Paul Murphy demands referendum on neutrality, warns of NATO drift

Very simple question for the Taoiseach. Are we going to get a constitutional referendum on neutrality? The government likes to talk about the need for a public debate on neutrality. You have a ready-up system of the forums on international security policy, led by a dame of the British Empire, who has publicly come out in support of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, of U.S. coups in Chile, Cuba and Nicaragua. The Tanaiste has spoken about the need to have a debate that is not about a binary issue, so not neutrality or militarism, but some secret third thing, which I suspect is militarism and alignment bit by bit with NATO. We disagree on this. I think there is no question that you would like to abandon neutrality. You might not want to put it in those terms. But will you accept that it is the people who should have a right to decide about this, and that any change in terms of our policy of neutrality must be put to the people in a referendum? Our preferred option, by the way, to do that is to seek to enshrine neutrality in the Constitution. Thanks. Anybody else? No? Appreciate it. Thanks, Mr Corlett. Just an issue on housing, we as a government are committed to a referendum on housing. The Housing Commission is considering the matter. They have not yet advised us on a wording. Once we see it, we will have to consider it. But I think without any wording proposed from the Commission, having a referendum concurrent with the other one in November is very unlikely at this stage. But we will see the wording when it comes. From my own point of view, I think that any amendment on housing that is worth having has to be one that makes it easier to build homes. There is no point in putting language in the Constitution that gives people a legal right to housing if it does not actually help housing to be built. I don't want to see one court ruling against the state, giving people compensation for not providing them housing, while the next court next door strikes down planning permissions. It would just be incongruous to me. So I think some aspect of any housing amendment has to actually be one that makes it easier to build homes. And we have to consider that as part of the deliberations, because otherwise it will be meaningless. There is no point in having a right that can't be vindicated. And any housing amendment worth having, in my view, should tip the balance in favour of more homes being built, not against it. And that will be crucial from my point of view in terms of supporting any wording. In relation to neutrality, we have no plans for a referendum on neutrality. I doubt we could even agree on what the definition of neutrality is. And it was a government decision to declare a policy of neutrality back in the 40s or 30s, I think. It was never something that was put to the people. In terms of presidential voting rights, work is ongoing on that. And reports are done. It is a huge job, because it does mean compiling an international electoral register, essentially. Huge numbers of people in the north, but also huge numbers of people around the world. would be able to qualify to vote. It is something I support, by the way. It is something that I was very much in favour of during my first term with CSIC. We do not have a time for it yet, but making it happen would be a huge job. Essentially, an international electoral register for Irish citizens and passport holders abroad. So, logistically, it is a huge operation. Now that we have an electoral commission in existence, I think it is something that they could do. But I think perhaps the time to have it, and this is just a personal view, is at the time of the next presidential election. I do not think we would be able to get it all done in time for the next presidential election. So, perhaps that would be the right occasion to have a referendum on extending voting rights concurrent with the next election when it comes. Just on the interdepartmental group, on the gender equality referendum, we would hope to have a final proposed wording before the summer recess. The proposals of the All-Party Committee are, of course, under active consideration, and we would hope to consult with opposition parties and NGOs in the next couple of weeks, just to keep everyone informed and in the loop as to where the current deliberations are and where they are going. Just finally, in relation to the European Parliament elections, I do not know if the government has taken a formal position on this yet, or at least has not gone to Cabinet. We would generally prefer a May date over a June date, but we do have a slightly complicating factor on this occasion, as we may be gaining seats in the European Parliament. May gain one, May gain two. That has not been decided yet, and if we do gain one or two, then there will have to be a boundary commission, or at least the Electoral Commission will have to do a boundary review and redraw the boundaries for the European Parliament. So, with an extra seat or two, it could be adding a seat to one of the existing constituencies and changing the boundaries, or we could go back to four constituencies, roughly modelled on the provinces, like we had before. So, that actually might create a complication for us. But one thing I can say is that we will hold the local elections and European elections concurrent. It would not make sense, I think, to have people go to the polls twice within a period of a few weeks. We will introduce the draft when about the opposition of the European Parliament. H