and providing leadership on that.

In respect of Russian activity in Ireland, a number of reputable sources have alleged that two arms of the Russian security services are operating here, namely, military intelligence, the GRU, and foreign intelligence service, the SVR. The massive planned expansion of the Russian embassy in Rathgar, accompanied by an on-site ESB substation to be built by a Russian company that primarily engages in military contracting, is undoubtedly a cause for alarm. Ireland now has an abnormally large contingent of Russian diplomatic staff for a country of its size. Several other European intelligence agencies have suggested that Ireland could be in the process of being used as a Trojan horse to allow Russian intelligence agencies build links with individuals working in the technology, science and Internet services sector in this country.

There are clear concerns about the embassy being used for nefarious purposes, the most high-profile of these being the 2010 implication of Rathgar-based SVR officers in the running of a spy ring in the US and the forging of Irish passports for this purpose. There is also the disturbing recent hacking of the ESB network by a group linked to the GRU. While the Garda and the National Cyber Security Centre are undoubtedly doing valuable work, it is unacceptable, given the scale of the threat, that we are reliant on overseas intelligence agencies for such information. The fact that we are being viewed as a Trojan horse is no doubt influenced by the scant attention that we pay to these kinds of threats, often assuming that there are things that only occur elsewhere and would not occur here. If a state has a population of less than 3,000 living here and has a history of using Ireland as a base for suspect and questionable activity, alarm bells should be ringing when it makes plans to construct an embassy three times as large as its embassy in the United States. The Government should be investing resources to ensure that there will be preventative work done rather than putting on a show of solidarity, as is happening in respect of this expulsion.

It seems that responsibility for security is spread over a number of agencies, without having a single one with clear responsibility. There are big questions about the capability and capacity of our security services. Allied to this is the urgent need to separate responsibility between policing and the whole security area within the Department of Justice and Equality. Ultimately, we should be doing much more intensive work on this. We should be taking a lead role in respect of peacekeeping rather than engaging in a knee-jerk reaction like this.

See this speech in context