Vol. 1040 No. 2
6. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs what action is being taken to improve processing times of paper-based renewal and first-time passport applications, in view that the current processing time is eight weeks, and in particular the efforts to fast-track those applications of which queries have been raised as this can often lead to extended delays in the processing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28824/23]
63. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs to advise what action his Department is taking to ensure there are no delays in the processing of passport applications during the busy summer months, in particular the efforts to fast-track those for which queries have been raised as this can often lead to extended delays in processing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28823/23]
I ask this question on behalf of my colleague, Deputy Colm Burke, who cannot be here this morning. It relates to similar questions that have already been raised, the replies to which I have listened to carefully. The question is about the processing time for paper-based applications and first-time renewals of passports.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 and 63 together.
The passport service's recent achievements, which I have outlined in response to earlier questions, are thanks to the operational and staffing plans my Department has put in place for 2023, as well as the efficiencies allowed for through Passport Online.
There are currently 834 staff in the passport service. The Department has run 18 recruitment competitions since 2021 to address staffing needs in the passport service, and another is currently under way. The passport service has scaled up the customer service hub significantly over the past 18 months and plans to ensure that excellent customer service is maintained during this current period of peak demand.
We are currently in the busiest time of year for passports as we approach the summer holiday season. However, the passport service has already seen application numbers coming down in recent weeks. This suggests that most applications for the summer season have already been processed or submitted. The high application numbers seen during the first half of the year came following an effective communications campaign run by the Department during the winter of 2022 and spring of 2023. The campaign focused on the benefits of applying online and encouraged citizens to check their passport in advance of booking travel. I strongly encourage the Deputy to advise his constituents of the advantages of using the substantially more efficient online service, which is now used by more than 90% of applicants worldwide.
Due to the nature of the paper application process, it will always be a slower service. The turnaround time for all paper applications is eight weeks. Given that less than 10% of applicants now use the paper service, it is not the priority service for the passport service in the context of strategy and resources.
Applications for which queries have been raised and further supporting documents are submitted do not go to the back of the queue. All such applications are processed within 15 working days from when the additional documents are received by the passport service. This includes paper applications.
Paper applications do take longer and so there can be up to 30,000 paper applications in the system at any one time. This does lead to significantly more queries with paper applications compared to online, which is faster. It is only in cases of a life or death issues that a passport can be prioritised. I am confident that the planning and staffing measures implemented, along with other improvements, will continue to have a positive impact on passport processing times for the remainder of this year.
I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. Unfortunately, everybody cannot, for very obvious reasons, make an online application. There are exceptions, of course, where alternative arrangements could be made. However, we must deal with the situations we face. I compliment the Tánaiste and his Department on their helpfulness with regard to particular applications. However, I, my colleague Deputy Colm Burke and other Members of this House have dealt with applications made as far back as January that have still not been processed for various reasons. That particular issue needs to be dealt with in an effort to find out the cause of the snag. What is holding things up? It cannot be that the two-month processing period applies in every case. There must be some exceptions and it must be possible for an intervention to be made to speed up the process, particularly because the people who have made those paper applications may not have access to the online option because they are not well-versed in its use. They are uneasy about using that online option. Perhaps the Tánaiste will look again at that issue with a view to identifying the particular snags that are causing the problems which are creating further problems and delays down the road.
I appreciate the Deputy's comments. A number of Deputies have commented on the helpfulness of the staff of the Department of Foreign Affairs and in the Passport Office, in particular. I take the Deputy's point that not everybody can go online but people should seek assistance to do so, where possible, because it is a very effective and much faster service. I will take away the Deputy's viewpoint. I will talk again to the team in the Passport Office about the situation in respect of paper-based applications. Some senior citizens may not be as competent in the use of online platforms but they should not be in any way disadvantaged by their use of a paper-based application.
I am not clear why any passport application should have been in the system since January. If the Deputy sends details, we can examine that and perhaps learn lessons from the situation.
I thank the Tánaiste. I note his willingness to look at the situation and consider what can be done to improve it. The fact of the matter is that we have all had complaints from constituents during holiday time. It obviously does not happen at any other time. However, the processing time for paper applications needs to be looked at, as the Tánaiste has agreed to do, in order to find out what exactly is causing the hold-up and what can be done to improve the situation. That applies to first-time applicants and renewals in respect of paper applications.
As was mentioned in previous questions, the stamping of the documentation relating to a passport overlaps the signature or photograph, which is, in many cases, a requirement to ensure there can be no duplication or reproduction of the photograph or signature separately. That is the reason that requirement is there. I would ask for that to be looked at to try to understand why that is happening.
There has been a considerable amount of conversation about passports. That goes with this time of year. There are issues in respect of the need for a garda to witness an application and old-style communication. Those issues need to be dealt with. A considerable number of my Northern friends contact my office, which sometimes uses up an awful lot of our slots and that is a particular difficulty. The Government is going to facilitate elected representatives from the North. What is the timeline for that?
I will also mention a specific problem with the artificial intelligence, AI, system. I know of a lady with a disability for whom it was incredibly difficult to get a photograph that worked for her. I will be honest and say that the picture that got through the AI system to allow the process to start might not have been the correct photograph. It is a particular issue and we need more discretion for those with disabilities. The lady in question was unable to stop her head shaking and whatever else. That did not allow for the taking of a photograph in the same way as any of the rest of us.
We have already taken action in respect of MLAs. They now have the same access as the Members of this House.
When is that going to happen?
It is done.
It is not available through a telephone.
It is not available through a telephone.
They can email but do not have telephone access.
Elected representatives on the island are provided for. I have also brought MEPs into the fold in respect of access to the same services available to Members of these Houses.
Will they get the phone line?
Yes, that is my understanding but I will come back to the Deputy on that. There is a question later.
On the specific case, the Deputy acknowledged the photograph was a problem. We are always looking at ways to try to make it more efficient and effective through new technologies and to reduce the room for human error and the number of original documents required. We all get phone calls about passport cases, as Deputy Carthy mentioned earlier, from people saying their passport is due to expire next week and asking is there anything we can do. To be fair to the Passport Office staff, the bulk of them come back to human error. My view is that our obligation is to help people as best we can with all the constraints, and the Department agrees with this. There is a recruitment campaign under way at the moment to get more staff. There are two things people need to do: check their passports and apply early online, and get assistance to apply online. If people apply online, they will get a really quick response.
7. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs further to Parliamentary Question No. 26 of 27 April 2023, if he will provide an update on his bilateral engagement to date in 2023 with his Israeli counterpart with regard to the ongoing demolition and seizure of Palestinian property in the occupied Palestinian territories, as well as the escalating violence by Israel on Palestinians; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28816/23]
My specific question requests an update on any bilateral engagement the Minister has had with his Israeli counterpart on the ongoing seizure and demolition of Palestinian property in the occupied Palestinian territories. I say this while acutely aware that 158 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces in the first six months of this year alone. That is almost the same number as last year, which was the deadliest year on record since 2006.
I was hoping to go to Israel and the Middle East more generally last week but particular people in certain areas were not available so we have postponed that visit to a later date in the next number of months. I want to visit the Middle East more generally to meet my Israeli counterpart and others in the region to discuss these issues.
The ongoing demolition and seizure of Palestinian property is a matter I follow closely, along with my European Union counterparts. I am deeply concerned the UN has reported, as I said earlier, a significant increase in such activity in 2023.
Visible solidarity with those affected is an important element of our response. Ireland's representative office in Ramallah has made a number of visits, along with European Union colleagues, to sites of concern in East Jerusalem and the West Bank since April. Most recently, on Sunday of this week, they joined European Union and international partners in visiting a family facing imminent forced eviction from their home in Jerusalem's old city. Ireland's embassy in Tel Aviv also raises these matters in its regular contact with the Israeli authorities.
Such actions by the Israeli authorities are among several worrying trends we are witnessing, including escalating violence and increasing civilian casualties. I have been consistently forthright in underlining Ireland's clear position on these matters, including the obligation of Israel as the occupying power, to protect civilians in the occupied Palestinian territory.
I have not yet had the opportunity to meet directly with my Israeli counterpart, Foreign Minister Cohen, although I hope to do so in due course with a view to reiterating our concerns on these matters.
A sustained European Union focus is also a priority. I welcome that the European Union Special Representative for Human Rights, Mr. Eamon Gilmore, visited the occupied Palestinian territory and Israel last week. While there he raised concerns about several issues, including settler violence, the use of lethal force by the Israeli Defence Forces, IDF, civilian deaths and demolitions.
Ireland is part of a group of EU member states pursuing compensation for confiscated or demolished humanitarian structures, funded by donors such as Ireland, through the West Bank Protection Consortium. The consortium has sought compensation of more than €1.3 million in respect of confiscated or demolished assets since 2015. Ireland provided €300,000 in funding to the consortium in 2022, underlying our commitment to reducing the vulnerability of Palestinian communities living in area C of the West Bank.
I know the Tánaiste is on record repeatedly expressing his concerns and outrage about what is happening. However, the absence of action is really worrying. He talks about a rules-based order in other contexts. He said here today that he feels the two-state solution is receding, which is really serious. Yet we have taken no action other than expressing our outrage. I welcome that the Tánaiste will be making a visit and I welcome that Mr. Eamon Gilmore is now jumping into action, further to the EU.
However, we are now facing the bloodiest year. Last year was the bloodiest and it is increasing. We have taken no action. Six organisations remain designated as terrorist organisations. We fund two or three of those. Amnesty International's report on Israel's apartheid against Palestinians has been utterly ignored by this Government and by Europe, except for the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Mr. Josep Borrell, saying he would not like to use the word "apartheid" and that it is not appropriate.
I do not accept the Deputy's general criticism of the Irish Government's position. Globally, the Irish Government would be seen as one of the stronger contributors to this debate. It would be considered to consistently take a very principled approach on this matter. When we say "action", we have to specify first of all the effectiveness of further actions. We want to work with other European member states to get a significant critical mass of EU member states to take particular positions in respect of this. We work with the Palestinian Authority and representatives of Palestinians to strengthen and deepen the relationship with the European Union. Unfortunately, there is not consensus across the 27 EU member states on this. There are varying degrees of emphasis, with different countries having different policy approaches to this issue.
I referenced the two-state solution earlier. The continued expansion of settlements, and the composition of the new Israeli Government, leads to my pessimism about the viability of the two-state solution, if the current Israeli Government's position continues as it has developed from the moment of its establishment. I feel it is honest to articulate that point. We still believe the two-state solution is the only viable way forward here.
I condemn the attacks going on. However, it is a matter of judgment as to how we further reflect our views. In the meantime, in terms of the organisations that were banned, we have been very supportive of them, not just financially but in raising it in various fora and with our Israeli counterparts.
I do not doubt the Tánaiste's bona fides and what he said in that we have been stronger than any other country. That is not the measuring stick. We are an independent country, so what is our attitude regarding Israel other than expressing concerns? What is it we are saying to Israel? The Tánaiste has not met with the Israeli Foreign Minister or whoever the appropriate minister is and we are approaching a second deadly year in Palestine. The Tánaiste speaks about six organisations that he supports. They have been designated as terrorist organisations with no substantial evidence. That is what the EU said a year ago to back that designation, and still we sit idly by and do nothing.
We talk about compensation. Can that be clarified? Is that compensation to allow the Palestinian people to rebuild the houses that have been demolished or confiscated? Are we colluding in the knocking down of houses and giving them money? What does compensation mean in that regard? I would like specific answers on the six organisations and Amnesty International's report.
I agree in general with what the Tánaiste and Deputy Connolly have said. In a previous existence, I had occasion to meet all sides in that debate and dispute, which continues. It would be of considerable importance and influence if, at on-site level, there was a platform to which grievances could be addressed before they boil over into the kind of incursions we are talking about now. That platform could earn the respect of all sides, which is hugely important. I say that on the basis of having met all sides previously, as I know the Tánaiste has.
As I said, we were due to go to the area last week but that was not possible. Meeting people face to face is far more effective. On the broader question, we do not sit idly by. There are very real limitations in terms of impact and effectiveness to what a country like Ireland can do on its own.
We were not idle on this in respect of our position on the Security Council. That was reflected by the UN Secretary General. At a European Union level, Josep Borrell and others would not view Ireland as a country that stands idly by in respect of all of this. We are not in any way colluding but are simply putting pressure on the Israeli Government that if we with other European countries are funding infrastructure in the West Bank and it is destroyed or confiscated, we believe compensation must be forthcoming and there must be a cost. It is just one other further element of endeavouring to keep pressure on the Israeli Government with regard to recklessly attacking infrastructure which European Union member states have paid for, and this is something that has been going on for years. People are now taking a stand, as are other member states, and saying that a school cannot be destroyed without people being held to account in some shape or form. Financial is one form of accountability but it is not colluding in any shape or form and I do not think that is a fair perspective to put on it.
8. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has given consideration to the opening of a passport office in Northern Ireland. [28848/23]
Will the Tánaiste outline if he is willing to progress plans to open a passport office in the North?
As I said earlier, Passport Online has allowed for the centralisation of passport processing resulting in greater efficiencies for the service and for customers. A total of 90% of applicants last year applied through Passport Online and that figure will continue to grow as the passport service's digital first strategy continues to roll out.
Demand for passports from Northern Ireland remains steady and represents about 10% of total applications received by the passport service. So far this year, the Passport Office has issued more than 64,000 passports to applicants residing in Northern Ireland. Out of the total of 78,000 applications received from Northern Ireland to date in 2023, almost 70,000 of these were made using Passport Online.
More than half of all simple adult online renewals issue within two working days, meaning that for many the online renewal service is faster than the four-day urgent appointment service offered at the counter in the Passport Office in Dublin and Cork. First-time applications are the most complex and it is therefore not possible to process these at an in-person appointment. It is important to note that the passport service public counters do not function as a walk-in service for passport queries. The urgent appointment service operates by appointment only through an online booking system.
Applicants in Northern Ireland who have a query about their application should contact the passport service customer service hub. The passport service website also provides comprehensive guidance to applicants on all aspects of the application process, from video guides to tracking an application in real time.
In view of the fact that the overwhelming majority of passport applicants apply online and the considerable benefits of Passport Online for all of our citizens, the Department is of the view that a strong business case cannot currently be made for opening an additional passport office in the North. The Passport Service will continue to consider ways it can improve its service to all citizens regardless of where they live.
I am very disappointed with that response. We spoke of the urgent appointment service which operates both in Dublin and in Cork. In fact, a person can get an urgent appointment service in London but not in the North of our own country. This has a particular real impact for people who are obliged to travel to either Dublin or Cork. I know that my colleague Deputy Pearse Doherty regularly speaks to me about the burden of people from his constituency in Donegal having to travel to Dublin when they need to make an appointment of this nature because that is a much bigger undertaking than if somebody gets the 49 bus or whatever into the centre of Dublin. I urge the Tánaiste to reconsider the response he has been given and give real consideration to this prospect.
Of the 78,000 applications received from Northern Ireland to date in 2023, almost 70,000 of these were made using Passport Online. The direction of travel is online. The business case just is not there for a physical office. Increasingly, we will be going online. With regard to a physical office, if 70,000 out of 78,000 are applying online, that number is going to increase next year and the year after. Others were looking for an office in the west as well as in the North, but I believe that the business case for physical offices in those locations is receding not only because of the growth of the utilisation of the online service but because of the efficiency of that service and the degree to which people are responding to it.
In an earlier question the Deputy raised the issue of a portal. I believe it is operating, I am told, on a similar basis to the Oireachtas phone line to facilitate MLAs to bring urgent cases to the attention of the passport service. Since its launch on 17 April until 2 June, the passport service has handled 280 queries through the MLA portal. I believe Deputy Ó Murchú had asked that question earlier.
On that issue, that is not the same service that was being offered to Oireachtas Members who have a phone line and there is a difference. I have used both and nothing beats actually talking to a human being sometimes when dealing with a specific case.
If we use the business logic which has been prepared and put forward in the Tánaiste's response in respect of this office, then I regret to inform him that the next logical step is that somebody is going to propose closing the Passport Office in Cork. I would not support that and I do not know whether the Tánaiste would.
Deputy Carthy should consult Deputy Ó Laoghaire on that point.
Yes, and I am sure he would be aghast to hear-----
Or Deputy Gould.
-----of such a prospect because this is more than business. It is about a service being provided to citizens. Yes, the vast bulk of people apply online, wherever they are applying from. Urgent and emergency cases and appointments are usually made by people who have previously made their application online. It is because an urgency or an emergency emerges that they need access. It is a service we operate and we acknowledge that it operates, by and large, very well. It can operate better and one of the ways in which it could operate better would be if we had an office network which was actually accessible to people across the country.
The Department has made clear that a business case does not exist right now. We have had queries all morning, with people wanting us to improve the service to make it faster and more efficient. There are choices in how we deploy staff. There has been a very significant push on innovation and in making the service more streamlined in respect of the birth certificate, for example. A total of 16,000 birth certificates have been delivered online as opposed to people having to get physical birth certificates in the past. This involves our collaboration with the General Register Office. That is all very positive and that is the direction of travel. If we can streamline this more and more, it will be more technology driven into the future. There has been an exponential rise in the use of technology but, to be fair to the service, it has improved very significantly mainly because of the focus on the online side of it. There are issues in respect of the paper applications still and we have to keep working to see if we can speed up that side of it, but we will keep the issue under review.
10. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the proposed timeline to honour the Government commitment to recognise the state of Palestine. [28846/23]
In the context of the Tánaiste's conversation with the Leas-Cheann Comhairle in respect of tangible things the Irish Government can do to support the Palestinian people as they face Israeli aggression and apartheid, one of the practical things the Government could do is to enact the agreed position of this House and to recognise the state of Palestine. Will the Tánaiste give the House a timeframe as to when he intends to do that?
The programme for Government states the Government will "[h]onour our commitment to recognise the State of Palestine as part of a lasting settlement of the conflict, or in advance of that, when we believe doing so will progress efforts to reach a two-state solution or protect the integrity of Palestinian territory". I have emphasised on several occasions that the timing and context of any such decision would need to take account of a number of considerations. In particular, it is necessary to assess whether the resulting loss of influence would be matched by a commensurate benefit for the Palestinian people and a positive impact on a sustainable peace on the basis of a two-state solution. My judgment at present is that this is not the case.
It is clear the current situation is deeply troubling. At the same time, over recent months, we have witnessed an increase in international engagement.
I welcome the discussions which took place in Aqaba and Sharm el-Sheikh over the religious holiday period, which brought both parties around the table, albeit with a relatively limited focus on de-escalation. The United Nations Security Council has been seized of this matter, issuing a consensus statement on 20 February, reiterating a strong opposition to all unilateral measures that impede peace. It is also significant that the UN General Assembly has sought an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice, ICJ, on the legal consequences arising from Israel's prolonged occupation.
I have asked my Department to begin work on preparing a written statement. I plan to seek Government approval for the submission of that statement to the court in advance of the July deadline. My priority is to underline the need for these efforts of the international community to enhance the prospect of meaningful engagement between the parties with a view to restoring a political horizon towards a two-state solution. Ireland's bilateral engagement with the Palestinian National Authority, notably our programme of assistance to the Palestinian people, also reinforces our commitment to the development of a viable, sovereign Palestinian state, living in peace alongside the State of Israel. In 2023, Ireland will provide more than €16 million in development and humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people, including measures aimed at building the institutions of a Palestinian state.
The difficulty and reality, which I think the Tánaiste acknowledged in his earlier remarks, is that Israeli actions in breaching international law, engaging in an apartheid regime and committing war crimes are becoming more blatant and glaring by the day. I think he also acknowledged that the EU, because of the position some of the governments, to their shame, have taken in respect of Israel in particular, will not take defining action or the level of action required to in any way put pressure on Israel to change tack. Therefore, it will be left up to individual states, through independent foreign policy, to take meaningful action. We can look for excuses not to do things all the time, but recognition of the state of Palestine has been supported by the Tánaiste's party in this House. It now needs to be followed up with action by the Tánaiste in his current position in the Government.
We have worked with other like-minded states. There are like-minded states in the EU that share our position on Palestine and the Palestinian question. We have met several of them, collectively. At this time, I would argue with the Deputy, from a judgment of this situation, that it is more effective to see if we can build a greater critical mass of member states prepared to jointly work on this issue and take a position than just going it alone right now. That would be far more powerful and impactful than individuals going it alone. It is in the context of putting pressure on the Israeli Government towards the two-state solution track, as opposed to the current government's approach of the expansion of settlements and increased violence and attacks on Palestinian homes.
My fear is that the longer we delay these types of measures, the less likely it is that there will be a Palestinian state in a two-state solution to actually recognise. I welcome that the Tánaiste indicated the Government will make a submission to the International Court of Justice about the clarification it is preparing in respect of the commission I referenced earlier. Will that submission underline the opinion of this House, as agreed in resolution, I think, last year, that Israel is in fact engaging in the annexing of the West Bank? That is the fundamentally important point, in my view. We need the International Court of Justice to declare. That declaration should and must lead to actual action to bring an end to this scandalous situation.
There is a huge irony in people who oppose a two-state solution in Ireland supporting it in Palestine. Nobody believes partition is an acceptable solution here, yet somehow we think the ethnic and racist partition of Palestine is a solution. Nobody in Palestine believes that any more. They increasingly recognise that the Oslo Accords were a smokescreen through which Israel would continue the ethnic cleansing and annexation of Palestinian territory. Now, even the UN Human Rights Committee, which I believe the Tánaiste's Department met this week, as did we, is now asking for opinions. It is clearly its view that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory is now permanent. In other words, it has no intention of dismantling the settlements or coming to a peaceful resolution, which has big legal consequences. Will the Tánaiste give the Palestinians a bit more than tea and sympathy and recognise the reality of what Israel is doing to them?
Last year, I met Mahmoud Abbas, who came to Ireland, and I also met the Palestinian Prime Minister on several occasions. Their ask on that occasion was to strongly support the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly in respect of the advisory opinion, which Ireland did and it was successful. I have asked my Department, in response to Deputy Carthy's comment, to begin preparing a written statement to the International Court of Justice in relation to its advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from Israel's prolonged occupation of Palestinian territory since 1967. I plan to seek Government approval for the submission of that statement to the court in advance of the July deadline. We are also talking to other European Union and like-minded states to discuss our approach to the submission as we work through the preparation phase. It will be detailed work. We must use every available international forum and accountability mechanism, such as the ICJ, to continue to put pressure.
11. Deputy Gino Kenny asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that many journalists, trade union leaders, judges, civil society activists and politicians, including the Speaker of the Tunisian parliament (details supplied) have been arrested in Tunisia in recent weeks in concerted acts of state repression; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28774/23]
My question concerns the ongoing situation in Tunisia. The Tunisian Government has increasingly become authoritarian in relation to journalists and political and civil rights activists. I wish to hear the Tánaiste's views on the ongoing situation, particularly Ireland and the EU's relationships with Tunisia.
We are concerned by the deteriorating situation in Tunisia. In recent months, there has been a worrying increase in reports of repression against protesters, opposition leaders and civil society groups by the Tunisian authorities. I am aware of the arrest of the Tunisian opposition leader and of other prominent members of Tunisian civil society. Freedoms of expression and association are fundamental human rights guaranteed to all and are an essential foundation of an open, democratic and inclusive society. I call on the Tunisian Government to uphold these rights.
The situation in Tunisia has been discussed several times at the European Union Foreign Affairs Council in recent months. In March, Ireland raised the issue of restrictions on freedom of expression and association in Tunisia, with particular reference to the then-recent expulsion of Esther Lynch, the general secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation, ETUC. I made a public statement on this matter and voiced Ireland’s condemnation of this act. I underlined our support for the rights of trade unions to conduct their work free from harassment, intimidation and fear. I welcome the recent visit of EU Commission President von der Leyen, along with the Prime Ministers of the Netherlands and Italy, to Tunis for talks with President Saied. The EU-Tunisia relationship will continue to focus on people-to-people contacts, economic co-operation and political dialogue, including ensuring respect for human rights.
I thank the Tánaiste. As I said from the outset, a number of prominent politicians, trade union leaders and lawmakers have been imprisoned in recent months. It is very ironic, in the birthplace of the Arab Spring 12 years ago, that one dictator took over from another in 2011. He is oppressing his people and has used horrible and really xenophobic language against people of colour that is completely divisive. It is important that Ireland uses its influence via the EU, which is one of the biggest trading partners with Tunisia. It is important that we reflect our solidarity with the people of Tunisia.
I share the Deputy's concern. The Belgian and Portuguese foreign ministers visited Tunisia recently and met with its Government on behalf of the EU foreign ministers to articulate these concerns and to undertake a fact-finding analysis and meet people on the ground. They provided useful insights in their subsequent presentation to the European Foreign Affairs Council meeting. We have been consistently using international forums to address this question. Ireland called on Tunisia to take all necessary steps to protect the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and association during Tunisia's universal period of review on human rights in November 2022. The EU, as a body, continues to prioritise human rights as part of its engagement with Tunisia. The statement recently released jointly by the EU and Tunisia, as part of the recent visit of President von der Leyen and Prime Ministers Rutte and Meloni, outlined key features in that regard and, in particular, respect for human rights-----
I thank the Tánaiste. I call Deputy Kenny.
I do not have much else to add, but the issue of the funding that emanates from the EU and goes to Tunisia is important. There must be some sort of consequences in respect of what the Tunisian Government is doing. I say this because if we look at what happened several decades ago during the Ben Ali dictatorship, we can see that this Tunisian Government is doing exactly the same as he was doing, not only to the people of the country but to the opposition there. As a beacon of democracy and solidarity with the Tunisian people, surely the EU will have to stand up to this kind of xenophobic and authoritarian regime.
I would like the Taoiseach to comment on the imprisonment of Mr. Rached Ghannouchi. He is the elected Speaker of the Tunisian Parliament. I met his son at a Palestinian solidarity conference in Oslo a few weeks ago. He is very worried about his father because he is 81 years old. Mr. Ghannouchi is a renowned human rights activist and writer and was a central figure in the Arab Spring. Along with all opposition parliamentarians, trade unionists, etc., he was locked up by the Tunisian dictatorship. I was told that, essentially, the new dictator of Tunisia is allying himself with el-Sisi, who has done exactly the same in Egypt. The two of them are working to crush the democratic revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt. Once again, we are just getting tea and sympathy from the EU rather than action. Will the Tánaiste call for Mr. Ghannouchi's release and that of the other parliamentarians and trade unionists and make serious representations to the Tunisian dictatorship in this regard?
We have. I spoke about this issue earlier in terms of the arrest of Mr. Rached Ghannouchi. I made this point in response to the original question from Deputy Kenny. This is not about tea and sympathy. That is not what we are doing. We must have a realistic assessment of these issues and how we can best have an impact and create pressure. It will either be through engagement or just complete isolation. We must work on the engagement front.
Respect for human rights and a frank discussion on all these issues form parts of the EU's regular contact with Tunisia. There is concern across the EU regarding the deteriorating situation in Tunisia, and this will be a core element of discussions at the EU-Tunisia association council meeting, which will take place before the end of this year. This will be one opportunity. In other areas, we have been active across all international forums on issues related, for example, to freedom of expression and press freedom. We are members of the UN Human Rights Council, the World Press Freedom Coalition and the Media Freedom Coalition, which advocate for the protection of journalists and so forth.
I thank the Tánaiste.
We are active, therefore, in many international forums to try to deal with unacceptable regimes such as this and behaviour on their part.
We are moving on, I am afraid, to the last question.
I am sorry.
I call Deputy Carthy.
I will waive it.
13. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he supports Ireland’s historic position of neutrality; his views on the Government’s current position regarding Irish neutrality; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28826/23]
I thank Deputy Carthy. I wish to ask the Tánaiste about the consultative forum regarding neutrality. I watched the engagement with Deputy Barry earlier, where the Tánaiste was very worked up, I would say, at the Deputy pointing out the reality that the list of invited speakers gives the game away to an extreme degree. There is one anti-war speaker in the form of Roger Cole and multiple people who are on the record as being in favour of joining NATO, having links themselves to NATO, etc. Does this not just give the entire game away?
No, I was not worked up at all. I just think it is shocking how you guys operate, how the Deputies operate, first, in terms of their intolerance of a wide variety of views and debate. I instinctively felt this was how they were going to approach this. This is a genuine debate. There is a wide range of speakers with different perspectives, including people working in Irish universities and at different forums. The first thing the Deputies tried to do was to attack the chairperson some weeks ago. There was a personalisation of this. It was the old story of let us-----
She is a US militarist.
-----get the person. Let us undermine the integrity and international reputation of the person, and all for the sake of the Deputies' political agenda.
We were just attacking her bias.
It is a sickening form of politics you engage in, Deputy Murphy. I find it abhorrent. A more sinister element behind it is to snuff out debate. You talk about freedom of speech and so on in Tunisia. You are nowhere near that - I am not suggesting that - but what you are trying to suggest is certain people cannot speak-----
No, it is great.
-----because they have a view. That is what you are saying. They should not be allowed speak.
That is not what we are saying.
It is not.
If there are up to 50 or 60 speakers and if one or two have views that are contrary-----
One or two?
-----to the views of Deputies Murphy or Boyd Barrett, then they should not speak. That is intolerance. You guys are no great advocates of freedom of speech at all, and I shudder to think of the day when you would ever be in authority, because, by God, would you put the jackboot on people who might have views different from yours. That is where you guys are coming from.
That is a shocking statement.
It is not. It is where I stand.
It is a shocking statement.
Can I ask the Taoiseach to withdraw that?
I will not withdraw anything. It is a democracy.
Can I ask him now to withdraw that? I am asking it right now because in the past there was an issue about not asking for it immediately. He said if we were in power we would put the jackboot on people. Could I ask him to withdraw that comment?
I was a disgraceful comment.
Sorry-----
That was a shocking comment regarding the jackboot.
Regarding the use of "you guys", these are elected Members of Parliament.
Okay.
I ask you, Tánaiste, to refer to their status when we are talking about the level of debate. Another issue has arisen now because the Deputy has asked you to withdraw that comment.
I am not withdrawing it. We are in a parliament. I believe fundamentally in the right of freedom of expression in this Parliament.
So do we.
I will be pursuing this.
I have witnessed the Deputies opposite make all sorts of comments about people.
That is okay. We are not going to have a debate.
I am not going to. It is a bit rich for Deputy Murphy to be looking for-----
No, can we speak through the Chair?
He is getting somewhat squeamish now.
Tánaiste, can we do this through the Chair, please?
Through the Chair, yes.
This is a question-and-answer basis. I got a bit distracted as to where we are in terms of time. Deputy Murphy has a right to reply - in relation to the question now.
I want to ask the Chair-----
The Deputy has asked and-----
He is in breach of Standing Orders saying we would put a jackboot on people if we were in power, and I ask him to withdraw that.
I am entitled to an opinion.
You are in breach of Standing Orders.
Sorry, through the Chair, you have just-----
It is not just an opinion. Go and say it outside the Dáil, like your disgraceful allegation that we are Putin's puppets.
It was disgraceful that it was said we were Putin's puppets.
You have just-----
Say it outside the Dáil.
You have just made an assertion-----
You are abusing privilege.
You have just made an assertion that certain people should not be on a platform.
No, actually, we did not. Stop lying about what we said.
No, we did not.
Thank you. Please be-----
I will tell you what is abhorrent-----
No, Deputy. Resume your seat.
Sorry, I was going to-----
No. Resume your seat. This is not helpful, especially given the context of your saying the debate should be free and should flow. This is not helpful. I am going to resume this. The Deputy has asked the Tánaiste to withdraw a comment. He said he will not do that. I am asking you now, Deputy, to resume in relation to this question because we are almost out of time.
What is abhorrent is not our exposure of the reality that the Government has a hand-picked consultative forum, with a hand-picked chair, who is on record as being a supporter of US militarism. Us being critical of that is not abhorrent. What is abhorrent and contrary to democratic debate and free speech is that the Government is not doing any of this in the full glare of the public and allowing the public to decide. The Government was originally going to have a citizens' assembly. That was ditched. Why? It was because the Government was afraid of the views of citizens. We had a Bill in this Parliament which the Government voted down to say that the people should have the right to decide that we should put neutrality into the Constitution. We want to have a real debate about these things.
What we are exposing, however, and what the Government does like being exposed at all, is that these consultative forums are an absolute farce. They are part of a managed process designed to say that the great and good have come together and have decided that Ireland is now too mature to stick with these old notions of neutrality and we are going to ditch it.
That is why the Minister has the thing completely stacked. I have no problem with people like Brigid Laffan, John O'Brennan or whoever with explicit anti-neutrality or pro-NATO views speaking. I have a problem with there being one speaker in favour of neutrality over the course of four days. The thing is clearly rigged and the Minister has a problem with that being pointed out.
Deputy Murphy, there is one Chair. Thank you.
Ireland's policy of military neutrality has long been a very important strand of our foreign policy. It has been practised by successive Governments of which I have been a member. The policy means that Ireland does not participate in military alliances or common or mutual defence arrangements. The Government has no plans to alter this policy. That is not part of this conference. The Deputy has attempted to make the view that it is. He has tried to damage and undermine the bona fides of the conference.
It is our first major national conversation on international security issues, foreign policy and defence. Why is the Deputy so afraid of it? It is public. The public can participate online, make submissions and attend. It is very transparent - openly transparent. All members of the Committee on Foreign Policy and Defence have been invited to attend. Every Member of the Oireachtas can attend, but there is particular facilitation for members of the Oireachtas committee.
We are not on that. It is convenient for you.
As Chair, I have to ask the Minister to reflect on the use of the phrase "putting the jackboot in". It is unparliamentary language. I do not think it is acceptable.
I would like to test that. I do not think it is unparliamentary language. I think it is-----
I am making a ruling now in relation to this matter. I have given great discretion in relation to robust debates. I would ask you to reflect on accusing Members of putting the jackboot in. I would ask you to withdraw it. That is all I would ask you to do, on reflection.
First of all, I did not say they were putting the jackboot in, but I said in the future, given their trend and approach-----
We will not add to it.
In the interests of civility, I will take back the word "jackboot". Again-----
We are not having a debate on it, Tánaiste.
I do not want a debate. I want this issue of freedom of speech in Parliament referred to the procedures committee.
We are not going on to that.
I do not like what is happening here. I have to put it to the Chair directly. I do not like it. I am doing it in the interest of-----
We are having the words withdrawn. Thank you for your co-operation.
