Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am sorry for jumping the gun a little bit.

I spoke to Senator Higgins on similar issues to this following the Second Stage debate. At the outset it is important to clarify that the purpose of section 2 is to provide for the delegation of a level of operational control to the force commander of international UN forces. The legislation simply provides for the current de facto position. The Senator's amendment would neuter the effect of section 3 of the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006, which recognises that certain missions, including humanitarian and training operations, would usually not be subject to a UN Security Council resolution as such operations do not constitute a threat to international peace and security for the most part. While I am certain that this was not the intention of the Senator, it is important to note that if this provision was enacted certain humanitarian operations and training missions, conducted using military forces and capabilities, would not be possible as they would not be a UN or a UN-mandated operation yet may be justifiable in terms of an Irish intervention. As such, I cannot accept the amendment.

In practical terms, when I make a decision as to a consideration around sending Irish Defence Forces personnel to certain parts of the world, the triple lock is a major factor in terms of getting Government approval, Dáil approval and having a UN mandate. However, there are both training and humanitarian missions that do not necessarily fall into that category but may well require the co-ordination, under a force commander, to ensure that there is proper operational control and so on.

Let us not forget that the delegations that a Minister would offer are under the control of the Minister. I would, therefore, always prioritise the well-being and involvement of our Defence Forces personnel but for line of command and leadership within a humanitarian or training mission, which may involve multiple contributors, one must make sure that there is a decision-making process to ensure that groups of Defence Forces personnel are interoperable with each other. That is kind of the space we are in here. It is not trying to find a way of sending Irish Defence Forces personnel, to parts of the world, with less scrutiny or anything like that. This is about having the capacity to respond quickly.

I can vividly remember, when I was last Minister for Defence, that I made the decision to recommend to the Taoiseach that we should send ships to the Mediterranean Sea. We did that without a UN mandate. We did so because it was a humanitarian response to an appalling human tragedy and Irish people supported that. It had nothing to do with the triple lock. As it happened, a delegation was not needed because there was not a structured operation in the Mediterranean at the time. We helped on a bilateral informal basis with the Italians and the Italian coast guard but later that developed into Operation Pontus, Operation Sophia and so on where there is a lot more structure. It is just like when we send troops on a training mission to Mali. That is an EU mission, not a UN mission, even though the UN very much approves and even though what is happening in Mali at the moment is concerning to put it mildly.

For me to be limited in terms of a delegation that I could give, in order for our troops to be safe and function under a force commander, because there was not a UN mandate for a training mission such as that, would be unnecessarily restrictive. Part of being a neutral non-aligned country militarily is that we decide where our troops go and when they should intervene whether it is a humanitarian or training mission, or whether it involves a large number of troops.

Yesterday, in Limerick, I inspected a battalion that is going to UN Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, in a few weeks, and I am conscious of the risks and sacrifices that they make along with their families. In normal structured missions this is straightforward in terms of a UN mandate but specific missions sometimes require me to make decisions, and sometimes with a tight timeline, to make humanitarian interventions, or support others in whatever crisis may need, or may justify, an Irish intervention, that do not have a formal UN mandate. We need to careful we do not tie our hands too much in this regard.

I understand that the amendment seeks to introduce appropriate checks and balances before Irish troops would go to a part of the world and, effectively, operate under a force commander from another country. However, there needs to be sufficient flexibility for a Minister for Defence, either an existing one or future one, to be able to make a recommendation to Government to make an intervention when Irish troops can make a real difference. That is why I think it would not be helpful to accept this amendment as we want the flexibility to intervene when necessary.