Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Social Democrats for bringing forward this timely motion, which I support, but it is probably too late. Judging by the Government's behaviour yesterday, when it rammed through Standing Orders, it appears that it will do exactly the same with this legislation. I have no faith in the Government and I say that as a committed democrat in the Dáil. I will quote from the Transnational Institute, TNI, because I could not put the words any better. It stated, "This is a fundamental policy shift that will seriously weaken Irish neutrality. It could see Irish troops being deployed, not to keep peace within a UN mandated mission, but to wage war as part of a military alliance".

This is a fundamental shift in policy and a fundamental twisting of language, where one day, or one year, the triple lock is an integral, core part of our neutrality and the next day it is not. How could anyone trust the Government in relation to the misuse and abuse of language like that? It is a further breach of trust with the Irish people. It was done to us with Nice and with Lisbon. We got a declaration and another document that acknowledged our neutrality and that would always be acknowledged.

This change will have profound long-term consequences, not just for our country, but for peace in the world. I do not want to personalise this but I know the Minister of State represents the Government which talks about being "militarily neutral". When it is reduced down to that, that is an insult. Neutrality means a lot more to all of us, as evidenced by the thousands of representations we are getting on a daily basis regarding this proposal to get rid of the triple lock. What it means is that we take pride in the history of our troops who have served abroad since 1958 on UN peacekeeping missions, not peace-enforcement missions. I know it is difficult for the Minister of State to hear that but in my limited time I will ask him to listen to it because people are asking me to speak out. I do not stand here for no reason. Peacekeeping forces are what we want. We passed an Act in 2006 that allowed the Government to send more than 12 troops abroad for various reasons, including humanitarian ones. The Minister of State might spell out what the Government wants to change. He might also clarify how the Government can rightly decry what Russia has done - and I agree with it - and completely ignore what Israel and America is doing and have done.

I have read the speeches of some 5,500 words. They contain no mention of Gaza, except one word. There is no mention of the genocide going on there. There is no mention of our friend, America, funding the genocide. When the Ministers of State put the folder down, we might see their faces because this is a very important topic. They cannot hide but they can try to. They can try to hide behind the misuse of language to tell us that the Government is not doing away with our neutrality but only with the triple lock. The Government does not want to be burdened by international human rights law. It does not want to be burdened with the responsibility of changing the UN to make it more suitable to the modern age. The Government does not want to work with the all of those other countries that see what Israel and England are doing. Before he leaves, the Minister of State might just listen to the planes that have left from London to Yemen with American money, bombs and weaponry to bomb innocent people on the streets of Yemen.

See this speech in context