Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to join colleagues for this important debate. I will conclude today's session with a few words on the consultative forum and the related next steps. Allow me to thank Deputies for their valuable contributions in the House today. One of the main goals of the forum was to generate discussions on our foreign, security and defence policies. Anyone who has listened to the last two hours of lively, open debate will surely conclude that we have certainly succeeded in that regard. The value of the last four days of discussion that took place in June of this year was to ensure that conversations on this very topic would be based on facts and evidence. There was an enormous variety of views and depth of knowledge among the contributions to the forum. We saw 80 people moderating or speaking on 18 panels over the four days of the forum, all of whom had considerable expertise and experience. They included many Irish people with on-the-ground experience of peacekeeping and peacebuilding all over the world, both civilians and military, as well as academics, experts from NGOs and Irish people working in the UN, the EU, the OSCE and NATO. It was also an open and inclusive process with approximately 1,000 members of the public in attendance and over 10,000 online viewers accessing the live stream during the forum. In addition, almost 850 submissions to the public consultations have been received.

The totality of these contributions was factored into Professor Louise Richardson's final report. For anyone who has not yet had a chance to read the report, I strongly recommend reading her expertly written findings, which represent a concise and measured account of the range of views on this issue in Ireland today.

As the Tánaiste previously commented, what was most striking was the degree of consensus to be found on many of the most significant aspects of foreign, security and defence policies. Ireland's commitment to a values-based foreign policy, to multilateralism and to the policy of military neutrality is not in question. Let me be very clear about that. Our contribution to both peacebuilding and peacekeeping has received global recognition. Such work is often grounded in the historical experience of conflict resolution on this island. Our partners, such as those who lead the peace process in Colombia, welcome the lessons we can share from our past. The role played by Irish women and men in UN peacekeeping missions, often in some of the most volatile security settings in the world, is an important part of our identity and one that inspires great pride in the Irish people. The consultative forum offered us an opportunity to hear directly from some of those individuals and to explore in more detail how exactly their work impacts on the lives of others.

One further area of consensus that arose during the discussions was the need for greater investment and support in our Defence Forces. Many Members present today will agree with me that it is now essential that we see significant and wide-ranging changes to the Defence Forces and defence provision in Ireland. As Minister for Defence, the Tánaiste set out the commitment to provide a positive transformation of our Defence Forces into a modern, agile military force capable of responding to increasingly complex security threats. This commitment is borne out in the high-level ambition plan to progress the recommendations of the Commission on the Defence Forces. This plan commits the State to move to level of ambition 2 with the commensurate increase in the defence budget from €1.1 billion to €1.5 billion in 2022 prices by 2028. We have already seen progress made in this commitment through the increased spending on the defence budget in 2023 and 2024.

Greater support for our Defence Forces brings me to an issue on which there has been much discussion but no single agreed point of view. I refer to the much-discussed triple lock mechanism. Participants at the forum from a wide range of backgrounds raised the question of how we can preserve our choice as a State to participate in EU-led missions in the context of an increasingly fragmented and contested UN Security Council, and which has not approved a new peacekeeping mission in almost a decade.

The Tánaiste presented his views earlier today on the need for a new process to replace the current triple lock, which allows Security Council members like Russia to bind Ireland's hands on international engagements. I direct those who argue that the discussion of this issue is all part of a plan to abandon our military neutrality towards my earlier remarks or those of the Tánaiste in his opening address. Any amendments that will be put in place would guarantee full compliance with the principles of the UN Charter and international law.

As Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, I work closely with our partner countries on a daily basis. I see the value of such co-operation in every area of our economy and society. I see no reason we would shy away from doing the same in the field of security and defence where it is in Ireland's interest to do so and not contrary to our foreign policy or military neutrality.

Our commitment to a values-based foreign policy, multilateralism and a policy of military neutrality does not insulate us from the harsh new security environment we find ourselves in today. The type of threats we see present today are novel and insidious. In many cases they seek to undermine our social fabric by spreading disinformation designed to stoke division. They sow doubt in our electoral system or create fear and confusion by interfering with our critical infrastructure. I point Members to the recent cyberattack on the Health Service Executive or the risk of intentional damage on our undersea cables. Members will agree that the Government must do more in this space to protect our citizens and our infrastructure. As a small nation it is entirely logical for us to look for opportunities for partnership to counter such dangers, be they in the context of permanent structured co-operation, PESCO, or through individually tailored partnership programmes with NATO.

As any representative of the Defence Forces will tell us, our involvement in the Partnership for Peace programme, in place since 1999, has offered us very significant opportunities to enhance our capabilities. The focus on the interoperability of our Defence Forces has greatly facilitated Ireland's participation in UN and EU missions overseas. By expanding into new goals such as co-operation on cybersecurity, resilience and civil preparedness, as well as maritime security, we are taking steps to protect Ireland against malicious state and non-state actors who seek to interfere with our way of life.

I strongly welcome the Tánaiste's comments that he wishes to see us go further and do more with our international partners. Equally, it is incumbent on us to take a clear look at our national security arrangements and ensure they are fit for purpose in an increasingly complex and unpredictable world. It is now timely to build on the progress made in certain areas, such as the National Cyber Security Centre, by enhancing our national security institutions. The Tánaiste made a number of commitments here today that will go some way towards doing so, most notably through the delivery of a national security statement of strategy. There will also be a clear focus on agreeing a maritime security strategy.

It is clear from the extraordinary public engagement with the forum, as well as the lively exchange of views here in the House today, that there is a real interest and a diverse range of views on Ireland's international security policy. Today's debate was an important next step in that national conversation to explore the type of challenges we face and to agree how we as a State are preparing to face them. I look forward to joining with my colleagues across the House and the Government in taking the next steps necessary to preserve our peace and security on this island and indeed around the world.

See this speech in context