Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am thankful for the opportunity to contribute briefly to the debate.

On 19 February 2019, in the previous Dáil, we debated a motion on the European Defence Agency. The now Government Chief Whip and Minister of State and then front bench spokesperson for defence, communications, climate action and environment, Deputy Jack Chambers, took part in that debate from the Opposition benches. He said at the time:

I note the breath-taking speed with which the Government and the Minister of State have advanced this business through the House. It is disappointing the defence matters of pay and conditions that we often discuss do not receive the same level of attention. We have had many promises about deadlines around quarter 1 and quarter 2 and we have had continuous delays, yet this proposal is being advanced within a two-week window. Perhaps the Minister of State could address pay and conditions and the core issues regarding defence-related expenditure in this House with the same degree of urgency and at a similar pace.

I wonder what progress has been made on pay and conditions for our Defence Forces since Deputy Chambers's party got into Government?

I also spoke during that debate more than two years ago. I spoke against the motion and at the time said "militarisation, EU defence integration and the overall global militarisation agenda is being pushed and shaped by private sector interests". That statement remains true today. The contribution of another Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan,also makes for interesting reading. I wonder what happens when people enter Government? Is there a cloakroom to hang some principles and policies and they get left behind as people move into fancy offices, surrounded by admiring advisors? Is it the cloakroom of electoral promises and morals?

The Twitter biography for the EDA states "The European Defence Agency (EDA) is the hub forco-operation". The word "hub" makes it sound like a cosy little get-together, planning military moves over tea and biscuits. On Tuesday this week, the EDA held a large conference entitled "Impact of Disruptive Technologies on Defence". It had 15 speakers lined up for panels on disruptive technologies, artificial intelligence and autonomous systems. The robots are coming so everyone be sure to be nice to your Alexa.

I have linked with some colleagues and activists on this motion and was informed that things have been very quiet recently. There is an aura of opaqueness around this area that is not acceptable and does nothing to build trust. Artificial intelligence gets a mention as well. One take on the matter is that the EU must be ambitious if it wants to match the Chinese military. The chairman of the EU military committee, General Claudio Graziano, stated "the prospect of slashed defence budgets and cancelled training missions has weakened the EU’s ability to defend itself.” The four-star general told the Financial Timesthat the 2017 launch of a multibillion euro fund for military equipment and tech research was a step in the right direction, “even if not as fast as I would like”, while calling for a greater focus on technology and expanding international maritime co-operation, the latter being one of the PESCO tasks the Government has signed up to.

General Graziano’s remarks come as many EU nations ponder how to pay for the vast debts run up as a result of the coronavirus outbreak. Military budgets across the EU are likely to be slashed to help cover the costs of the health crisis. There may be some benefit to this crisis if that is the case. According to the defence publication Janes, there is a forecast of a "noticeable slowdown" in military spending this year. Budgets across the EU continued to increase in 2020, up almost 5.6% on the previous year but they are likely to weaken in 2021, according to the magazine. Global defence spending increased 1.9% to $1.9 trillion in 2020.

General Graziano suggested the EU must continue to be ambitious if it wants to keep up with Chinese military reforms, stressing that the EU should focus on technological research and development in response to the potential threats posed by cyber and hybrid warfare, which involves political and economic aggression. He also warned of the future use of disruptive technologies such as artificial intelligence, which is all grist to the mill of the European Defence Fund and its military-industrial cheerleaders. He noted that the EU would have to bolster its maritime security powers to help counter China’s claims to disputed territories in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. General Graziano stated the EU needs to play a greater role in the area with a "more systematic presence". So, can we look forward to the Irish Navy, when it gets crews ready, heading to the Taiwan Strait to protect "our" interests?

Other news reported that the European Union has approved its first defence research budget. The 2021 to 2027 budget is estimated at over €7 billion and has been "designed to foster an innovative and competitive industrial base to increase Europe’s military autonomy". First there was a pilot programme, designed by Brussels, called the Preparatory Action on Defence Research, which was "to test the ability of European companies to undertake defence research projects". A Spanish research institute, AITEX, based in Alicante, has been awarded the contract.

What exactly is our role in all of this? Do we participate at EU defence meetings? What is our contribution to the EU defence budget? How does our Government protect our neutrality in this? Perhaps the Minister and Government can explain that as well. So much money. What a waste.

See this speech in context