Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate. I think it is a well overdue debate. We, certainly, are delighted as a party that there will be an in-depth consultative process with the people of Ireland, with all views on Ireland's security policy and our place in the world. We would have preferred a citizens' assembly. It was the construct that was devised by former Deputy Eamon Gilmore so successfully on major issues of contention that divided our peoples in the past. I think it has been a marvellous forum to allow all the facts to be heard by people and people to come to a conclusion. However, the Government has decided on a consultative forum. We will certainly fully support that, but we hope that it will not only inform debate, as the Tánaiste has said, around Ireland's security needs and the fast-changing international environment in which we as a nation must live and thrive too, but that it will also start a much-needed citizens' debate about how we view matters such as Irish defence and our security and what we as the Irish people want of our Government and of all those to whom we give responsibility to keep us safe. The Tánaiste has said that the report from this consultative forum will be received by him and he may bring its recommendations to Government. I ask that that not be the process. I ask that when the consultative forum finalises its deliberations and presents its report, it is presented to the Oireachtas first so that it is not mediated through Government, but is actually determined in open debate here, perhaps by a special sitting or a special committee of the House. It is the democratic forum of the people that will give legitimacy to any decisions made, rather than a forum that goes to Government, is determined by the Government and then presented finally to us to accept or reject.

In the discussion in this House on the report of the Commission on Defence Forces, I said that successive Governments - I was part of some of them - were content in raising the flag of neutrality as a pretext of spending very little in relation to defence. That is a truth. We have reached a point now when we need to set out our clear national stall unambiguously and define what we mean by our neutral status. Are we proud of it? Do we understand it? It seems to be a vehicle that can be whatever we wish it to be. I hope that our discussions that we are now embarking upon will unambiguously present Irish neutrality in all its understanding in a way that the people of Ireland fully grasp and support, but also that our position in the world is fully understood. Second, once we have that clear and unambiguous definition, we must do what we need to do to give that meaning.

I want to begin the process by setting out Labour's viewpoint. First, we regard positive neutrality as a valuable and internationally precious strategic position, one that has been at the core of our international position from the establishment of our State. Our history as a colonised people, not a coloniser, and our reputation in peace-building and peace enforcement gives us potential well beyond our economic might and military strength to make a difference in the world. We have utilised that in the past. Anybody who travels internationally knows that is a fact. This is not Pollyanna fiction; there is a place for honest brokers who are anchored in the rules of international law, human rights and democratic norms, to be a strong and persuasive voice in the world. Second, as I said previously, being neutral does not mean being impotent, which has often been our position in the past. Ultimately, we must take responsibility for our own security and our own safety. As we deliver more offshore facilities for wind generation, upon which we will be increasingly reliant for our energy, as we become more a high-tech base dependent on fibreoptic cables and develop our health, social welfare and public administration systems on digital platforms that will be increasingly vulnerable to cyberattacks, we have in parallel to those developments step by step to make them secure. Even the short period since our initial discussions on the Commission on Defence Forces report, things have moved on. Fundamentally, things have altered and the requirement for greater ambition, out of necessity, has grown.

The current state of our defence infrastructure is, quite frankly, dire. There is no other word for it. We have four usable ships currently, which, by the way, were all provided during our last period in government when we had to precious little money. If we had not expended that, we would probably have no sea-going ships at all at this stage. The two second-hand ex-New Zealand vessels arrived this week and they will be deployed for close inshore patrolling. The expectation is that they will be operational next year. Even having regard to that meagre flotilla, we do not have the personnel to put them all to sea. We have two overaged CASA maritime patrol aircraft that are about to be replaced - finally - with updated C-295 aircraft, which were ordered in 2019, four years ago. A third C-295 with troop transport capability was ordered by the Tánaiste towards the end of last year. So, we have four ships that we do not have enough personnel to crew, and two maritime aircraft. That is what our Defence Forces have to patrol the largest maritime area of any EU State. We still have no primary radar, so if aircraft enter our airspace and do not identify themselves through their own transponders, we will have no idea of either their presence there or their whereabouts. A most urgent requirement is to keep the people we have in our Defence Forces and to recruit many more.

Despite all the commitments, that is still not being done. We are still losing personnel. The joint cyber defence command with an additional 100 specialists is needed to manage cyber defences, but we do not have that yet. The new joint military intelligence service with its own intelligence school was one of the recommendations that has yet to be put in place. We will have time to debate all that needs to be done.

Ireland has been good at producing defence documents, strategies, plans and White Papers. We now need a clear vision that preserves the best of our traditions and history but for the first time since independence, gives us the ability, too, to defend our own waters, skies, infrastructure and well-being.

Sovereignty is a cherished word in this country. Successive generations shed their blood so that the Irish people could determine their own destiny and have their sovereignty in their own hands, yet we franchise out its protection to others. That is an embarrassment, but a fact. Our hope is that all perspectives are heard and valued at this forum and that there will be significant input from the people of Ireland where all their opinions are heard, and they find themselves in the report that will finally come back to us and not directly to Government to be determined by Government. I ask the Minister to reflect on that and give us that commitment. We need to explore a pathway for Ireland that is not simply to follow the path set out by others. We must recognise that the issues now under discussion at this forum and subsequently are fundamental to our country's identity.

See this speech in context