Martin Daly urges National Security Council amid cyber threats

I welcome the establishment of the National Security Council that will give coordination, weight and urgency to our security requirements, with the increased risk because of the unstable international environment and the risk of hybrid cyber attacks and hybrid warfare. And it's not as if we haven't been attacked already. The HSE was attacked a number of years ago. There are lots of attacks on private institutional companies which are underreported. So we are essentially at war with someone. We don't always know who those actors are, but there's a suspicion that they're acting for state actors. Also, the ability of us to secure our own air and territorial waters is extremely important. There are some people who would have us being passive and supine and wait for something to happen to us. The tradition of neutrality for other neutral countries has been investment in their defence and security because that's the mature and responsible approach to take. And we must do that. We cannot have this unspoken reliance on third-party states for our defence and security. Thank you. I'll just make a fundamental point that the establishment of this National Security Council is about creating a proper structure to ensure democratic accountability in terms of national security matters, proper coordination between all government departments and between Nongorda Shikana, the defence forces. So, as Taoiseach, I'll chair it, the Minister for Justice and the Minister for Foreign Affairs. And that's at a high level in terms of the national security threats that face the country. Confidentiality is very, very important in terms of the conduct of national security threats and how we respond. And in time, I would like to see some discussion with the Oireachtas in terms of an Oireachtas role, but it would have to be predicated on confidentiality in terms of our engagement with Nongorda Shikana or with the defence forces. We don't have a tradition of that in our political system. But given the nature of modern threats, and it's not project fear, Deputy Boy Barrett. Russia did invade Ukraine, by the way, just it's a fact. It's not project fear, it happened. And that act alone has changed the entire mindset around Europe in respect of security. Allied to the decision of the US to make it very clear that its role is changing in terms of being the ultimate security guarantor of the Western Hemisphere. And therefore, Europe does have to seriously look at how exposed it is to any future aggression. And there are EU member states, whether you like it or not, or others might not like it, but it's a reality. They see it as existential. These are states that formerly experienced the brutality and the repression of the Soviet Empire. I'm speaking of Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia. They don't want to ever again be under the rule of a jackboot regime that suppresses civil rights, civil expression, political expression. And if you speak out, you're put into a jail straight away. They don't want that. So it's not project fear. It's a bit too simplistic in terms of what's going on. And in some respects, we're seeing a growth in autocracy across the world with similar methodologies and similar approaches to international relations. So we do actually have to protect both our own democratic structures, as Deputy O'Sullivan has said, and the Electoral Commission is working on that. We also have to protect, as Deputy Moynihan said, our economic infrastructure and our energy infrastructure. Because modern methods of disruption, warfare doesn't have to be waged conventionally. They can be done through cyber, to devastating effects, as we found out during the attack on the health service during COVID-19. And it was devastating on the maritime front, which has been raised, I think by Deputy Byron as well, Malcolm Byron, who has a number of issues, the subsea cables, the energy interconnectors are very important. The decision of a national gas reserve is a security decision. It's an energy security decision, whereby if anything happened, or interconnectors, we do need backup to keep the Irish economy going and to keep the lights on, basically, in households and in industry. And it's an expensive thing to have to do, but we have to do it. I believe it would be irresponsible to take a chance in respect of that. In terms of Mothers Against Genocide protest, there's absolutely no issue with protest. None whatsoever. My understanding is, and I'm informed of following engagement with a number of protesters, who are blocking the entrance to Dáil Éireann. I think we all saw that. Why does that have to happen? You can protest on the left-hand side. You can protest on the right-hand side. You can protest across the road. You don't have to protest at all, because we had a previous protest in the previous time, a year or two ago, which were quite violent. I'm not saying, sorry, I'm not saying what it was against genocide or being that. They're not. But everybody in this House railed against the Gardaí for not having operational procedures to keep access and egress from Leinster House available. I mean, sorry, through the chair, I haven't interrupted, I just want to make a bit. But you don't have to block the gates of Leinster House. Fine. No, what happened then was, the Gardaí gave a direction under the Public Order Act. Okay? That's what the Gardaí formally did. No physical engagement, just gave a direction. These individuals, it says, were given a period of time to adhere. They were given time to adhere to the direction. The direction was not complied with, and a number of people were arrested then for offences contrary to the Public Order Act. Eleven people were arrested under Section 8 of the Public Order Act, and all eleven have received adult cautions. Additionally, three people were also arrested for alleged offences under Section 6, threatening abuse of or insulting behaviour in a public place. Nine, willful obstruction, and 19, assault of obstruction of a peace officer. Now, I will follow up with the Minister of Justice in terms of the assertions and the allegations that have been made today in the House. I don't have any background to that, but I will follow it up, because I would not understand the necessity for any strip searching or whatever. But I will follow that up. But I will again make the point. The deputies use the phrase again, which they use with abandon, where they accuse people of complicity and genocide. Now, that is a horrible, it's a great old slogan, but actually it's a horrible assertion. It's a demonstrably false assertion, and again, misreading, absolutely wrong, and it shouldn't be made, because you complain, deputies complain from time to time about what assertions made about them and others, that is a very fundamentally wrong, and it speaks to a kind of philosophy that's really in a mindset, it's about how can we blame the Irish government or the Irish parliamentarians for what's going on in Gaza, not the Israeli government. Your approach always seems to be, let's blame the Irish government, not where the fault lies, and you're attempting to drive a wedge between the Irish people and the Irish public representatives who are not of your persuasion. Thank you.