Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 20 May 1993

Vol. 431 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Peace-Enforcement.

Seán Barrett

Ceist:

4 Mr. Barrett asked the Minister for Defence when he intends introducing an amendment to the Defence Acts to allow Irish troops participate in peace enforcement missions on behalf of the United Nations; whether any requests for such missions have been received from the United Nations; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Proinsias De Rossa

Ceist:

36 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Defence the implications for the Defence Forces of the decision made by the Government on 11th May 1993, to seek changes in the Defence Forces Acts in order to allow participation by Irish troops in UN peace-enforcement, as distinct from peacekeeping, operations; the difference between peacekeeping and peace-enforcement operations; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 36 together. The Government has recently been requested by the Secretary-General of the United Nations to make a contingent of 80 military personnel available for service with the second United Nations Operation in Somalia, UNOSOM II.

The Defence (Amendment) (No. 2) Act, 1960, permits the despatch of a contingent of the Permanent Defence Force for service outside the State as part of an international United Nations force. The Act defines such a force as an international force or body established for the performance of duties of a police character.

The mandate of UNOSOM II is not confined to duties of a police character. Consequently a prerequisite of participation by an Irish contingent in this force is the amendment of the 1960 Act. The necessary legislation will be introduced shortly. UNOSOM II will be authorised to carry out certain military tasks such as prevention of the resumption of violence between the various formerly warring factions, continued United Nations control of heavy weapons, seizure of unauthorised small arms and securing of ports and airports. The Irish contingent will consist of a transport unit whose main duty will be to provide supplies to military components of the force.

Fine Gael would support changing the legislation in this area provided each request was brought before both Houses of the Oireachtas for approval. I am sure the Minister would agree that this is a fundamental change in the role of our Defence Forces. In certain circumstances such requests could be in breach of our traditional stand in relation to neutrality. Would the Minister not agree that it is somewhat galling for those of us who have been elected to this Assembly to read in the newspapers on a regular basis about a decision made by the Government to send troops to a certain country and that it will bring this request before the Dáil? This highlights the disrespect which exists for this House. Before any commitment is given to the UN, each request should be brought before the House so that it can be debated and a decision taken to either accede or not accede to it. In view of the statement by the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Spring, on 12 May that: "The decision reaffirms our commitment to securing peace——

No quotations, please.

——and to implement the role of the——

I am sure the Deputy heard me. Quotations are not in order at Question Time.

Sorry. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs also referred to the role of the Irish troops in matters of security. This is a fundamental change which will have serious consequences for our Defence Forces, whose age structure is getting older. May I ask the Minister if it is his intention in bringing forward this legisltion to afford this House and the Seanad the opportunity of debating each request prior to a decision being taken?

I can assure the Deputy that every request to send a contingent abroad will be brought before the House by way of resolution. In this context, I understand that the Dáil only will be asked to agree to the request. I do not think the Seanad will have any involvement in this respect. With regard to amending the Defence (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1960, both this House and the Seanad will have a say in this matter. The Deputy asked a number of questions. I thank him for his support.

With regard to discussions in the news and electronic media, when one is asked by a journalist at a press conference if something is happening based on informed information, it is then that the information gets into the public domain. It is difficult for a Minister or a Deputy to attempt to avoid a question by attempting to come into conflict with the intelligence of the questioner. When a decision is made at Government the decision subsequently gets considerable publicity before the House has been made aware of it. I would not want the Deputy to think that because that happens I am being disrespectful to the House. I, in common with other Members, am conscious of our obligation to respect the House and its Members. As for the point made by Deputy Spring, perhaps the Deputy would put a question to him in that regard.

I am concerned that there is still a question to be dealt with and time for dealing with priority questions is fast running out.

Will the Minister agree that if it is the proposal to introduce legislation that will require the approval of the House before any commitment can be entered into, it is no longer a Government decision but a decision of the House? Has a commitment been given to the UN to send a battalion to Somalia or to any other place prior to the legislation being passed here and this House being given an opportunity to debate the issue?

I am anxious that we should have regard to the time factor. Members should have as much regard to the clock as the Chair has.

Does the Minister recognise the difficulty facing the Irish people in deciding on each application because the Irish Defence Forces have been so effective in the past when they were engaged in peacekeeping as distinct from peace-making? The Irish personality is very suited to that role and we could be far more effective in more cases if we stick to that role.

Can I still hope to deal with the remaining question?

Of course the Government has to decide in response to a request. A request comes from the UN through Boutros Boutros Ghali to the Government and the Government in a response decide to say, "Yes, we will consider the request subject to Dáil approval". The Dáil will have an opportunity under the heading of the Resolution and when we are amending the 1960 Act to discuss this issue. It will have two bites of the legislative cherry.

If the Minister responds to No. 5 I will take it.

Can the Chair give Deputy Sargent an opportunity to ask questions? I have no problem with that.

We will all be agreeable.

The Chair is obliged do adhere to Standing Orders. It Deputies wish to extend the time for priority questions, I would very much welcome it. It would make my task all the easier.

Barr
Roinn