Gerard P. Craughwell: The triple lock needs to go
Gerard P. Craughwell addressed the Leader on the triple lock, arguing it undermines national sovereignty and insisting that 'the triple lock needs to go.' He urged colleagues to review decisions taken since the war in Ukraine and to consider whether Article 2951 of the constitution has been breached.
Craughwell said the triple lock has eroded sovereignty since its introduction in 2001 and compared it to asking neighbours' permission for decisions. He told the House he was on the other side of the triple lock debate and called for its removal.
He called on members of both Houses to examine recent decisions in light of Article 2951 of the constitution, saying 2951 places a grave onus on the government when making decisions about raising or supporting armies. He urged a prompt and serious consideration of constitutional obligations in government decision-making.
Craughwell argued neutrality is only relevant if war reaches the state's doorstep, at which point the state must decide whether to be involved. He maintained that a decision not to be involved should preclude participation regardless of who is fighting.
He raised concerns about the post-2013 pension arrangement discussed in Galway, warning it damages the defence forces, firefighters and Gardaí. He asked the Leader to organise a debate with the Minister to address the issue.
Triple lock critique
Craughwell said the triple lock has eroded sovereignty since its introduction in 2001 and compared it to asking neighbours' permission for decisions. He told the House he was on the other side of the triple lock debate and called for its removal.
Constitutional concerns
He called on members of both Houses to examine recent decisions in light of Article 2951 of the constitution, saying 2951 places a grave onus on the government when making decisions about raising or supporting armies. He urged a prompt and serious consideration of constitutional obligations in government decision-making.
Neutrality and wartime choice
Craughwell argued neutrality is only relevant if war reaches the state's doorstep, at which point the state must decide whether to be involved. He maintained that a decision not to be involved should preclude participation regardless of who is fighting.
Pensions and defence personnel
He raised concerns about the post-2013 pension arrangement discussed in Galway, warning it damages the defence forces, firefighters and Gardaí. He asked the Leader to organise a debate with the Minister to address the issue.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Other speeches
Tego samego dnia All speeches from this day →
Rose Conway-Walsh
Rose Conway-Walsh praises Gaeltaigte show, questions €6,000 cost
Mattie McGrath
Mattie McGrath pushes for N25/N24 funding for Waterford route
Danny Healy-Rae
Danny Healy-Rae: Calls for tax relief to unlock 55 vacant homes
Paul Murphy
Paul Murphy raises case of family facing jail for insulation
Paul Murphy
Paul Murphy Brands Proposal to Cut Taoiseach Questions 'Authoritarian'
Rose Conway-Walsh
Rose Conway-Walsh Demands Second Opinion for Teen Scoliosis Patient
Transcript
Leader, it's no secret I'm on the other side of the triple lock debate. Triple lock is like your children coming to you and saying, do you mind if I go on summer camp and you say, well, I'm terribly sorry, you've got to go up the road and ask the neighbours. And if the neighbours say it's OK, then you can go. We're a sovereign state. We were a proud sovereign state until 2001 when the triple lock was introduced. The triple lock needs to go. I don't disagree with what Senator Clonan says with respect to building in safeguards that we don't finish up sending troops somewhere. But I would ask members of this House and the lower house to consider decisions that have been made since the start of the war in Ukraine. Does our constitution mean anything? I would ask people to look at the decisions that have been made and then to look at Article 2951 of our constitution and ask themselves if that particular section of the constitution has been breached. We talk about neutrality all the time here. Neutrality is an irrelevancy unless there is a war and that you are faced with the war on your doorstep. At which time you decide, yes, I will be involved or no, I won't. In which case, if you say, no, I won't, then it doesn't matter who kills who, you're not going to get involved. It's as simple as that. But 2951 places grave onus on the government when they're making decisions to have sight of the constitution and what the constitution says with respect to raising armies, with respect to supporting armies. And I think we need to do that and do it fairly urgently. In the last few seconds I have, could I ask you, Leader, I mentioned the post-2013 pension in Galway yesterday. You heard that yourself. There's a misconception that because it applies to the public service at large that it is not damaging the defence forces, the firefighters and the Gardaí. It is. We need a debate with the Minister on that, if you could organise it. Thank you.