Micheál Martin (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail)

I thank all the Deputies for raising those various issues. Deputy Brennan raised the key issue of Ukraine's accession process. Ukraine has responded very well to the framework that governs accession. Basically, it involves reform. Ukraine has carried out a lot of reforms, which the Commission has acknowledged to the membership of the EU Council. The Commission has also stated that Ukraine has been extremely positive in terms of meeting the various standards required. One of the big issues we have is that Hungary continues to oppose the formal opening of the first chapter, even though we would argue that the European Council had agreed to the accession process in an earlier vote over a year ago. At the same time, there is a parallel negotiating process in terms of approximating Ukraine to the various standards that would apply to different chapters. It is very regrettable that Hungary has behaved in such a manner. It is really endeavouring to stifle and stop Ukraine from joining.

Key milestones have been reached. There is ongoing interaction with the Commission. We have offered support in terms of providing personnel, namely people from Ireland who would have previous experience of the European Union, to help with Ukraine. We have offered funding on the humanitarian side and so forth. What we can also do - we do this with other accession states - is in terms of training of public servants, utilising the IPA and so on. We are very open to helping the country on progressing the reforms and understanding how the EU works.

We have been strongest in terms of making sure that this matter is on the agenda at every meeting. In the previous Government, I would have been, in or around 2021, one of the minority pushing for accession. From a geopolitical perspective, it is a no-brainer. It has to happen. That has helped the western Balkans, even though the states there were worried Ukraine would go ahead with Moldova. Now it is accepted that enlargement, as an issue, is back firmly on the EU. It had been fairly dormant for ten years, if we are honest. It can be a long process. Hungary is really undermining the process, but we are working with Hungary and with others. My latest encounter with the President of the Council, Antonio Costa, was on Ukraine membership.

Deputy Malcolm Byrne raised very important issues in terms of cyber resilience, hybrid warfare and further supports. Deputy Shane Moynihan raised similar issues in two separate strands.

On hybrid warfare, Russia is becoming far more risk-averse or reckless, is the word I would use, in terms of violating the territorial integrity of member states of the European Union through drone violations, aeroplane violations, hybrid attacks on Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and in terms of the monitoring of subsea cables and of the gas networks between Britain and Ireland. Ireland is under threat from Russia. We should have no doubt about that. We are not immune. We are not some safe haven. It is not the case that every other member state is under pressure but we are not. The drone violations in Denmark were calculated to intimidate before the European political community met and before the informal European Council meeting in Copenhagen. That was what they was about. We should be under no illusions in that regard. As the Prime Minister of Denmark said, the pattern of behaviour is clear.

It is not an accident in the Baltic Sea when an anchor takes a gas connection or a cable with it. These are not accidents any more. The shadow fleet is very dangerous. A lot of those vessels are old but they are dual use. They are also environmental disasters waiting to happen. This is very serious because they are transporting loads of oil to India and other places. These are very real concerns that Deputy Byrne raised. I take his point in terms of the Common Agricultural Policy.

Deputy Shane Moynihan raised the issue of reparations. I link that back to some aspects of what Deputy Byrne was saying as well. As regards the immobilised assets, there is a big debate ongoing at the moment at European level. We have used the windfall from those assets. In other words, the interest accrued has already been used. I am strongly of the view that when a country like Russia invades and destroys another country, it cannot be Europe that has to rebuilt it. There has to be a financial and economic deterrent into the future. The immobilised assets should be used for the rebuilding of Ukraine. The ECB and others have issues with this from a monetary system perspective. Belgium has issues because it is the home country of Euroclear. There are issues, but it is valid to use immobilised assets in this context because of the destruction that has occurred. Countries cannot violate the UN Charter willy-nilly and then expect the good, honest countries and, I will be straight about it, the European Union pony up all of the time. That is an ongoing issue at EU Council level.

Deputy Ó Murchú raised the issue of the summit in Budapest and so on. President Trump, if we are honest, has some unorthodox methods of making peace, but he is focused on peace. He does not like war. He thinks war is irrational and he wants to end wars. I hope that applies in the context of Ukraine and that we can get traction to get the war stopped. However, Russia has shown no interest-----

See this speech in context