Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Fein)

The Swiss and the Austrians have constitutional protections in terms of neutrality so perhaps that is a conversation the Tánaiste wants to have. Instead of legislation governing the triple lock then perhaps the Tánaiste wants to have a conversation about us looking at constitutional protection for neutrality. Let us have that conversation. I suspect that is not what is in the Tánaiste's mind. If the Tánaiste is concerned about sovereignty I suggest that the Government puts this proposition to the people, given there have been two referendums in which the Irish people were assured that the triple lock would remain in place and that it was attached in protocols to European treaties. If the Tánaiste is so confident on the issue of sovereignty then I suggest he puts it to the people.

As regards the committee, a lot of the issues that were instanced by Government representatives as reasons to get rid of the triple lock are not prevented by the triple lock. Carrying out duties as military representatives, filling appointments or postings outside the State, and secondments to international organisations are not prevented by the triple lock. Conducting or participating in training is not prevented by the triple lock. Undertaking monitoring, observation or advisory duties is not prevented by the triple lock. Undertaking reconnaissance or fact-finding missions is not prevented by the triple lock. Participating in supporting duties, inspecting and evacuating stores, undertaking military close protection or undertaking humanitarian tasks - none of these are prevented by the triple lock. That was found and confirmed by the-----

See this speech in context