Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE) | Oireachtas source

Wrong. Again, the Tánaiste is engaging in a very dishonest debate because he is not referring to the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006 which changed that. This is not about the UN Security Council. The notion of any country having a veto is a complete and utter red herring. The 2006 Act, which is explicitly about dealing with this issue, changed it. That legislation says "UN approval", which is explicitly not UN Security Council authorisation and UN command. The Act refers to "an international force or body established, mandated, authorised, endorsed, supported, approved or otherwise sanctioned by a resolution of the Security Council or [and this is the important bit] the General Assembly of the United Nations". There is no Security Council veto. It is in black and white in our current law. The current arguments that the Government is making about getting rid of the triple lock were the arguments that were made for the 2006 Act. This has been dealt with. If, for example, there was a regional peacekeeping mission into Gaza or somewhere else, and there was a veto at the UN Security Council but it was passed by a majority vote of the General Assembly, that would meet the terms of the triple lock.

See this speech in context