Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

As part of the strategic agenda, there is a statement about protecting citizens and freedoms. We should examine how Europe protects migrants and their freedoms. The Tánaiste was emphatic yesterday that it is not EU policy to return migrants to Libya and its detention centres, yet that is where some migrants end up. As well as being sent to the detention centres in Libya with their appalling human rights abuses, they are being sent to a war zone.

On the multi-annual financial framework, we have heard the term "tax harmonisation". A better principle to consider, however, is tax justice. I question the motives of the large European powers which spent their histories, in the age of colonialism and imperialism, plundering African countries of all their natural resources, a practice that continues today with multinationals. There must be a commitment to tax justice. We could do with more transparency in respect of our 12.5% corporation taxation rate and must bear in mind the danger of relying on it solely to fund services.

Brexit is unbelievable. Reading the views of the contenders for the position of British Prime Minister, what comes across is their ignorance and utter lack of interest in Irish history, the Good Friday Agreement, what it meant and how it was achieved.

I have previously raised the issue of the increasing securitisation agenda in Europe and the so-called European peace facility, EPF. I say "so-called" because it is obvious it is anything but a peace facility. It was proposed by the former Vice President of the European Commission, Ms Federica Mogherini, to support our partners in dealing with our shared security challenge but it means the EU will be allowed to provide, train, equip and support the armed forces of third countries affected by conflict. What types of equipment will be financed through the EPF? I refer to lethal and non-lethal weapons, and equipment that could be used for torture and human rights violations. It marks a shift in EU policy, which had excluded the direct provision of lethal equipment to foreign government partners. The question is how the facility contributes to peace, justice and development outcomes. It seems to suggest there will be an over-reliance on the use of force. We have heard many examples of wars that were supposed to be short when they started but that continue, such as those in Libya and Syria.

The Government's position on the matter is not clear, even though I received a reply from the Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, to a parliamentary question I tabled in which he stated it had been discussed at ministerial level but that there was limited support for aspects of the proposal. We need much stronger attitudes and statements on the matter from the Government.

That brings me to another topic I have discussed previously, namely, the arms industry, because it is in the same context as the EPF. In 2017, the world spent an estimated $1.74 trillion on weapons and military, while the EU states spent €260 billion on arms. That is appalling and frightening, yet we are speaking about the EU and its peace facility. It is totally at odds with what we are saying and very much so with Ireland's neutrality. As I have stated, EU Ministers and so on speak about peace, development and human rights issues, but the same EU countries make millions or billions of euro from the arms industry.

If we continue with that European peace facility and do not voice concerns about it and if we are not a stronger voice against this arms spending, it will completely undermine our new development policy, A Better World.

See this speech in context