Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 15 June 2023
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]
View answerI 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.
