Paul Murphy Challenges New Defence Cooperation with Britain
Paul Murphy questioned a new defence cooperation agreement with Britain, arguing it could conflict with Irish neutrality and asking whether the public supports closer security ties. He demanded details of the pact and asked if Ireland would be expected to increase military spending in response to Britain’s reported £67.7 billion rise and alleged actions in Gaza.
Paul Murphy pressed the Deputy Taoiseach on a defence cooperation agreement described as due to be signed soon. He asked what the agreement will contain, invoked the historical origins of Irish neutrality as an anti-imperialist struggle against Britain, and challenged whether closer British security cooperation is what Irish people want.
The Deputy Taoiseach replied that close cooperation with the United Kingdom is sensible for shared infrastructure risks, particularly gas connectors and interconnectors. He warned that Ireland’s economy could come to a standstill within a week if anything untoward happened to those connectors and highlighted subsea cables and incidents involving a "Russian shadow fleet" and divers as examples of where operational cooperation is necessary.
The Deputy Taoiseach described cooperation as practical steps such as sharing information about potential terrorists or attacks and monitoring territory for suspicious activity. He framed these measures as routine security cooperation, not a major departure from established practice.
The Deputy Taoiseach disputed the claim that Irish neutrality originated as an anti-imperialist stance, saying World War II and a neutrality of survival were core to its origins. He noted he consulted a seminar on neutrality that provided a more nuanced view and said Paul Murphy had boycotted that forum, implying the seminar would have been informative.
The transcript records strong public-facing questions about whether Ireland will be drawn into deeper defence obligations or higher military expenditure, but it does not detail specific clauses of the agreement. The exchange frames a political debate about infrastructure security, neutrality, and the transparency of any new defence cooperation with Britain.
Questions about the new defence agreement
Paul Murphy pressed the Deputy Taoiseach on a defence cooperation agreement described as due to be signed soon. He asked what the agreement will contain, invoked the historical origins of Irish neutrality as an anti-imperialist struggle against Britain, and challenged whether closer British security cooperation is what Irish people want.
Security risks and infrastructure cited by the Deputy Taoiseach
The Deputy Taoiseach replied that close cooperation with the United Kingdom is sensible for shared infrastructure risks, particularly gas connectors and interconnectors. He warned that Ireland’s economy could come to a standstill within a week if anything untoward happened to those connectors and highlighted subsea cables and incidents involving a "Russian shadow fleet" and divers as examples of where operational cooperation is necessary.
Intelligence sharing and cooperation explained
The Deputy Taoiseach described cooperation as practical steps such as sharing information about potential terrorists or attacks and monitoring territory for suspicious activity. He framed these measures as routine security cooperation, not a major departure from established practice.
Debate over the origins of neutrality
The Deputy Taoiseach disputed the claim that Irish neutrality originated as an anti-imperialist stance, saying World War II and a neutrality of survival were core to its origins. He noted he consulted a seminar on neutrality that provided a more nuanced view and said Paul Murphy had boycotted that forum, implying the seminar would have been informative.
Outstanding questions and political implications
The transcript records strong public-facing questions about whether Ireland will be drawn into deeper defence obligations or higher military expenditure, but it does not detail specific clauses of the agreement. The exchange frames a political debate about infrastructure security, neutrality, and the transparency of any new defence cooperation with Britain.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Other speeches
Tego samego dnia All speeches from this day →
Carol Nolan
Carol Nolan criticises National Housing Plan amid rising homelessness
Danny Healy-Rae
Danny Healy-Rae criticises turf restrictions, cites briquette imports
Danny Healy-Rae
Danny Healy-Rae: Demands Carbon Tax Cut as Energy Prices Rise
Michael Fitzmaurice
Michael Fitzmaurice criticises habitat designations and entitlements
Danny Healy-Rae
Danny Healy-Rae warns against six-year tenancy and Airbnb rules
Michael Fitzmaurice
Michael Fitzmaurice calls for emergency laws to deliver housing
Transcript
A new defence cooperation agreement with Britain is to be signed soon. The Lords in the House of Lords are saying it will mean a stronger defence relationship between Ireland and the UK. You yourself have said that there must be, quote, very, very close cooperation with the British when it comes to security. Do you really think that is what Irish people want? Have you forgotten that our neutrality originates from an anti-imperialist struggle against Britain, a struggle that Fianna Fáil once fought for? Can you tell us what will be in this new military agreement? Britain is increasing its military expenditure by £67.7 billion. It is an active participant in genocide in Gaza. Are we going to be expected to massively increase our military expenditure too as part of this new agreement? Thank you, Deputy Taoiseach. Deputy Taoiseach. The new cooperation agreement absolutely makes sense that we cooperate very closely with the United Kingdom in respect of the gas connectors, for example, which is a huge security vulnerability for both the UK and Ireland, but particularly for Ireland. We would, within a week, our economy would come to a standstill if anything untoward was to happen to those interconnectors. So I hope you would agree that we should have closed defence cooperation in respect of our economic security in particular and subsea cables. That would mean a lot of technological. So when Russian shadow fleet crossed over those pipes or subsea cables, very often in that case divers had to go down to check that the pipes were OK. That's cooperation. Letting people know that somebody who might be up to no good is in your terrain is cooperation. Service services sharing information about terrorists or about potential attacks. That's cooperation. There should be no big deal about cooperation. And by the way, in terms of the origins of neutrality, it was not an anti-imperialist origin. In fact, I consulted a forum. There was a very good seminar on neutrality and its origins. Obviously World War II was the core. And it was both OK, we were neutral in terms of not having issues with Britain and the occupation and so on of Northern Ireland, but the more fundamental issue was it was a neutrality of survival as well. Because no one was in a position to defend Ireland in 1939, 1940, 1941. And it was actually a very good presentation to me that consulted a forum, but you boycotted it and you felt it wasn't worthwhile. It would have been very informative if you went there in terms of a more nuanced view of the origins of neutrality.