Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

I thank Senator Doherty and do not doubt his sincerity on this issue. This is much the same proposal that was addressed by Deputy Ó Snodaigh in the Dáil.

As was explained already, the reform treaty does not affect Ireland's tradition of military neutrality and several safeguards for our position are in the treaty. Unanimity continues to be the rule in security and defence matters and we preserve a veto on any proposal or crisis management mission with which we disagree. The treaty recognises that the policy of European Union "shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain member states". The Senator referred to negotiators and this phrase was inserted specifically at the request of Irish negotiators and it is a phraseology that appears in several recent treaties.

The Senator correctly points out that there are a significant number of references to NATO in the treaty. However, the references to NATO arise from the fact that the majority of member states see their defence arrangements as best served through membership of that organisation. A small number of countries, including Ireland, Austria and the Nordic countries, do not share this view. I am discounting Denmark because it is a member of NATO and has a unique position regarding the European Union's common foreign and security and policy, CFSP. There is no one-size-fits-all policy for all member states. We would not accept an attempt by a NATO member state to dictate to us that we should join that organisation and we would not dictate to it.

The protection of our position of military neutrality is already enshrined in our Constitution and there can be no better guardians than those given guardianship of military neutrality. Article 29.2.2° was one of the significant changes made between the first Nice treaty referendum and the second Nice treaty referendum. We had the Seville declaration, which recognised Ireland's position and we added a clause to the Constitution that made it very clear this State could not become part of a defence arrangement without the prior agreement of the Irish people. To do so would require a constitutional referendum.

There are other defences for our neutrality that are not as strong as that offered in Article 29.2.2°. There is the triple lock, which consists of Government decision, Dáil approval and United Nations authorisation. The important point is there is no power or mechanism in the treaty for the EU to oblige a member state to become involved in a defence arrangement. Unanimity is required, even for peacekeeping arrangements, and the EU has no power to oblige a member state to increase military spending. I feel we should not impose our views on other member states and neither I nor the Senator would be willing to have a view imposed on us. I think we have a shared opinion on this matter.

Ireland is already a member of the European Defence Agency, EDA, which was established in 2004. We aim to ensure we get value for money, we have the equipment we need and we deal with programmes case by case. I do not think this is sinister, although I do not expect the Senator to share my view.

The treaty allows for future permanent, structured co-operation in the area of defence by member states that wish jointly to develop capabilities. There is no obligation on Ireland to take part in permanent, structured co-operation. We can opt in if we wish but we can opt to stay out, if we so wish.

The treaty states that member states shall come to the assistance of fellow member states. I was surprised during the Dáil debates that the issue of coming to the assistance of a fellow member state was an allergic point. This provision refers to a case of a member state suffering a natural or man-made disaster, a terrorist attack or being the victim of armed aggression on its territory. The obligation in the treaty makes it clear it shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain member states. The phrase Ireland penned to deal with its position is written into the treaty. Ireland will, therefore, retain its right to take its own sovereign decision whether or how it would come to the assistance of another member state. There is no threat to our tradition of military neutrality.

The changes introduced in the reform treaty will equip the Union to undertake widely supported crisis management tasks. In the Dáil, Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh characterised the Chad mission as a military adventure. It is certainly not that. It is a humanitarian intervention of the highest order. I regret that the Deputy and other members of Sinn Féin have not taken up this point. I accept Senator Pearse Doherty's contribution is more measured.

The mission seeks to assist people who have been displaced and have experienced generations of slaughter. They are people who have had their lives and livelihoods destroyed by warlords, their women raped and their children starved to death. It would be very wrong of any nation which is wealthy and has decent young men and women to help to stand in the way of assistance.

The Senator and I share different views on this overall matter. The Senator should consider the activities of the EU as not being militaristic and most definitely not aggressive. They are do with the highest standards of peacekeeping and humanitarian activities. I am not in a position to accept the amendment.