Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I regret that the Minister is not able to accept any of the amendments. Under the existing mechanisms, greater scrutiny and application is required. Especially on amendment No. 7, it was not that there should not be investment but the question is how this is being done. How is compliance being secured? The Minister did not address the issue I highlighted in some detail of the ammunitions support investment. Technically it is not through the agency, but it is nonetheless €17 million of public money and sadly when we spoke about the issue, I asked how this was checked for compliance with the Cluster Munitions and Anti-Personnel Mines Act and there was literally a blank. I received no response as to how it was checked. The clear evidence seems to be that it was not checked. The decision around the EU ammunition production support Act and the implications for Ireland and Irish public money were not checked in any way or did not seem to have been checked. Certainly, the officials in the Department did not speak about how they had teased it out. They did not say it does not come under this or that. They just said it was not on their radar, effectively. That is what seemed to be the case.

There is a real concern that these things might not be really on the radar for the agency or for an external investment manager who is managing multiple portfolios. I recognise that these are additional measures and that the measures that are there currently should be adequate. I accept the Minister's argument in respect of those but I am not confident about them. That is why I urge the Minister, even if he is not accepting these amendments, to have robust engagement with the agency around how it engages with its external managers. The existing reporting structures the Minister mentioned may need to be examined to see whether they are capturing enough. Is it simply saying "we told the external agency what not to invest in". When we spoke to the NTMA representatives about the settlements divestment legislation, they said they have an exclusion list, but there is very little on it. It seems that having the exclusion list is regarded as enough and it is not enough. We need further scrutiny. I understand that the Minister is not accepting these amendments but I am raising a number of red flags because there are issues that need to be examined.I believe we are coming back with regard to that ammunition production support Act because there is a real concern of public money effectively having been invested, whether or not it is through the agency. The equivalent of €17 million of Irish public moneys going directly to arms manufacturers is something we should be ashamed of and concerned about. It should be flagged as a serious warning sign that we are not doing enough with or being careful enough about our money as, indeed, should have been the facts.

I will leave it there. There are some other related points, but I think they are covered under amendment No. 10 so I will come to them then.