Sinéad Gibney (Dublin Rathdown, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

7. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if he will outline the proposal to remove the triple lock protection for approving overseas deployment of Irish troops; the protections to be put in place to ensure the integrity of Irish peacekeeping operations is maintained in the absence of UN approval; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6399/25]

Sinéad Gibney (Dublin Rathdown, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Irish neutrality is held dear by the people of Ireland. I am sure that, like mine, the Tánaiste's inbox is reflective of concerns about it. As we know, a proposal has gone to Cabinet to remove the triple lock. This is connected to neutrality. Will the Tánaiste please outline the proposal to remove the triple lock protection for approving overseas deployment of Irish troops? How does he propose to protect the integrity of Irish peacekeeping troops' operations maintained in the absence of UN approval?

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Gibney for this important and timely question. I have absolutely no doubt that as this issue goes through the Houses and draft legislation gets published there will quite rightly be a lot of debate and scrutiny. There should be time and space to get it right. I hope Deputy Gibney accepts my bona fides, because it is my genuine view, that I value Irish military neutrality. There is no proposal, or attempt by me to bring forward proposals, that in any way alter the neutral status of our State. We will have different views on the triple lock but I want to say this at the outset.

This is not a hidden reality as the programme for Government sets out in black and white that the Government intends to reform the triple lock legislation. This was also set out by the previous Government and by my predecessor. We also want to ensure that any amendment to legislation is in keeping with our values and our policy of military neutrality. I agree with Deputy Gibney that the people of the country feel very deeply about the importance of Irish military neutrality.

It is worth stating on the record what the triple lock means. The triple lock is a mechanism that sets out the conditions under which Irish troops may participate in overseas peace support operations. For troops to take part, the operation must be mandated by the United Nations, it must be approved by the Government, and it must be approved by Dáil Éireann by means of a resolution.

I believe a new process is clearly needed to replace the current system underpinning the deployment of Irish troops abroad, which effectively allows UN Security Council members to bind Ireland’s hands in its international engagement by a veto or, often, the threat of the use of a veto. The previous Government had approved the drafting of a general scheme of a Bill to amend the legislation on how Ireland deploys its troops overseas, in terms of overseas peacekeeping and in terms of deployment of Defence Force personnel overseas for purposes other than peacekeeping, such as for evacuation operations of Irish citizens abroad, something which, sadly, has become more frequent in the geopolitical world in which we live. Draft heads of legislation have been prepared. They have not yet been brought to the Government but I intend to do so in the month of March, at which stage they will be able to go through pre-legislative scrutiny.

Sinéad Gibney (Dublin Rathdown, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is great to hear the Tánaiste assert that he values neutrality. I appreciate it has not been a hidden reality. There is no hiding the fact the Government has put this on the table for quite a while. It is also a reality that both Government parties have moved their position from recognising the integral part played by the triple lock in Irish neutrality to now being on record as saying this is not the case and, similarly, walking away and retreating from what we have seen in a commitment to the multilateralism the UN mechanism offers towards one which now suggests it is not necessary. What will fill the void if the UN Security Council is so problematic? I believe it should be fixed from within the UN. If the Tánaiste is suggesting the UN is not required as part of the triple lock, what will be the third component in addition to the Government and this Chamber?

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to see the Security Council reformed. I have said this at the Security Council, at the Munich security conference at the G20 last week. The Security Council urgently needs to be reformed but I cannot imagine Putin or others being open to this. We have to deal with the reality of a Security Council that in my view does not function the way it should and is badly in need of reform. I do not want anybody other than the directly elected people's representatives to have a veto on where our peacekeeping troops go. How we do this, how we get the legislation right and what a new mechanism to safeguard our neutrality would look like are things on which I am eager to engage constructively with Members of the House. My starting point in the debate is that the UN Security Council permanent members should not have a veto on where I as Minister for Defence and the democratically elected Government of Ireland wish to send our peacekeeping troops. There have been examples in the past, and I can go through them in the reply to the supplementary question, when this has impacted and impeded our ability. People in Ireland understand this.

They want Irish Government officials, not Vladimir Putin, deciding where our peacekeepers go.

Sinéad Gibney (Dublin Rathdown, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The vetoes and examples that have been used are completely exaggerated. Even in the hypothetical conversations we have been having in the last couple of weeks about peacekeepers potentially travelling to Ukraine in the scenario that peace is agreed there, I will always acknowledge that of course we would do so when that is agreed by both Ukraine and Russia. That points to the multilateralism that the UN holds. I will ask the question again. What efforts are being made to fix this from within the UN? I appreciate the Tánaiste is saying he does not think Russia would do so, but what efforts have been made? Have discussions and debates even been attempted by diplomats to try to find ways to maintain the multilateralism that is offered by the UN in our triple lock without having to walk away from the UN and try to find another replacement?

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, there have been. Consistently, for years, there have been efforts by Irish diplomats and our permanent representative in the UN. Every Irish Government for many years has put forward the idea that the UN Security Council needs to be reformed. As recently as last week, I was articulating this in international fora.

We should be clear on this. The proposals to amend the triple lock came about long before there was any talk of peacekeepers in Ukraine or anywhere else. As the Deputy said, this has been worked on for quite a period of time, so it is not a Ukraine-specific legislative proposal. I want to be clear on that. Let us take the hypothetical case of Ukraine, however. We all want to see peace in Ukraine but, of course, we want to see peace that is fair, in line with the UN Charter, respects Ukraine's territorial integrity and is not a carve-up of a country. Ukraine is not in anyone's gift. If there is peace, however, and if there is a process and an invitation for peacekeepers, I am not satisfied that we have to sit idly by and wait for Vladmir Putin to say whether Irish men and women from Óglaigh na hÉireann can play a role in the peacekeeping. That is the decision of this Government, not of any despots.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We now go back to Deputy Wall, in substitution for Deputy Duncan Smith, to introduce Question No. 5.