Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, to delete lines 22 to 25 and substitute the following: “ ‘international force’ means the United Nations or an International United Nations Force to which a contingent or a member of the Defence Forces may be assigned to for service outside the State for any purpose specified in section 3 of the Act of 2006;”.

The amendment seeks to change the definition of "international force".Let me give an example of other legislation. The Defence (Amendment) Act 2006 contains a definition for "international organisation" that lists a number of different sub-categories such as the UN, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE, and "any regional arrangement or agency", which includes the EU. I am concerned that the Defence (Amendment) Bill 2020 contains an extraordinarily wide definition as it states: "'international force’ means an International United Nations Force or any force to which a contingent or a member of the Defence Forces may be assigned to for service outside the State for any purpose specified in section 3 of the Act of 2006". However, section 3(1)(a) of the 2006 Act simply states that a person may be seconded to another force so the purpose is literally secondment. That provision does not have a qualitative constraint in terms of what force somebody might be transferred to yet the definition in this Bill also does not have a qualitative constraint on what kind of force or international force that people may be transferred to. Section 1 of the Defence (Amendment) Act defines subcategories for an international organisation. Some of the subcategories need a little examination but at least they were spelled out in the Act whereas the proposal in the current Bill refers to "any force" and I think that is too wide. My amendment seeks to constrain it by stating "the United Nations or an International United Nations Force" rather than "any force". I am open to and reserve the right at Report Stage to refine my amendment somewhat further as forces may operate with a UN mandate and some of my later amendments relate to that aspect. Perhaps the OSCE or other categories should be included but the provision in the Bill for "any force" is too wide. I have suggested the parameters for a force and I am interested in the Minister's view on how we can set parameters. Perhaps he will confirm whether he wants to accept my amendment or intends to bring forward an amendment or clarification.