2026-02-17

147. Deputy Darren O'Rourke asked the Minister for Defence if she will commit to a public plebiscite on the question of the removal of the triple lock; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11687/26]

I know there has been much discussion on this already. I ask the Minister to commit to a public plebiscite on the question of the removal of the triple lock. Many have spoken in here, including Deputy Crowe, to the Irish people's belief in relation to an independent foreign policy, our neutrality and how they are completely against any movements away from this. They feel and believe the triple lock is that. It was offered previously as a protection and now it is being taken away.

I thank the Deputy for the question. There have been a number of calls, including from Sinn Féin, for a public plebiscite in relation to the Government's proposed changes to the triple lock. It is important to highlight that there is a lot of conflation as to what is being proposed and what will be done and is actually being suggested. This mechanism is not set out in our Constitution. What we are amending is not something that is set out in our Constitution, it is set down in national legislation, namely, the Defence (Amendment) Act 1960. Therefore, amending the legislation which governs how we deploy our Defence Forces overseas does not require a referendum. I need to be clear on that. Any suggestion that we are amending the treaties is simply not the case. That cannot be done without a referendum. We are amending legislation that was introduced in 1960. The triple lock is a statutory mechanism, not a constitutional one. It is not enshrined in our Constitution and it was a political commitment during the Nice and Lisbon Treaty processes. It was a very different time, 1960. We are talking about a very different time given the threats and the changing landscape we are working in. Even when it comes to deploying our peacekeeping troops, that environment has changed. We now find ourselves in a situation where one of five countries can decide whether or not our Irish troops can travel to engage in peacekeeping missions, be it in Lebanon, the western Balkans or any other part of the world. I simply do not think it is acceptable that another country, be it the US, Russia, France, the UK or China, would decide where our troops are going. I can commit and say very clearly that our legislation to change the triple lock will be very clear. Troops can only be deployed for peacekeeping reasons. It must be very clear where the missions are. They must comply with the UN Charter and international law and there will still be checks and balances. Instead of the UN mandate being a requirement, it will have to be approved by Government and the Oireachtas and where there are over 50 Defence Force members being deployed there will have to be a report sent to the Oireachtas committee. There is full transparency to what we are doing here. The amendment of the triple lock does not amend the treaties or change our stance on neutrality; it simply changes the way by which we can deploy our troops. At the moment we cannot partake in any new mandated mission because they are simply not happening and they are simply not being approved by the council.

We start from the point of view of the UNDOF mission to the Golan Heights and the fact that it was a governmental decision to step aside and remove us from that operation that we have been engaged in for a huge period of time. That is down to the fact that there was a run-down allowed of the Defence Forces. The one thing the Minister will get agreement on throughout the Chamber and throughout the campus is that there has been a long-term failure to invest in the Defence Forces and that when we even spoke of neutrality we did not have the capacity to actually operate as many other neutral countries or states did. That is a failing that needs to be addressed and I am not quite sure that is happening. We are hearing statements from the Minister about how she is going to deal with the Russian shadow fleet. How is that going to operate on a day-to-day basis? In relation to the triple lock and what the Minister has proposed as regards checks and balances, how would they actually work?

Again, I keep hearing in the Chamber this evening that we are not investing in the Defence Forces and therefore this is somehow related to the triple lock. The triple lock is about how we send our Defence Force personnel. At the moment we have 436 troops, as of 31 January, on peacekeeping missions. That has nothing to do with how many members we have overall, which is over 7,000. I will be the first to say that we need to be more ambitious in increasing our numbers and investing in our capacity, increasing our spending and funding, doing more for the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann, making sure we are investing in new technologies, amending our legislation so it is fit for purpose, and that is what we are doing here. We have to look, review and revise our legislation and ask if it is fit for purpose. That is no different for the Defence Forces. Is this fit for purpose? No. What was the whole purpose of it? That we would be able to send our troops to missions within UN mandate. It is not required by the UN and it is not something it requires from other countries. We imposed it on ourselves at a time when we lived in a very different dynamic politically and otherwise. We now have a situation where one of five countries can essentially say no, they will not let us send our troops to a mission because they have decided they do not want it to happen. That cannot be the case. I do not think Irish people want us in a situation that we now have no ability to send our Defence Forces, which are renowned worldwide for the decades they have provided service in peacekeeping missions, to new missions unless they have a UN mandate that is there. Even at that, if we look at some of the smaller missions in the western Balkans, there is a constant threat that those mandates will not be renewed. The 85 troops I mentioned that we will have at the end of the year will potentially be even fewer. We are talking about a structure. We are not changing the treaties. This is not about our neutrality.

I get there is not going to be agreement. That could be taken from the first question, never mind some of the latter questions that were asked on this. I get that there is no constitutional requirement for the Government to call a referendum. I am just stating that asking the Irish people is the right thing to do. What engagement has there been in relation to changes to the triple lock? I will again ask the Minister to explain these checks and balances on what a peacekeeping mission is. The Minister spoke about how this is only updating legislation, how it is absolutely necessary and that we are in a much different place from the 1960s. I accept that, but it is not like in the 1960s there was not the possibility of nuclear war. As far as I know, the Cuban missile crisis happened on 28 October,1962. They were very difficult times and these are very difficult times. Nobody needs Ireland to be a military superpower. We do not have the capacity to be one. We do need to make sure we have an up-to-date, upgraded Defence Forces that are fit for purpose, but we also need to protect independent foreign policy and that is the reason why we have been respected as peacekeepers throughout the world.

Respectfully, if we cannot send troops to engage in peacekeeping missions then we are going to lose that level of respect that we have had for many years. Countries will look at us and ask how do we not have the ability to send our own troops where we want to send them. That is the situation we will find ourselves in. The world is changing. We need to update our laws. They are currently not fit for purpose when it comes to the deployment of troops. In terms of the safeguards and checks, the legislation will be very clear. Troops can only be deployed for peacekeeping reasons, not for any reason or purpose other than peacekeeping. Of course, we will have to take on board recommendations and views from the Defence Forces, which will be part of this. There will then have to be a recommendation to Government which has to be agreed by Government. It will then have to be debated in the Houses, where everybody represents the people who elected them. That is where their voices are heard. There are then different stages within that. If there is a mission with fewer than 50 troops, it will go through a particular process. If there are over 50 personnel being deployed, it will have to be sent to the committee afterwards to scrutinise whether the legislation was applied. The legislation itself, which we have not gone through and debated in the House, will have to comply with international law. We will be clear that any mission will have to be in line with the UN Charter. That will be debated and Members will be an opportunity to go through it when the legislation is going through the House. We all represent the people who have elected us. It is important that all of us, me included, engage with our constituents and those who want to discuss this. This is a really important issue and I am not minimising that, but I wish we would not conflate two things. This is not about neutrality; it is about how we deploy troops.