Paul Murphy challenges plan to end the triple lock
Paul Murphy questioned the government's plan to reform or end the triple lock on overseas troop deployments, arguing such changes would undermine Irish neutrality and citing the Iraq invasion and Shannon Airport. He challenged the Taoiseach's claim that UN Security Council vetoes block deployments, citing the Defence Amendment Act 2006 and asking which missions the government now wishes to join.
Paul Murphy noted the programme for Government reference and recent reports that a draft law to end the triple lock will be brought to Cabinet. He asked the Taoiseach to explain in what way the triple lock will be ended or reformed and demanded specifics about any proposed changes.
Murphy argued the triple lock is central to Irish neutrality and recalled a 2013 comment that framed attempts to remove it as an ideological obsession. He referenced the invasion of Iraq and the facilitation of US troop movements through Shannon Airport as reasons the triple lock had previously prevented participation in foreign wars.
He disputed the Taoiseach's repeated claim that a Security Council veto prevents deployments, citing the Defence Amendment Act 2006 which he said allows United Nations General Assembly resolutions to unlock the third element of the triple lock. Murphy pressed the Taoiseach to say which specific missions the government would like to send troops on that are currently blocked by the triple lock.
The Taoiseach replied that the Security Council has a veto and that recent events, notably the Russian invasion of Ukraine, have changed the international landscape. He cited work on humanitarian corridors in Northern Syria, the Ethiopia/Tigray situation, a vetoed climate-security resolution, and concerns about Russia's use of private forces such as Wagner in the Sahel. The Taoiseach argued that removing the Security Council role would mean the Dáil and Government, acting within military neutrality and the constitution, would make deployment decisions.
Question on triple lock reform
Paul Murphy noted the programme for Government reference and recent reports that a draft law to end the triple lock will be brought to Cabinet. He asked the Taoiseach to explain in what way the triple lock will be ended or reformed and demanded specifics about any proposed changes.
Neutrality and historical example
Murphy argued the triple lock is central to Irish neutrality and recalled a 2013 comment that framed attempts to remove it as an ideological obsession. He referenced the invasion of Iraq and the facilitation of US troop movements through Shannon Airport as reasons the triple lock had previously prevented participation in foreign wars.
Legal challenge to the veto argument
He disputed the Taoiseach's repeated claim that a Security Council veto prevents deployments, citing the Defence Amendment Act 2006 which he said allows United Nations General Assembly resolutions to unlock the third element of the triple lock. Murphy pressed the Taoiseach to say which specific missions the government would like to send troops on that are currently blocked by the triple lock.
Taoiseach's response on Security Council and deployments
The Taoiseach replied that the Security Council has a veto and that recent events, notably the Russian invasion of Ukraine, have changed the international landscape. He cited work on humanitarian corridors in Northern Syria, the Ethiopia/Tigray situation, a vetoed climate-security resolution, and concerns about Russia's use of private forces such as Wagner in the Sahel. The Taoiseach argued that removing the Security Council role would mean the Dáil and Government, acting within military neutrality and the constitution, would make deployment decisions.
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 →
Richard O'Donoghue
Richard O'Donoghue: LDA 'Hasn't Built One House' in Limerick
Mark Daly
Mark Daly Declares Impartiality and Urges Strengthening Local Democracy
Mattie McGrath
Mattie McGrath criticises Power Up grant as unfair to SMEs
Richard Boyd Barrett
Richard Boyd Barrett: Skills shortages fuelled by unaffordable living
Michael Collins
Michael Collins warns rural chaos over planned speed limit cuts
Joe O'Reilly
Joe O'Reilly: Pledges No Waiting Lists for CAMHS, Urges Reform
Transcript
The programme for Government refers to that we will reform the triple lock legislation, and then it was reported last Friday that a draft law to end the triple lock is shortly going to be brought to Cabinet. I would like the Taoiseach to provide some detail on this, in what way is the triple lock going to be ended or be reformed. Back in 2013 the Taoiseach hit the nail on the head when he said that the triple lock is at the core of our neutrality and described the attempt to remove it as an out-of-touch ideological obsession by Fine Gael, unfortunately an obsession that the Taoiseach has now adopted and with even more gusto it seems than Fine Gael. The Taoiseach I think was in government, I might clarify, when the invasion of Iraq took place. I was on the streets protesting against the invasion of Iraq, I see some other people in the chamber who were also on the streets protesting. I think the Taoiseach was in government and that government of course, while not sending troops, because they couldn't under the triple lock, to participate in that invasion, did facilitate the invasion by allowing US troops to go through Shannon Airport, millions but four million have gone through at this stage. But the triple lock was the one thing that meant that the government could not send troops abroad to participate in a US-led war, invasion, occupation for oil and for profit. But this attack on neutrality is being done in a very misleading way and so I want to challenge the Taoiseach in a couple of assertions, or one assertion in particular that he's made repeatedly. He's talked about this being about getting rid of the veto that the Security Council powers have in terms of the deployment of our forces. Taoiseach do you accept that no such veto exists because of the Defence Amendment Act introduced in 2006, which makes clear that it is not only peacekeeping missions endorsed, agreed by the Security Council, that unlock the third element of the triple lock, but resolutions of the General Assembly of the UN would also do so. And then Taoiseach, I think you have a duty to tell people which missions do you want to send Irish troops on that you cannot currently. The triple lock is currently in place, where would you like to send Irish troops that you cannot because of the existence of the triple lock? I think you have a duty to inform people about that. Thank you Deputy Taoiseach to respond. First of all, the Deputy will be aware that in my capacity as Minutes of Defence, we had significant discussions on this issue in this House. And I would have outlined substantially the amendments that we were considering essentially to end the veto. And I don't accept your point about the General Assembly, because I did deal with that before as well. Essentially it's the Security Council has the veto. And the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been a fundamental change in terms of the world order and the way Russia is behaving. China has a veto. All the members of the Security Council have a veto. And it was very evident to us when we were on the Security Council, for example, that we had to work extremely hard and with great challenges to get humanitarian corridors open, for example, to Northern Syria during that war to make sure that millions of people would get access to humanitarian aid. Likewise, in respect of Ethiopia. And we took a lot of heat for insisting on humanitarian corridors to Ethiopia during the war in Tigray. And you may recall during the Security Council, we fought to link climate and have a resolution bringing climate security and climate security together. It was vetoed by Russia. So basically, I don't think any decisions we take in respect of a peacekeeping mission should be subject to a veto by the likes of Russia. I just don't believe it. I think it's crazy. Things have changed dramatically. Russia's behaviour is always challenging in terms of human rights and compliance and all of that, which you guys really, really, you say pro forma, but you don't really deal with it to the same extent as others. But the point I'm making is the point I'm making is the Russian invasion of Ukraine, for example. And so, say, we're involved in CAFO. It's a NATO mandated peace initiative. The European Union may be involved in conflict resolution, be it civil, which we've been involved in as well, where people go to, or future peace agreements. And the UN itself has been supportive of regional approaches. So, for example, the African Union may want peacekeepers to keep the peace in certain conflicts on the African continent. Russia has been sending the Wagner group to these places. Russia has been manipulating administrations all across the Sahel, promising security in return for coup d'etat and so on, and then exploitation of minerals. Are you really suggesting, Deputy, that they should have a veto on whether we participate in the peacekeeping mission or not? No, they do. And it's the Security Council approves peacekeeping missions. That is the reality. And you know that. And the triple lock is essentially taking out the Security Council from the decision making. The Dáil has to decide it. The Government of the day has to decide it. And anything we decide has to be in accordance with military neutrality and with our constitution.