Brian Stanley warns triple lock reform risks loss of neutrality

Thanks to the witnesses, the officials from the department for coming in. Could I just start by saying that in the opening statement you said that the Programme for Government sets out a commitment to reform the operation of the triple lock whilst ensuring that the amendment and legislation are in keeping with Ireland's values of policy of military neutrality. Mr McGuire, could I just ask you in relation to that, that a scenario where a peacekeeping resolution would come before the Security Council and if it is vetoed by the permanent members and if the European Union or some other group of countries decided to apply regardless of that, and if Ireland was to participate in that mission, you know, would Ireland in that case not be in conflict, you know, in terms of taking sides in a global dispute against where there would be a veto of the UN and the UN Security Council? That's one question, if you might want to address that first. Yeah, no, thank you, Deputy. Yeah, no, in relation to, you know, where the UN might veto, and I suppose this is the whole purpose of this legislation, is that at the moment the power is with what we call the P5, the five standing members of the Security Council who can veto, and it's called into question as to why there hasn't been any new peacekeeping missions for the last 11 years, because either, you know, there is a fear that, you know, it won't pass either of the five. So if we see things that have happened more recently in relation to Gaza and Ukraine, you know, the resolutions wouldn't get passed, and that's the fact amongst of those, at least one of the five countries. There's 11 peacekeeping missions around the world at the moment. Pardon? There are 11 peacekeeping missions at the moment. That's right. And Ireland participates in some of those. That's right. Right. Yeah. So, like, if you look at our current, I mean, at this again, it's... But the picture you're painting is that, you know, that there's almost no peacekeeping missions around the world at the moment. No, there's no new ones. There's no new ones. And, you know, we're participating in the mission in UNIFIL in Lebanon. We have still a number of personnel in UNDOF, and we're also in the UN mission in UNSO, and then we're in a number of EU and NATO-led missions as well. So just going back, I suppose that, you know, when we look at the missions we are in, this is the challenge that it's causing us at the moment. And even today, we have the UN Security Council are looking at the resolution for Operation Irene, which is an EU mission. There is a doubt that that might go through, you know. Yeah, yeah. So, like, what do we do with our people that are serving in that? I think there is the point I'm making. The point I'm making is that Ireland is then taking sides in a conflict without UN sanction. Is that not correct? There wouldn't be a UN mandate, but if it's an EU mission, for example, the EU always adhere to international law and the UN Charter. So just because it's not a UN mission doesn't mean all those principles are not present in another type of mission. So we put our faith in that, is that what you're saying? That's okay. You know, I'm not trying to be competitive. I'm trying to explore where this could go. Yeah. There's an inherent risk there by virtue of the fact that we're participating in a conflict zone without UN mandate, which means that, you know, the international norm that has operated, we're going to sidestep that. Well, what we are ensuring in the legislation that we have, um, the principles of international law and in accordance with the UN Charter as part of the text of the bill. And, um, that, that'll be a fundamental part. And that would give to the reassurance to the minister of the day, to the government of the day, to the Dáil of the day. But up to now, we've been seen as impartial. For example, you know, you correctly said in relation to peacekeeping troops in the Lebanon, that we're not seeing to be taking sides in a conflict. But the fundamental change is this, is that when you disregard the UN mandate, regardless of your position, regarding the veto of the, uh, of the, the Security Council, you are then taking sides, you're then taking, uh, you know, you're no longer taking a neutral position regarding a geopolitical conflict. That's the point I'm making. Yeah, I suppose if you, if you, if you look at the EU Treaty, Deputy, um, Article 21 of the Treaty of the European Union, this requires that, uh, the Union sanctions should be guided by the principles of democracy, the rule of law. I want to come to that. Yeah. Um, so you... The Nice Treaty, the Nice Treaty was, roughly speaking, as I recall it, it was two-thirds rejection, one-third for pass, right? It failed the first time. And there was a lot of back and forwards. And in fairness, you know, the government at the time, uh, uh, put the triple lock in place. And that was the guarantee. And that swung it the other way, that you had 60, 65 percent, the, you know, the, the, uh, two-thirds, one-third swung the other way at that in the next vote that came in 2001. And, you know, people were satisfied with that. And that was a guarantee given. But this now is a fundamental change to that. You know, the triple lock was the guarantee. And the government, you know, in regards to who's in government, that the, the, um, you know, uh, the, the double lock, the double lock is that the government will decide, because the government always has the majority in the Dáil. A Dáil vote would count for nothing. That's window dressing. You know, from the point of view of, you know, regards to who's in government, whether it's those of us that are in opposition now or those who are in government, the government today will carry it regardless. And that completed the, the legislation, as you have framed it, completely disregards the will of the Irish people. Can I just mention to you briefly that in the, in the minutes that I have left, that in relation to the veto, uh, the UN, the UN General Assembly can also, uh, they can also, uh, pass a resolution. Now, while I'm aware that's not legally binding, it does carry, it does carry a certain amount of political clout. Um, you know, and it'd be very difficult to ignore it to a hundred and, I think it's 190 countries in the, in the UN, uh, General Assembly. Would you like to just address that for me? Uh, no, you're right, deputy. It's not legally binding. So it's only the, the, the decisions from the UN Security Council that member states are, are obliged, um, to implement. Very hard to ignore it though, wouldn't it? That, that could be an opinion. Um, it may draw attention to a particular issue, but it has no effect. So if you don't have the, if you don't have the support of, um, the Security Council and particularly the P5, um, it'll be very difficult to implement any new peacekeeping mission. The big shift with this bill is removed and away from the 70 year in arm, where we accepted the global order as ordained by the UN to now we're going to participate in, uh, in regional, in regional forces. Thanks. Thank you, Deputy, uh, uh, the, uh,