Mick Barry
Ceist:1. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [16421/23]
Ceisteanna - Questions
Departmental Strategies
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:2. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [18277/23]
Paul Murphy
Ceist:3. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [18280/23]
Bríd Smith
Ceist:4. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [18283/23]
Ivana Bacik
Ceist:5. Deputy Ivana Bacik asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [19238/23]
Brendan Smith
Ceist:6. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [19256/23]
James Lawless
Ceist:7. Deputy James Lawless asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [19257/23]
Ruairí Ó Murchú
Ceist:8. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [19261/23]
Gary Gannon
Ceist:9. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the current situation in regard to the development of a national security strategy. [19314/23]
Tógfaidh mé Ceisteanna Uimh. 1 go 9, go huile, le chéile.
Our national security is always a primary concern for the Government and we are carrying out substantial work in building and sustaining our security and capabilities across several sectors, including justice, defence, the economy, energy and cyber. The continuing threat from republican paramilitaries is a priority and our authorities continue to work closely with their counterparts in Northern Ireland and Britain to counteract it.
The security environment that we and our partner states face now is considerably more dynamic, different and international than in the past and our strategic approach to national security must reflect this. The serious deterioration in the European security environment caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the related economic and energy impacts, the growing effects of malicious cyber activities, instability in the international environment and the increased stress on liberal democracy, as well as the challenges posed by hybrid threats, are all subjects of ongoing work. This work also takes account of the implementation of the report from the Commission on the Defence Forces and, at a wider EU level, the EU strategic compass for security and defence.
The Tánaiste announced recently that the Government plans for a consultative forum on international security policy. The forum will seek to generate an open and evidence-based discussion on the State’s foreign and security policy. It seems to me that we have to move away from the traditional and binary debate on neutrality that tends to characterise discussions on our security and defence policy. Taking account of the changed geopolitical context, especially in Europe, the forum is designed to build public understanding and discussion on the links between the State’s broad foreign policy approach, national security and resilience and the State’s defence posture.
Last year, the then Taoiseach, Deputy Micheál Martin, told the Dáil, "it is my view that there should be a citizens’ assembly in relation to all aspects of neutrality." In the aftermath of his comments, an Ipsos poll carried out on behalf of The Irish Times found that two thirds of respondents were opposed to jettisoning neutrality. Similar polls with similar results were carried out by other newspapers. The waters were tested and I do not think the Government liked the findings of those polls, so now the idea of a citizens' assembly seems to have been put to one side, scrapped in favour of a four-day debate in June with so-called experts in foreign policy and military experts. I do not think any serious observer will see this as anything other than an attempt to soften up public opinion. I know the answer to my next question but I will ask it anyway. Why has the Government ditched the idea of a citizens' assembly? When exactly will this stage-managed debate take place?
The Government is involved in a systematic campaign of trying to condition public opinion to move Ireland away from neutrality. It is exploiting every dire crisis around the world to further make the case for reviewing neutrality and, ultimately, moving away from it into a closer alliance with NATO and the EU militarisation project. The latest example is Sudan. All present have witnessed the scenes of Irish citizens, for example, trying to flee Sudan, which have generated further discussion. Would it not be good for the Taoiseach to remind the public of a matter I raised in the House, namely, that the militias that are now killing people in Sudan were funded by the European Union? They were explicitly funded, starting with Omar al-Bashir. Mohamed Dagalo, known as Hemedti, who is in charge of the Rapid Support Forces, got €200 million to €600 million from the EU trust fund for Africa. He boasted he was getting the funding from Europe in order to stop Sudanese people leaving Sudan but it has been used to arm the militias that cracked down on the revolution in 2018 and are now being used to kill Sudanese people and threaten Irish and other EU citizens in Sudan.
Should we not remember the EU's implication in the horror that we are witnessing in Sudan?
The so-called consultative forums are already up with a predetermined outcome to undermine neutrality further. If that was not already clear from the fact that the Government has Bertholt Brecht-style dissolved the random selection of citizens and replaced them with a so-called expert group, it should be absolutely crystal clear when we look at who the Government has appointed as the chairperson – Dame Louise Richardson, dame of the British Empire – someone who in writing repeatedly identifies with the aims and targets of US militarism. Writing after the US invasion of Afghanistan following 9-11, she writes: "We did not use the mechanism of NATO or any other international institution to fashion or implement a response. We felt strong enough to react on our own, and so we did." Writing about the attempted and implemented coups in Chile, Cuba and Nicaragua, she says: "An examination of these cases reveals that the United States had very good reasons to object to the governments of Chile, Cuba, and Nicaragua. Their ideological orientation was inimical to its own, so it supported local groups that used whatever means were available to them to try to bring them down.“ This is absolutely transparent.
I want to raise the question of energy security under the issue of national security. I do so because energy security is central to the number of data centres that are connecting not just to the national grid but now we see to the gas grid. The cables for these data centres that link them with Europe and the US are coming from Ireland and lying under our ocean so it is a question of national security also.
I condemn the decision to allow 11 more data centres onto the gas grid, because this may facilitate them to continue producing the data that then allow companies to buy and sell products around the globe while they mine into our information and create lots of profits, but at the same time it will drive our emissions through the roof. There is a prediction that by 2030 we could well be fined €8 billion in penalties for failing to reach our emissions targets. We have lots of money to slosh around but perhaps that €8 billion would be better spent elsewhere.
First, I express my solidarity with the people of Sudan who have been affected by this terrible conflict that is ongoing there. Could the Taoiseach assure that Irish citizens who are trapped there, from whom we have heard some very distressing experiences, have been safely evacuated? I know a ceasefire has come into effect, so I hope it will hold and that there will be a lasting peace there.
I wrote to the Taoiseach and spoke with him previously about national security briefings for Opposition leaders. I renew my call on him to commit to holding such briefings. Once again, we have seen Russian ships operating in Irish waters. We have heard new reports last week of the laptop of the Minister for Health apparently being compromised and cyberterrorism remains a huge risk. Just on Friday, we saw the Government announce that official devices should not have TikTok on them because of concerns around cybersecurity. With the extraordinary Hutch case and the latest revelations about the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, there are now valid concerns about links between policing and organised crime. Given that national security is a concern for all of us, could he commit to providing briefings to Opposition leaders?
The Taoiseach referred to the threat from republican paramilitaries as being an ongoing priority of the Government. Those thugs and criminals masquerading as republicans or loyalists do threaten security, in particular in the Border region. In that context, in all discussions that the Government has with the Garda Commissioner, it must be emphasised time and again that adequate resources for Garda divisions should be prioritised at all times. There are unique policing demands in a Border region and that should be factored into all decision-making.
The Taoiseach also referred to the Commission on the Defence Forces. As he is well aware, we do not have any Army barracks in the central Border region. We have an Army barracks in Finner Camp and Frank Aiken Barracks in Dundalk. I do not need to remind the Taoiseach that during the years of the Troubles, when the security of this State was threatened, the role of personnel in barracks local to the Border region and their familiarity with Border crossings was crucial in protecting this State. We need people on the ground, relatively adjacent to the Border region, based in barracks locally.
I believe the Irish people are very much committed to non-alignment and neutrality. We see what is happening in Sudan and we hope the evacuation of Irish citizens is going as well as it can be. Questions about our capacity will need to be answered.
We are also talking about cyber and hybrid threats. There is talk of the telecommunications cables. I want to know what has been done as regards due diligence in relation to ensuring we are secure from this point of view.
Data breaches and cyberattacks will be the preferred weapon of the future, as it is of the present, with the potential to bring the whole infrastructure of the State to a halt. The 2021 HSE cyberattack demonstrated Ireland's vulnerabilities and showed that we are not immune from such belligerent actions. The State is in large part responsible for the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information and data within its borders. However, there is no lead figure for government or national information security. Will the Government consider the appointment of a national information security officer and the creation of an office of national information, cyber and data defence and security to co-ordinate the various bodies responsible for Ireland's data and cybersecurity?
It is estimated that the attack on the cybersystem in this country will cost €100 million. We do not know what the human cost is. We know that hundreds of thousands of people did not get the treatment they needed following the cyberattack because of the collapse of the systems, so there could very well be people who have died and have suffered serious morbidity as a result. Ireland was shockingly exposed. The National Cyber Security Centre had a budget of €5 million. To put that in context: the budget for PR in the Department of the Taoiseach was three times that amount, €15 million, during the same period. In the accountability-free zone that is the Oireachtas, is anybody going to be held accountable for what happened in that cyberattack? Where is the criminal investigation? Will the Taoiseach put in place a judge-led investigation to make sure that this never happens again?
The consultative forum on international security policy appears to be the exact opposite to consultation. The chair, who has been picked by Government and not ratified, will oversee four public hearings and then from a response to a parliamentary question it appears it will be charged with preparing a report. That is the exact opposite to the ethos and principle that underpinned the citizens' assembly to which the Government had committed. A response to a parliamentary question from the Leas-Cheann Comhairle to the Tánaiste does not reference the word "neutrality" at all, yet it mentions that the forum will examine our current and future engagement with NATO. Does the Taoiseach understand why so many Irish people who value our very proud tradition of military neutrality and non-alignment are concerned about the approach that is being taken?
I thank Deputies for their questions. At the outset, to be very clear, the Government has no proposals to apply for NATO membership or join any military alliance or mutual defence pact. I am happy to give that assurance in the Chamber today. We are, however, a NATO partner for peace, we are involved in the European Union's battle groups, and we are part of the European permanent structured co-operation, PESCO, arrangement. The events in Sudan demonstrate why it is particularly important for a small country like Ireland to have security partners, because we relied on EU mechanisms to assist us to evacuate our citizens. No small country, or even no big or medium-sized country, can do these things on its own. The fact that we had the assistance of France and Spain made a big difference. It is one of the many reasons security co-operation is in the interests of our citizens.
I join others in expressing my solidarity with the people of Sudan and what they are facing at the moment. In relation to our own citizens, the Tánaiste gave us a briefing today at Cabinet about the efforts that are being undertaken to enable Irish citizens and their immediate family members – husbands, wives and children – to be evacuated to Ireland should they wish to do so. We think there are about 150 still in Sudan, mainly in the Khartoum area. Some want to be evacuated and some do not, but that work is still ongoing.
How about EU funding of militias?
I am not familiar with that EU funding so I cannot answer the question.
I raised it here back in 2018.
I know, but I do not know the answer to every question and am not familiar with any EU funding of that nature.
I would look into it if I were the Taoiseach.
On the consultative forum on international security policy, the Tánaiste announced last week that the Government plans to have a consultative forum on international security policy. It will take place in June and aim to build a deeper understanding of the threats faced by the State and the links to and between our foreign, security and defence policies. It will focus on a wide range of issues, including Ireland's efforts to protect the rules-based international order, through peacekeeping and crisis management, disarmament and non-proliferation, international humanitarian law, and conflict prevention and peacebuilding, as well as allowing for a discussion on Ireland's policy of military neutrality. The forum will also provide an opportunity to examine the experiences and policy choices of other partners in responding to the new security environment in Europe. The international security environment has changed significantly over the past year. We have seen that in respect of Ukraine.
The consultative forum will allow for an open and informed discussion on the issues involved and will provide a unique opportunity to bring together a wide range of stakeholders from the foreign policy and security and defence community, as well as civil society, political representatives, academics and other relevant bodies, as well as members of the broader public. We believe we need to have a serious and honest conversation about the international security policy options available to the State and the implications of each, as well as examine ways in which we can work with, and learn from, other European and international partners. The forum will have an overall chairperson, who will be tasked with directing and overseeing the discussions. The Tánaiste has confirmed that Louise Richardson, the highly respected president of the Carnegie Corporation of New York and former vice-chancellor of the University of Oxford, has kindly agreed to take on this important role. The consultative forum will take place in three different locations: University College Cork on 22 June, the University of Galway on 23 June, and Dublin Castle on 26 June and 27 June. The forum will be open to the general public, with opportunities to attend in person or virtually and to make written submissions. Further details will be made available in the coming weeks.
A couple of Members referred to a citizens' assembly. The Tánaiste floated the idea. It is okay to float ideas; I do it too, as does everyone in this House, but ultimately, on consideration, it was decided not to act on the proposal. No proposal for a citizens' assembly was made to the Government. A decision was made to have a consultative forum instead.
A problem with citizens.
We have good energy security in Ireland. We have our ports. A very significant announcement was made today on investing in Rosslare port, in particular. We have electricity and gas interconnection with the UK and are now developing an electricity interconnector between France and Ireland. We will need more interconnection to improve our security in the period ahead.
Deputy Bríd Smith is absolutely correct that underwater cables and pipelines are a security issue, more so than ever given what has been happening with Nord Stream and so-called scientific vessels in our waters. Crucially, part of what will have to change is design, making sure that future cables laid will be much harder to interfere with and tamper with. That was a big part of our discussions in Ostend yesterday. It is also a case of stepping up the capabilities of our Naval Service, radar and aerial surveillance to monitor what is happening in our exclusive economic zone.
But not reducing our emissions.
On briefings for Opposition leaders, I can ask my Secretary General to carry out a review. As things stand, security briefings, even for Ministers and the Taoiseach, are given largely on an ad hoc basis. We do not have a formalised structure like that in other states. We need to consider that. We also need to consider the associated rules and what the consequences would be if there was any breach of confidentiality regarding any security briefing. All these matters would have to be taken into account.
And leaks.
In my experience, one thing that never leaks is anything to do with national security. Were that to change, there would have to be very serious consequences.
On Deputy Brendan Smith's comments, I absolutely agree with what he had to say about republican and loyalist paramilitaries. He made a valid point on Garda resources for the Border counties. We need to take into account the fact that paramilitaries are still active. However, there are no plans at present for any new barracks to be constructed.
There was a question on a judge-led inquiry into the cyberattack. Where was the criminal investigation into that attack?
I understand there is a criminal investigation under way. It is being carried out by the Garda but I do not have an update on it. There are no proposals for a non-criminal investigation.
No accountability.
Cabinet Committees
Cian O'Callaghan
Ceist:10. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will next meet. [16726/23]
Peadar Tóibín
Ceist:11. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will next meet. [17706/23]
Ruairí Ó Murchú
Ceist:12. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will meet next. [18117/23]
Mary Lou McDonald
Ceist:13. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will next meet. [18127/23]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:14. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will meet next. [18278/23]
Paul Murphy
Ceist:15. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will meet next. [18281/23]
Bríd Smith
Ceist:16. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will meet next. [18284/23]
Mick Barry
Ceist:17. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will meet next. [19145/23]
Christopher O'Sullivan
Ceist:18. Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will next meet. [19218/23]
Robert Troy
Ceist:19. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will next meet. [19219/23]
Ivana Bacik
Ceist:20. Deputy Ivana Bacik asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will next meet. [19239/23]
Gary Gannon
Ceist:21. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on the economy and investment will meet next. [19315/23]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 to 21, inclusive, together.
The Cabinet Committee on the economy and investment was re-established in January 2023 and is due to meet on 25 May. The committee has a function similar to that of the Cabinet committee on economic recovery and investment, which met six times during the course of 2022. Membership of the committee comprises the Taoiseach; the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and for Defence; the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications and for Transport; the Minister for Finance; the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform; the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment; and the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. Other Ministers or Ministers of State will be invited to participate as required, as is the case with officials and advisers. The committee will oversee the implementation of programme for Government commitments aimed at sustainable economic recovery, investment and job creation, including through the implementation of Harnessing Digital, our national digital strategy. As with all policy areas, economic issues are regularly discussed at full Government meetings, where all formal decisions are made.
In 2006, the solicitor representing Deputy Niall Collins's wife wrote to the council seeking to purchase land. A month later, the Deputy was one of seven councillors who voted in favour of the selling of that land. Freedom of information documents released to The Ditch show Mrs. Collins was the only person to inquire about the purchasing of that land prior to the vote. She made an offer on the property in March 2007, when her husband was still a sitting councillor. According to The Ditch, Mrs. Collins is currently in negotiation with the council to sell the property back to it, with houses built on it. These are astounding events but unfortunately they are not unique. I know of cases in which Government politicians have voted on the sale or zoning of land in circumstances in which family members have been the beneficiaries. Elected representatives should not use their power to materially benefit themselves or their families. Will there be any consequences for the Minister of State, Deputy Niall Collins? Will the Taoiseach call for his resignation?
I spoke to the Taoiseach previously about the tech sector. Obviously, there have been a number of difficulties owing to job losses. Is the Taoiseach still assured that the sector is absolutely strong, given the State's significant reliance on it?
Could I raise an issue I brought up previously, namely the difficulty whereby remote workers are not allowed to work for employers across the Border? This has meant that 120 or possibly more PayPal workers who had been working in the South had to be transferred to what is called PayPal UK because of the closure of the PayPal premises. Has there been any interaction between the Revenue Commissioners and HM Revenue and Customs and even beyond that, at governmental level, to do a deal to get over this issue, which is a big one in Border areas?
It is predicted that we will see a surplus of €10 billion this year, €16 billion next year and as much as €21 billion in 2026. Obviously, Sinn Féin and everyone must appreciate the volatility of our corporation tax receipts, which outlines the need for careful management of the public finances; however, even if we leave corporate tax receipts aside, we can still expect to see surpluses of more than €4 billion in the years to come. That makes it clear that the State has additional capacity to address crises in housing and health, and also to make the necessary investment in climate action measures without penalising ordinary workers and families. Of course, nobody is opposed to setting aside revenue for the purpose of addressing future challenges, but how this is managed remains an open question and requires further discussion. Will the Taoiseach outline whether he intends to use the available capacity to address the crises in health and housing and to ensure the necessary funding is put towards climate action measures?
The decision to waive levies for developers is a disgraceful recycling of an already failed policy.
Does the Taoiseach not remember LIHAF, which involved subsidies to developers to build infrastructure and was supposed to deliver affordable housing? Within weeks of LIHAF being introduced, the requirement to get 40% back in affordable housing was dropped and we got virtually nothing in terms of affordable housing but millions went into paying for the infrastructure from which developers profited and they are going to profit again.
Instead of giving it away to developers, what the Government could do with these big budget surpluses is buy up the newly completed developments out there where currently we are only going to get 10% or in a few cases 20% and the rest will be rented or sold at astronomical prices. If the State used the revenues it has on a once-off basis to buy those properties, we could rent and sell them at affordable levels and get the revenue back in the long run from the rental income we would get. That would be a sound use of the additional funding we have available and we could introduce "use it or lose it" measures for developers and speculators sitting on planning permissions that they are drip feeding.
I wish to raise the disgraceful behaviour of Workhuman, a major so-called tech unicorn with a turnover of $1 billion per year. Last year, it issued $90 million in dividends to investors, partners and board directors yet - perhaps ironically given its name - it is treating its workers in a very inhumane manner. It is attempting to lay off 60 of its 600 staff employed in Ireland and is offering a relatively meagre redundancy package of three months pay and then only two weeks per year of service, which is below what is being offered at other tech companies. The company has even refused to contribute €250 per employee for the legal fees incurred by staff as part of the process. Perhaps worst of all, the company appears to be in breach of the Protection of Employment Act 1977, which says it is an offence for an employer to issue notice of redundancy to any employee during the 30-day period of consultation with employee representatives when it did precisely that.
In a similar vein, we have been receiving emails regarding a company called Indeed. Indeed.com uses paid-for job ads on its website to make its money. It has announced redundancies and is allegedly in consultation with its workers. Has the Minister been notified by this company and is it complying with the terms of the Redundancy Payment Act because there is suspicion and it appears to us from the emails we received that there have been breaches of the Act? Both cases need to be put in the context of the profits made by both companies. Indeed.com bounced back from pre-tax losses of €15 million in 2020 to profits of €268 million in 2021. This is an incredible turnaround for the company yet it is giving a miserly redundancy offer to its workers. There seems to be a pattern here about which we and the Taoiseach should be concerned given the attraction of tech companies to this State.
Murphy International is part of the giant Murphy group of companies that operates throughout Ireland, the UK and Canada generating €1.5 billion in revenues. It benefits from big State contracts here from local authorities, Irish Water etc. Last year, a group of workers in Limerick were sacked by Murphy International. They were members of Unite and one was a shop steward. Unite believes they were victimised for their trade union activity. These workers were engineering and construction contractors at Aughinish Alumina Ltd., which is owned by RUSAL International, whose majority shareholder is the Russian billionaire and Putin supporter Oleg Deripaska.
The Government was very vocal when Mr. Deripaska faced sanctions but its silence has been deafening on workers' rights at this company. I put it to the Taoiseach that the State should not be giving contracts to companies that engage in union busting and there should be no more State contracts for Murphy International until these workers are reinstated.
The economy is doing very well with unemployment at only 4%. Many sectors are booming but for many rural areas, tourism and hospitality is key and is the largest employer. A concerning report recently suggested that visitor numbers for the first three months of this year were down 16%. Many believe this is down to an issue with hotel accommodation capacity and the fact that the British market, one of the markets on which we are most reliant, is down. What is being done to increase hotel accommodation capacity, improve visitor numbers from the UK and ensure we increase the rate of critical skills visas being issued for chefs in particular?
The Government is expected to run a surplus of €10 billion this year and what is forecast for next year is a surplus of €16.2 billion. My question is simple. When are normal people, many of whom are struggling through this devastating cost of living crisis, going to see the surplus invested in their lives be that through housing, climate, education, childcare, arts or culture? We can stand here and talk about good financial management but at the same time, year on year, the Society of St Vincent de Paul and organisations that work with older people highlight the level of poverty and deprivation being experienced in very real people's homes. When will people see the benefit of that surplus?
Given the limited time available to me, I will focus in my reply on matters relating to the economy and investment. There were some questions about the tech sector. The assessment I gave many months ago was that I thought the tech sector was down-sizing or re-sizing by about 10% or 15%. This is not too far off the mark. It comes after a period of rapid expansion. Tech companies that expanded rapidly over the past three years are now re-sizing or down-sizing by about 10% or 15%. In the medium to long term, this is a sector where we will see phenomenal new growth in terms of jobs and investment because the future is digital. It is AI, robotics, VR, AR and the metaverse so any jobs that have been lost will be recovered in the years ahead. It is reassuring to see that the vast majority of people who have lost jobs in the tech sector have got good redundancy packages and have been able to find employment in other parts of the economy, which is now close to full employment. I do not have any update on PayPal since I last corresponded with the Deputy but I am certainly aware of the issues that have been raised.
Deputy Carthy and a number of others mentioned the surplus. I would argue that we used the surplus last year both to pay down debt and to set aside for the inevitable fall off in revenues that will occur in the future through the strategic reserve fund. We also gave back to people. The last budget package was pretty huge - €10 billion or €12 billion in additional spending, welfare and tax reductions - so people have already seen the benefits of the surplus in their lives. Anyone paying less for childcare this year will know that as will anyone paying less for public transport, any family that received free school books in September or anyone who received a SUSI grant he or she did not have before so we have already used the surplus to help people with the very real problems they have while still paying down the debt and setting aside money in that anti-austerity fund to make sure we do not have to be faced ever with the kind of decisions we were faced with when the crash occurred 12 years ago.
Deputy Carthy is right about one point. The surplus does mean that we have additional firepower to help solve some of the problems we face as a country and it does mean that we can spend more and save more. However, I think, as I hope is increasingly clear to people, that money is not the constraint that it used to be in terms of solving our problems. We have a lot of money and we are spending a lot of money. I hear people talking about under-investment in public infrastructure. When I was first appointed to Government in 2011, the public capital budget was about €3 billion or €4 billion. It will be €14 billion this year. We have increased threefold or fourfold the amount of money we invest in public infrastructure in Ireland. We now invest well above the EU average in public infrastructure and are well above the countries we often compare ourselves with when it comes to investment in public capital such as the Netherlands and Denmark.
If there was a decade of underinvestment in infrastructure in Ireland after the crash, and there was, that decade ended a long time ago. It ended probably around 2018 or 2019. Since then we have had phenomenal public capital investment under this Government and under the previous one, which I had the privilege to lead. That continues, but there are consequences to that. The housing budget is now so big - €4.5 billion a year - that sometimes it can be difficult to spend it. That is one of the reasons we made the decision today to allocate some money to reducing the cost of construction.
In the education budget, we allocated an extra €300 million only a few weeks ago. It is not for more schools but just because the cost of building schools went up. Sometimes the more money we pump in does not mean higher output, just higher costs. We are seeing that as a real issue at the moment. In the past two or three years in the health service, something has happened that would have been unimaginable ten or 15 years ago where the health service has not been able to hire all the staff it has been allocated money for. Collectively, we in this Chamber, for the benefit of the public and for everyone, need to move away from the simplistic idea that just allocating more money will necessarily solve these problems. It will not; we have other constraints. The constraints are around availability of labour, skills and materials. You can be on a waiting list for steel now, for example. We need to be a bit more upfront and honest with people about that. It is not just a case of spending the surplus and solving all our problems. We are already allocating massive amounts of public spending. Public spending could hit €100 billion in the next couple of years. Could anyone have imagined that a few years ago? It is not just about writing cheques and solving problems. It would be very easy if that was all that was involved.
Deputy Boyd Barrett asked about buying housing from developers for social and affordable housing. That is something we are doing. Project Tosaigh is exactly that, where the Land Development Agency, LDA, is purchasing developments for social housing. We are going to do more of that. Then there is the tenant in situ scheme, where we have allocated funding to local authorities to buy 1,500 properties from landlords who are selling up. We have said very clearly to local authorities that if they meet that target of 1,500, we will provide additional funding for that scheme.
Deputies mentioned a number of individual companies. I do not know enough about them to get into giving detailed answers. They do seem to be employment law matters and industrial relations matters. I do not have the information the Deputies seek but I will alert the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to the fact it was raised here and perhaps he might come back with better answers.
Deputy O’Sullivan asked about tourism. He is right that the visitor numbers from the early part of the year are behind where they were in 2019. That is what we compare with, obviously, because it was before the pandemic. We do not know what the summer is going to look like. From talking to people who work in the industry and in tourism, they are pretty optimistic that the summer will be a good one and, whatever about the British, the Americans appear to be back and they tend to spend more than other visitors. I do not know of any particular schemes the Government has in place to encourage hotel building. While I can understand why people in the tourism industry would like us to build more hotels so that we can have more tourists, when the construction sector is facing capacity constraints, I would not like to see us build more hotels, unfortunately. I would rather see the focus on housing and other things. Those are the decisions we just have to make. The Deputy is spot on about work permits and critical skills. We have issued about 40,000 work permits in the past year.
The Taoiseach again has failed to answer the question. If the Taoiseach does not see a link between corruption and the economy, there is a serious problem in this regard.
Sorry, Deputy Tóibín. We are moving on to the next slot.
Corruption is a threat to investment. It is a threat to business and it is a threat to society.
Deputy Tóibín, we are moving on to the next lot of questions. Take your seat.
The fact that so many within the Government parties have been silent on the issues of corruption in the past has given licence to it. All I am asking is whether the Taoiseach, accepting what happened in this potential case of corruption, thinks it is good enough that we have this system continue?
Thanks, Deputy Tóibín. We are moving on to the next lot of questions.
I want an answer to the question.
The next lot of questions is on the European Council meeting. Sorry, Deputy. I have overindulged you. We have gone three minutes over.
A Chathaoirligh, it is unbelievable that the Taoiseach will not answer a question on this.
Excuse me. We have gone three minutes over. There are other people waiting here for the next lot of questions. We have definite time. We need to move on.
Do you not think, a Chathaoirligh, that it is unfair for the Taoiseach to ignore this question and not give an answer, given the gravity of the question and the public interest in it and given the clear link between corruption in the history of the State and the distortion of society and unfairness?
We are moving on to the next lot of questions .
For the record, I answered questions earlier on the Minister of State, Deputy Niall Collins. That last lot of questions was supposed to be on the Cabinet committee on economy and investment. I think the Deputy is abusing the procedures of the House and is abusing privilege.
European Council
Bernard Durkan
Ceist:22. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council which he attended; the issues discussed; and the conclusions reached. [15438/23]
Mary Lou McDonald
Ceist:23. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the recent European Council meeting. [18128/23]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:24. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council. [18279/23]
Paul Murphy
Ceist:25. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council. [18282/23]
Bríd Smith
Ceist:26. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council. [18285/23]
Mick Barry
Ceist:27. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council which he attended. [19146/23]
Seán Haughey
Ceist:28. Deputy Seán Haughey asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council which he attended. [19220/23]
Ivana Bacik
Ceist:29. Deputy Ivana Bacik asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council. [19240/23]
Gary Gannon
Ceist:30. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent meeting of the European Council which he attended; the issues discussed; and the conclusions reached. [19316/23]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 22 to 30, inclusive, together.
I attended the meeting of the European Council on 23 and 24 March in Brussels. We discussed Ukraine, competitiveness, the Single Market, the economy, energy issues and external relations. Leaders met with United Nations Secretary General António Guterres. In our meeting with him, we discussed the impact on global food security of the Russian blockade of Ukrainian ports. We also discussed climate action and the need to restore momentum towards achieving the sustainable development goals.
The European Council was joined by video for part of our meeting proper by the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Leaders reiterated our unwavering solidarity with Ukraine. In particular, we called for the accountability of perpetrators, respect for international humanitarian law with particular regard to prisoners of war, and the safe return of Ukrainians, particularly children, removed to Russia illegally. We also discussed our ongoing political, military, humanitarian and financial assistance to Ukraine.
Leaders returned to our discussion of economic issues in follow-up to our previous meeting on 9 February. We marked the 30th anniversary of the Single Market and discussed how best to ensure the EU’s longer-term competitiveness and productivity. The European Commission has rightly identified the further reduction of barriers, especially for services, as essential for the Single Market to stay the main driver of the EU's competitiveness. I emphasised the importance of safeguarding the level playing field between the member states on which it is built. Leaders agreed the importance to future investment of an EU framework that encourages access to private capital, research and innovation, education and skills, and a growth-enhancing regulatory environment.
The European Council held a strategic discussion on the geopolitical aspects of trade and underlined the contribution of trade policy to the EU’s competitiveness. The European Council also called for work to be taken forward on the proposals for a net zero industry Act and a European critical raw materials Act. We also met in Euro Summit format where we were briefed on economic and financial developments by Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, and by Paschal Donohoe, President of the Eurogroup.
We had short discussions on energy, where we took stock of recent developments, and migration, with the Council presidency and the Commission updating us on progress since our meeting in February.
We also discussed external relations issues, including February’s terrible earthquakes in Türkiye and Syria, the political situation in Belarus, Serbia-Kosovo relations, and we also took the opportunity to welcome the EU-UK agreement on the Windsor Framework.
We have nine speakers listed so I ask Deputies to stick to 40 or 45 seconds and that way it is hoped we will get a response for everybody.
To what extent did the discussion on food security take into account current issues or ones that might emerge in the future and what decisions were made on this by the entire group? Were the members in unison on the degree of help offered for the Türkiye and Syria earthquakes given the severity, loss of life and the hardship suffered by all concerned?
Events in Sudan since the Taoiseach’s return from the European Council represent a tragedy for the people of Sudan, first and foremost. I am sure the Taoiseach will join me in welcoming the announcement of a 72-hour ceasefire. It would be appropriate to commend and thank all those who have been involved in bringing a sizeable number of Irish citizens in Sudan to safety already. I understand there is still in excess of 100 citizens still to be evacuated. I would appreciate it if the Taoiseach could provide an update on that. It would also be appropriate to thank our European colleagues who have assisted in the evacuation efforts to date.
An issue that again has been highlighted is the deficiency with some of the equipment and resources of the Defence Forces. I understand a deposit was paid in December on a cargo plane that would have provided us with much greater airlift capacity. Will the Taoiseach also update the Dáil on the progress of that acquisition?
The Taoiseach should acquaint himself with the theory of Frankenstein's monster, because the militias that are running around and now killing Sudanese people are, in a significant part, the Frankenstein's monsters that have been created by hundreds of millions of euro of European Union funding. The leader of the Rapid Support Forces, RSF, which was formerly the Janjaweed militias that committed genocide in Darfur, boasted that they got European Union money to provide their arms. They first crushed the Sudanese revolution, killing 100 people. Then they fell out with each other and are fighting over the spoils. They are armed and supported by outside forces, including the European Union. Of course, the Frankenstein's monsters that Europe supports are many. Israel, similarly, could not do what it is doing to the Palestinians day in, day out without the support of the United States and the European Union, who continue to allow it to act with impunity and to give it trade and other support.
Is the Taoiseach concerned about the new arms race that is taking place across Europe? There is a report from the Transnational Institute which draws on research from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute and really highlights what exactly is taking place. By mid-May 2022, EU member states had announced a total of close to €200 billion in increased military spending for the coming years, which is higher than the entire spending for 2020.
In 2014, three of the 30 NATO member states were above the target of spending of 2% of GDP on the military. By the end of 2022, that is expected to rise to nine, with another nine countries being expected to hit the target by 2025, bringing the total to 18. The European Commission has suggested an increase in the European Defence Fund and in money within the multi-annual financial framework. The beneficiaries of all this spending are the big arms companies. I stress that every euro spent on these polluting armies is a euro not being spent to address the climate disaster. It goes in the absolute wrong direction.
The European Council assessed the action that has been taken to address high energy prices, reduce gas demand, ensure security of supply and phase out dependency on Russian fossil fuels. It is in this context that I ask the Taoiseach about his attendance at the North Sea summit yesterday. I understand there was a commitment to quadruple wind energy generation. It is suggested that Ireland could become a major energy exporter. What are the Taoiseach's reflections on the outcome of that summit yesterday, particularly in the development of our ports and the planning framework we have in place for wind energy? Is the Taoiseach satisfied that enough work is being undertaken to ensure they are fit for purpose?
On Deputy Durkan's question about the earthquake in Turkey and Syria, it is fair to say there was much consensus around the table at the European Council that the efforts we are making to assist both Turkey and Syria were the right ones. However, there was a definite degree of frustration that we were not able to get access to northern Syria for reasons linked to the conflict in that country.
In terms of the acquisition of new aircraft, a new aircraft is on order from the Air Corps. I am not across all the details, but I understand the new Airbus, which will not arrive for another year or two, will be able to carry 50 personnel. That will improve our strategic airlift capacity considerably, enabling us to get people to and from Lebanon, for example, or to evacuate citizens as needed in a way that we currently cannot. However, it will not be equipped to carry vehicles. It is a matter of debate as to whether that is a capacity we ourselves necessarily need. Perhaps it would make more sense to pool that capacity with other countries, which I understand is done from time to time.
Deputy Haughey asked about energy security and the Ostend meeting, which I attended yesterday. I joined the leaders of Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Norway as well as the President of the European Commission at the summit. The aim of the event was to harvest the full energy and industrial potential of offshore wind in the north seas, which include the Irish Sea, the Celtic Sea and the Atlantic Ocean, and make the wider maritime area an energy powerhouse for Europe. We signed the Ostend Declaration, which aims to turn this ambition into a reality. During the summit, I engaged with industry representatives and presided over a round-table discussion that focused on how best to deepen cross-country co-ordination and co-operation.
At the March European Council, leaders discussed energy issues and took stock of the progress made over the past year and the actions that have been taken to phase out dependency on Russian fossil fuels. These resolute actions have served to underpin the security of supply, reduce energy use and mitigate the impact of the dramatic price increases we have seen for businesses and consumers. Leaders also discussed the preparations for winter 2023-2024. There is a particular emphasis on making use of the joint purchase of gas, which will help with refilling our stores. The European Council also called for work to be taken forward on the revision of the EU's internal electricity market design, which is intended to make the market fully fit for a decarbonised energy system and to facilitate the uptake of renewable energy.
On Sudan, as Members will know, the situation there is very fluid and unpredictable. Up to 500 civilians have been killed and more than 3,700 have been wounded. There is heavy fighting, including air strikes in densely populated residential areas, and the death toll is feared to be significantly higher. Our embassy in Nairobi, which is accredited to Sudan, is in regular contact with the Irish citizens who have registered with them. Seventy-two Irish citizens and their dependants have to date been evacuated from Khartoum to Djibouti and Jordan, with the assistance of France, Spain, Sweden, Germany and the Netherlands. This was part of a wider EU effort, so I very much thank our security partners and the European Union for enabling us to get those citizens and their dependants out.
The consort team from the Department of Foreign Affairs have been on the ground in Djibouti since Sunday. They were supporting citizens and family members who have been evacuated. Officials in Dublin and Nairobi are continuing to support citizens and their families still in Sudan. We have deployed an emergency civil assistance team, ECAT, mission, comprising personnel from the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Defence Forces, to assist Irish citizens in Sudan. The duration of the mission will depend on the progress that can be made, the security situation on the ground and decisions on extraction by partners.
The security of the team itself, our citizens and their dependants is paramount. We have to remember that as we work to bring our citizens and their dependants safely back to Ireland, 45 million Sudanese civilians remain in Sudan and are facing insecurity and crisis. The international community has widely condemned the outbreak of violence and has called for a return to the negotiating table. Both the African Union and the United Nations Security Council have issued strong statements in this regard, which are fully supported by Ireland.