The House meets today at a time of great uncertainty, when parliaments and people all over the world are discussing the possible onset of war in Iraq. I consider it an indictment of the Government that this House has not yet had a full, open debate, with questions to members of the Government, about the Government's stance on the possible catastrophic economic and social consequences for humanity of such a war. The Government has been hiding behind language. I hope the Taoiseach will answer this simple question in simple and understandable language: has the Cabinet discussed, and made a decision on, this country's attitude towards the facilities for refuelling being made available at Shannon, first, in the event of UN sanction being given under a second resolution for a military invasion of Iraq, and second, in the event of a military invasion taking place unilaterally? What would the Government do, in the latter case, about the refuelling facilities? Would they be closed down or would the Government continue to make them available?
Leaders' Questions.
A detailed debate on this matter will take place tonight. The Government has discussed this a number of times, including in a long discussion today, and the Minister will bring—
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
It is totally disorderly to have a display of this manner. The Deputies are completely out of order.
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I feel it is necessary that the Government sees the message because it is not hearing it.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
The Deputy is out of order and should resume his seat.
They need to see the message. There is an element of deafness in the Government.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
The Deputy is in blatant contravention of Standing Orders. He should resume his seat and the other Deputies should remove the notice.
They are full of slogans.
It is necessary that we get a reply from the Government as to whether its members have seen the message. There is a degree of deafness and there may also be a degree of blindness.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
The Deputy should resume his seat. He is in blatant contravention of Standing Orders and he knows it. The Deputies should remove the notice.
To make the point, the notice is required. We will obviously not get a reply from the Government, so we will have to leave. I make the point that the Government has not respected the Constitution.
I am not coming into this House to have its regulations and rules disobeyed. If Deputy Sargent and his group want to interrupt Leaders' Questions, two can play at that game.
The Constitution is more important.
We defend the Constitution more than the Deputy's party ever will.
They should go and daub their slogans.
The Deputy should hand back his salary. They are all talk but no action – he did not hand back the salary he talked about.
An Leas-Ceann Comhairle
Order. This is Leaders' Questions. The Taoiseach, to continue his reply.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs will make a detailed statement on all the circumstances tonight. The Deputy asked what would happen over the next few weeks because there is much uncertainty about what may or may not happen between the US and the UK. The Government totally and absolutely supports the position as set out by the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan – we want to see a peaceful resolution to this issue. The Secretary General does not consider that we have commenced a war. He is not opposed to any military build-up to try to get compliance with Resolution 1441 of 8 November 2002. Until action takes place, the traditional arrangements for fuelling and flyovers will remain. Our preferred solution is that the Security Council debates the new report when it is issued, probably in mid-February, and agrees a new resolution. Whatever happens from that point will be based on the report and its contents. We would like to see this dealt with successfully without military action but that is in the hands of the Iraqi authorities.
If there is no resolution at the UN , or it does not get to debate or agree a resolution, and there is unilateral action by the US on its own, the US and the UK, or the US, the UK and others, without a mandate from the Security Council, we will have to consider the position at that stage. We would have to revert to the House and the Government would have to make a decision. I hope it does not come to that but we have put contingency arrangements in place if that is the way it falls. I think that answers the Deputy's questions.
For the information of the House, many issues were raised over the Christmas break about the various procedures and we will outline them in great detail in a contribution this evening.
I am not a supporter of the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein and we completely understand the economic, political and social ties between this country and the United States, however we are a sovereign independent people. The Taoiseach did not answer whether the Cabinet had discussed or made any decision on this, nor has he referred to Ireland's central role in European affairs – this country was critical to the expansion of the European Union arising from the people's decision in the referendum on the Treaty of Nice. We should know what the position and attitude of the Cabinet will be in the event of an invasion taking place without UN sanction. It is a shame the Dáil has not had an opportunity to debate this, not just by way of Private Members' motion, but with questions and answers so the people's representatives can give their views on what could be a catastrophic occasion. When the first bombs fall on Baghdad it will be too late to call the House back for such a debate. Will the Taoiseach tell us what is his and the Government's attitude regarding the need for UN sanction for action and is he bringing that response to the other leaders of Europe as is his duty and responsibility?
Our view is in line with that of the vast majority of European countries although I am not here to answer for them. In the event of military action being initiated against Iraq, either with or without UN sanction, the Government will review the situation, initiate a debate in the Dáil, including, if appropriate, the adoption of a motion similar to that which we passed during the Gulf War in 1991. I will not try to predict, as the Deputy is asking me, what Saddam Hussein and his corrupt regime will do or what he has done with the 6,500 chemical bombs, the equipment – logged on previous inspections and now missing – and the implements he is known to have and cannot account for or why he is not fully co-operating with the inspectors who have been unable to meet scientists. I hope he will listen to what the world is saying – the Security Council vote in November was 14 to 0, the meeting in Turkey of Saddam's neighbours last week asked him to co-operate. Practically everyone in the world has asked him to co-operate fully and comprehensively but to date he has refused to do so.
I share Deputy Kenny's view. I do not want to see this turn into a catastrophe but the one person – it is ironic in the modern age that one person can call the shots – who can end all this, send everybody home and stand down the military action is Saddam Hussein. It is a matter of grave concern that he is prepared to allow the world to get into a complex and difficult situation with all the ramifications that might have. I would prefer to see this issue resolved within the international body of the United Nations which is designed to bring world peace and stability. I do not like unilateral action – I have said so inside and outside the House. I would prefer if the Americans gave more time. I hope they do, and that is what the Security Council is saying – Kofi Annan has set out the terms clearly. I reiterate that Kofi Annan does not consider the military build-up to be an act of war. He sees it as the only way of forcing Saddam Hussein to deal with issues he has refused to deal with for 13 years. I hope that will resolve the problem. If the situation changes, I will keep Deputies Kenny and Rabbitte and others informed.
There was another killing in this city last night. There were 62 homicides in Dublin last year and the city is now more deadly than London. At least eight of those killings were so-called gangland killings as far as we know. No one has been charged with any of these killings. We know from official Garda figures that the level of violent assaults rose last year by 93%. The Taoiseach will be aware of a horrific incident last week involving the alleged rape of three young women, in which case a prosecution is being taken. Joyriding is at epidemic levels in some parts of Dublin and outside the city. Women, in particular, are afraid to walk some of the streets of our cities.
What will the Taoiseach do to address this problem? The only Government action I can see is an offer from the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea, to mediate among the warring gangs in Limerick, an idea not without its attractions. Other than that tomfoolery, what does the Taoiseach intend to do to prevent a situation where crime bosses think they can kill at will and with impunity? What does he intend to do to ensure these people are brought to justice?
There has been a number of serious and violent acts. While many of the people who have suffered from these have been engaged in crime, their families endured enormous hardship and I extend my sympathies to them.
In recent years, the Government has implemented and has had before this House stringent legislation to try to deal with crime. Our Garda force is at a record high this year due to further recruitment and full capacity in Templemore. We have resourced the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to a record level. We would like to have done more this year but that was not possible. The Government will continue to initiate and implement public order legislation and to support the targeted operations, which are aimed at the precise criminal activities to which Deputy Rabbitte referred and which exist. Such schemes include operations Encounter, Dóchas, Cleanstreet and Nightcap, all of which involve Garda units combating sophisticated and high level crime. The extension of CCTVs and the enforcement of the dedicated units of the Garda have to be taken into account also.
Deputy Rabbitte knows well that we are up against very sophisticated gangs which are, in some cases, very well equipped. The only way to break up those gangs is with heavy resources deployed by specialised units. It is difficult and specialised work. The precise answer to Deputy Rabbitte's question is that the Government has to continue to resource the special units and make them available to break up the gangs. Normal Garda surveillance activities will not break up the gangs that are involved in the kinds of gangland activities to which the Deputy referred. We have to target our resources into particular areas, and that is what the Minister is doing. At times, it means pulling resources from other areas because infinite resources are not available. The Public Order Act will help in some areas, but I am not a great believer that new legislation alone will resolve these issues.
Perhaps I am wrong in thinking that Deputy Rabbitte said the records of detection are not good. The records of detection in respect of murders that relate to domestic and other activities are very good, but not, admittedly, in respect of gangland murders, as I think he said. The Garda feels that the only way to deal with this problem is through specialised units, and that is where the Government is offering the most support.
Talking about reality, is it not the reality that we have had two gangland killings already this year and that two youths were abducted who are feared dead? There is little point in telling me of the rate of detection in respect of domestic violence when this is the record.
Is it not also the reality that the Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform promised 2,000 additional gardaí, but not one additional garda has been appointed? The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, a man who has an opinion on everything but a policy on nothing in his own area, in one of his many interviews over Christmas told us that the Minister for Finance has capped the number of gardaí at 12,500. We were not told that in this House. How does one get 12,500 when one adds 2,000 to 11,800? The Government promised the additional 2,000 gardaí and it is not only in terms of gangland violence that problem exists. It exists on the streets in terms of joyriding in communities that are besieged in their homes. No remedy is offered by the Government.
The Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Dea, went on radio and advised the nation that he went to his local Garda station to promise it additional resources. It is news to me that a Minister of State can go around advising of additional resources. Maybe when he is finished he can come to my Garda station and that of every other Member of the House to do the same. If the Government's response is to send the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dea, to talk on "Morning Ireland" to address the situation five years after a Minister came to office beating the drum of zero tolerance, it must be the sickest, most cynical joke in Irish politics in recent years.
Deputy Rabbitte has raised three points. The abduction and detention of the young men, allied to the difficulties in Limerick, is obviously totally unacceptable in a civilised society. All the resources that are necessary to find these young men are being, and will continue to be, made available. The Army, the Garda, the air support unit, the dog unit and special units have been involved for several days. The dog unit is very important in trying to find these young men so the Deputies should not sneer at it. The only way the young men will be found at this stage, unfortunately, is with the dog unit. That is the regrettable part. Searches have proved negative so far but they are still taking place.
The last Government increased the Garda numbers to the current figure of 11,900, as Deputy Rabbitte knows. Within the Garda Training College in Templemore it is hoped to bring the Garda authorised strength up to 12,200 this year. It will not be possible to go beyond that figure this year, but the figure must be considered in light of resources as they exist within the overall framework to keep a sustainable economy and to keep people in employment.
In respect of Deputy Rabbitte's question on overall crime, there is crime in other areas. The Public Order Bill, I hope, will give the Garda significant additional powers to deal with drunken, disorderly and riotous behaviour which is evident in beleaguered communities. As soon as the legislation is passed the Government will take the necessary action to try to enforce order in these areas, as we have been doing.
Why has the Taoiseach, as leader of the Government, and not primarily the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Transport, colluded in flagrant and persistent breaches of the Air Navigation (Carriage of Munitions of War, Weapons and Dangerous Goods) Order, 1973, which expressly prohibits weapons of destruction or munitions of war to pass through our airports without permission? Does the Taoiseach realise the anger among ordinary citizens over the blatant dishonesty of his Government in respect of the way Shannon Airport has been allowed to be used by the US military?
Last night the Department of Transport admitted that, in the eight days up to Monday, 19 aircraft carrying weapons or munitions of war sought and were given permission to land at Shannon Airport. For the whole of last year, one single aircraft notified that it was carrying weapons and was given permission to land. Were the other 552 military aircraft – mainly US aircraft – that used Shannon Airport last year carrying only soggy lollipops or did the Government recklessly allow the US military to flout, persistently and with contempt, the regulations governing the transport of munitions of war through our airports?
Does the Taoiseach know what weapons were carried through Shannon in those planes? He is very much in favour of inspecting the weapons or alleged weapons of destruction of the horrific dictator Saddam Hussein. Why did he not carry out an inspection of the planes using Shannon? Did a single inspection take place or is it the case that a blind eye was deliberately turned to the hundreds of aircraft which were undoubtedly carrying huge quantities of arms without permission and in breach of regulations?
The Deputy stated that one aeroplane went through last year, but my information is that 30 aircraft were given permission to carry weapons or munitions last year. I do not agree with the Deputy's assertions. The arrangements whereby Shannon is used as a refuelling stop by the US military have been in place for many years under successive Governments. As the Deputy knows – I told him before Christmas – we do not board the aircraft of friendly countries to check precisely what is on them. There has been a working arrangement for 40 years which has operated well. The United States of America knows what the regulations are and the Minister for Foreign Affairs reiterated them some weeks ago. The airlines involved were reminded of their legal requirements and they go through a procedure which we have always followed.
US military aircraft have been granted permission to land at Shannon according to the requirements of the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order, 1952, for a number of decades. It has been the practice for commercial charter aircraft carrying US servicemen between the USA and overseas bases to refuel at Shannon. Refuelling aircraft which travel all over the world constitutes about 40% of the activity at Shannon Airport. Such activity has always gone on. The regulations are set down and I do not see anything wrong with them. If a war arose, the Government would review the matter, but no additional facilities have been requested by the USA over and above the standing arrangements. If I believed the Americans were storing weapons of mass destruction at Shannon Airport and hiding them from the United Nations inspectors, I would take a different view. That is why I am very concerned about the fact that Saddam Hussein has held such weapons for many years which he has used against the people of his own country, as well as against Iranians and the Kurds whom he tortured and caused to suffer. I am sure Deputy Joe Higgins would join with me in hoping he complies fully with Dr. Hans Blix and others.
It was the United Nations that gave him those weapons in the first place.
He has used them against his people and all we are trying to do is get him to comply with international law. It is a good thing to help to force him into that.
I am reminded of what a farmer said recently about a different member of the Government. Asking the Taoiseach a question is like trying to play handball against a haystack. You hear a dull thud and the ball does not come back to you. It goes all over the world, but it certainly does not come back to the person asking the question.
I would like a specific answer from the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach knows that President Bush, the fundamentalists who surround him and his fellow fundamentalist, Prime Minister Blair, intend to attack Iraq no matter what. He should be very clear that they have made up their minds. He knows that doing so will wreak havoc on the peoples of Iraq and has nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction, but is about oil, power and influence in the world. By colluding with that, by facilitating the US military build-up, the Taoi seach will have on his hands the blood of the innocent Iraqi people who will undoubtedly be slaughtered.
The Taoiseach now says that 30 aircraft passing through our airports, mainly Shannon, notified that they were carrying munitions of war and were given permission to land. The other 532 aircraft neither sought nor received permission to carry munitions of war. Will the Taoiseach tell the Dáil that those aeroplanes, whether freight or passenger craft, did not have any weapons on board or munitions designed to wreak havoc on people or property?
I am satisfied the regulations were followed.
What changed last week?
Due to a recent increase in the number of aircraft, the Minister reiterated the message. What might have changed is that there is a more difficult state of affairs where they are going now. The Deputy says I will not answer his first question. If Saddam Hussein changes the regulations, complies with the inspectors, international law and the UN mandate, we will not have this problem.
It is not about weapons of mass destruction.
We will not have this problem if he complies in a very friendly way with the inspectors who stated that he has been helpful in process but not in substance. They have urged the Security Council, the USA and the UK to hold back. If he complies with them fully, none of us will have a problem—
The Taoiseach knows what this is about.
—and the Deputy will not have to get excited about it. The Deputy is totally against the United States of America in every regard.
I am not against the United States.
We are against the Bush Administration.
I am against Saddam Hussein and both of us will get our way.
I have been against Saddam Hussein since before the Taoiseach even knew he existed.
The majority of Americans are against this war.
We will not have a war and we will have no difficulties if Saddam Hussein com plies with UN Resolution 1441 of 8 November which was passed by all 14 members of the Security Council. The entire world cannot be wrong. One dictator is wrong and he is a man who has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people and who has lost 6,500 chemical bombs. Let us be realistic. The Deputy should not stand up in this House to defend the indefensible.
Who is defending the indefensible?
The Deputy is.
The Deputy should use his energy in the same way as everybody else in the world to see that the UN resolution is complied with. That is what we should be trying to do.
The Taoiseach is worse than the Vichy Government.
The Deputy should tell that to the Iranian war veterans.