Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I thank People Before Profit-Solidarity, for tabling this motion, as well as the opportunity to discuss these two very important topics, namely, the triple lock and our neutrality. Despite the fact that the Tánaiste has said for several years now that we need to have a discussion about these issues, very few opportunities are presented to the Dáil to have this discussion. It is only when the Opposition tables the matter that we are given the opportunity. I therefore highlight the fact that the Government never gives us the opportunity. It speaks of security and it has provided consultation forums but it only provides its people to speak at them, so I welcome this discussion today.

Irish neutrality is not very well defined. It is not laid out in the Constitution and it has never been enshrined in legislation. However, we know that neutrality has been the effective State policy since the foundation of the State and it has served us very well. We have never signed up to any collective defence alliance, whether NATO or any other alliance, and while we did adopt the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy, we rightly did not sign up to its collective defence mechanisms.

A line we have heard a lot in the past few years is that we are politically aligned but militarily neutral, which probably reflects the situation relatively well, but I would add that we are also grossly hypocritical in our approach. Never has that been more the case than in the response to Russia's horrific invasion of Ukraine when compared to the response to Israel's absolute brutal attempt at the annihilation of the people of Gaza. One saw a rapid and collective concert of sanctions whereas the other response was slow, with the need to talk behind closed doors and to work through diplomacy while the genocide rages all the while. This has undermined our neutrality and left us looking hypocritical to those who are suffering the most.

Ireland's neutrality is not something that can be taken for granted. It cannot be a position that is taken and then remains unaltered in perpetuity. It must be defended, it should be defined and, where necessary, it can change with circumstances. It should be an active neutrality, not a passive one. Active neutrality means acting in the interests of institutions such as the UN, ICC and ICJ, which were built on the very premise of “never again” meaning “never again”, no matter who it is against or who we need to bring to justice. That is under onslaught at the present and the idea that we are removing ourselves from one vital component of the United Nations by removing the triple lock, as opposed to defending it and trying to push it forward and advance it, is incredibly unbecoming.

I listened to the Tánaiste. I would like to accept that he feels he is genuine in his sense that the removal of the triple lock would somehow not undermine our neutrality but he did not create a very compelling argument. In fact, much of this argument was deconstructed very quickly in the analysis that he wanted to present to the Dáil. It is incredible that without a mandate through a party manifesto or a programme for Government, the Tánaiste, and the previous Minister, Deputy Simon Coveney, before him, would seek to remove this. In fact, the programme for Government explicitly said we would keep the triple lock. It is undemocratic in the extreme.

The discussion illustrates that strong consideration should be given to officially defining neutrality and having it protected in the Constitution. otherwise it seems to be at the whim of whomever is Minister for Defence at the time. By not having it defined in the Constitution, the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence is creating an argument for removing a very important component of our neutrality, although it simply falls down at the first sight of parliamentary debate. A citizens’ assembly on the matter would help us to explore the subject further but it should be one that starts off with a remit that is very much informed by what we know for sure, which is that the majority of Irish people support neutrality and want to see it maintained and protected, not undermined. The question should be how to maintain and protect it in a way that allows it to be dynamic and move with international developments.

Neutrality has been undermined consistently in the past couple of decades. For example, there is nothing neutral about aligning with other countries for our own security or to patrol our seas and skies. There is certainly nothing neutral about allowing US military planes to land at Shannon Airport. The story came out yesterday about a US general on his way to Israel to engage with a war criminal but we did not even have the self-respect to say we would like to know what was on that warplane. That is not the behaviour of a neutral state; that is the behaviour of a satellite state.

To be neutral, we need to resource the Defence Forces properly. We are currently well short of the establishment number and we cannot recruit fast enough to even maintain current numbers, never mind increase them. I want us to be realistic about what is required. Geopolitical developments of the past few years have shifted the world order and many of these developments have highlighted Ireland's deficiencies. We have no air surveillance or radar capacity, and we do not know what is above our skies or below our seas. As a modern, self-respecting republic, at a very minimum, we should have those things. That will impose a cost but it should not deter us. We should not rely on other countries to defend our airspace and have to call on neighbours to conduct patrols in our waters due to naval personnel shortages. That is no reflection on the proud men and women of the Naval Service, who do an incredible job in difficult circumstances and conditions. However, we should invest in them more. We are seen as a soft touch for transnational organised crime, with the international drugs trade using Irish waters as a gateway to Europe. We should not permit that to continue. We know that in recent years probing missions have used our airspace to test the resolve of other European countries. This is not neutrality, or this is not the kind of neutrality that will serve us well into the future. We should not see neutrality as a way of underinvesting in our Defence Forces and peacekeeping forces. As an island, we conduct the vast majority of our trade by sea so securing Irish sea lanes is vital. We should pay our Defence Forces properly and equip them to do the job we need them to do.

Neutrality is a fundamental principle of the Social Democrats, as are national security and, indeed, economic security and the advancement of global peace. As I said, Ireland's neutrality cannot be taken for granted. It must not be left undefined but, I repeat, there is nothing neutral about aligning with other countries for our own security. All of the parties on the left should be able to acknowledge this without attacking the bona fides of other left-wing politicians because they want to approach neutrality from a practical perspective as well as an ideological one. The practical elements of neutrality also need to be taken into consideration. Regarding that ideological approach, the triple lock has been a very important part of our neutrality since the 1960s and it is clear the Government has no mandate to remove it. We know that the majority of people in Ireland support neutrality, that none of the Government parties went to the voters in 2020 talking about altering the status quoand that they promised to maintain the triple lock in the programme for Government. We will be playing a potentially dangerous game with the removal of the triple lock at any point and, certainly, the way the Government is going about it will undermine democratic norms.

Regardless of what the Tánaiste and the Government believe are the merits of the arguments, this is something which absolutely must be mandated by the people. There is literally nobody calling for this. We are all out canvassing every night coming up to the local and European elections and we know the issues that are coming up at the doors. Would the Tánaiste be able to tell me that anyone is asking him to remove the triple lock? For someone who often talks about his unwillingness to move unilaterally, this is a very unilateral move being taken by the Government without any mandate from the population.

See this speech in context