Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 27 Apr 2023

Vol. 1037 No. 3

Ceisteanna ar Sonraíodh Uain Dóibh - Priority Questions

Foreign Policy

Matt Carthy

Ceist:

1. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the stakeholders that will be invited to participate in the consultative forum on international security policy; the criteria that will be applied to select these stakeholders; if the forum will make findings; if so, how those findings will be agreed; if a report will be published arising from the forum's work; who will author such a report; and if he proposes any further actions of the forum, other than the announced public meetings. [19793/23]

I remind Deputies it is six and a half minutes for every question. There are 30 seconds for the proposer, two minutes for the Tánaiste and then one and one each and a further one and one each. That is six and a half minutes in total, except when questions are grouped. Tosóimid anois.

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle knows that there is no need to remind me. I always stick within time.

We might have a debate on that some other time.

The question concerns the consultative forum on international security policy the Tánaiste has announced. I am sure he is aware that there are huge concerns that this is a vehicle for the Government to undermine Irish military neutrality and non-alignment, something that has served this State incredibly well over many decades. Will the Tánaiste outline the form the forum will take and how stakeholders will be selected to be invited?

I do not believe there is huge concern that this is an initiative to undermine military neutrality. It might be a huge concern to some who are contriving that huge concern, but nobody is afraid of debate in this country or of a broad conversation about the international situation in terms of Irish foreign policy and the international security policy of the State.

In order to build a deeper understanding of the threats faced by the State and the links to and between our foreign, security and defence policy, I have convened a consultative forum on international security policy. The consultative forum will take place in three locations: at University College Cork on 22 June; at the University of Galway on 23 June; and at Dublin Castle on 26 and 27 June.

The forum will be open, inclusive, and, as the name suggests, consultative. It will involve a wide range of stakeholders, with participation from civilian and military experts and practitioners. Attendance at the forum will consist of Irish and international participants with expertise and practical experience in the areas to be discussed, as well as members of the public. The Departments of Foreign Affairs and Defence are consulting with academic, civil society, research and State agency partners to identify a wide range of speakers and participants who represent a breadth of experience and views. Discussions will be livestreamed and there will be an option for online submissions. Anyone interested in engaging in the process will be able to do so. Full details of the arrangements for registration, livestreaming and the making of submissions will be published by the Departments of Foreign Affairs and Defence in the coming weeks.

The forum will be chaired by Louise Richardson DBE, formerly vice-chancellor of the University of Oxford and principal and vice-chancellor of the University of St. Andrews, who will produce a report to be delivered following its conclusion. The forum will involve a broad discussion examining the threats we face, including cyber, hybrid, disinformation and threats to critical infrastructure. It will also provide for detailed discussion on Ireland’s work to protect the rules-based international order, through our engagement in peacekeeping, conflict prevention and peacebuilding, as well as arms control and disarmament. Importantly, there are no predetermined or preconceived outcomes from discussions at the forum and participants will be free to raise any relevant issue during deliberations.

The concerns are genuine and deeply held because Irish neutrality has served us very well. The Tánaiste did not refer to Irish neutrality. It appears the forum will not have a mechanism to analyse how well military neutrality and non-alignment have served us.

The Tánaiste says that his Department will identify potential experts. Who will select those experts and what criteria will be used? The Tánaiste stated that it will be open, but then indicated that members of the public can make submissions online. Will members of the public be able to attend or watch online but not to directly participate in the forum? I will have further questions but ask particularly about the experts and how they will be selected to participate. Everybody knows when dealing with such forums that the selection of experts can skew the tone and direction of debate.

I regret the knee-jerk antagonistic approach the Deputy is taking to this. As soon as I announced it, the Deputy was out like a flash saying it was a threat to military neutrality. Why is the Deputy afraid of such debate? Why is he afraid of this country having an informed, open and public discussion about broader issues of the international threats facing the world and which Ireland has to work within? This consultative forum is not about a binary choice between military neutrality or joining or not joining an alliance. It is much broader than that. As I have outlined, it will take on board disarmament, as well as peacekeeping and conflict prevention, which have been the hallmark of Irish foreign policy for quite some time.

The Deputy is playing politics with this, banging the drum and playing to a base to the detriment of a genuine, informed public debate, which is healthy in a democracy. The Deputy should not be as opposed to democratic debate as he is. He should not be concerned. I will not try to orchestrate this debate as, perhaps, his party would on many other issues. Be a bit more open and trusting of people.

Perhaps if the Tánaiste had a better attitude, it would be easier to trust his bona fides on this issue. Nobody is afraid of open public and informed debate. The question I have posed is how the Tánaiste will ensure that these are genuinely open, public and informed debates. He referred to the chair of the consultative forum. I have no doubt Ms Richardson is an able and diligent person with expertise in her own right. Nobody doubts that. She also has very firm views that she has put on the record. The Tánaiste suggested that following the meetings of the consultative forum, Ms Richardson will write the report. There will be no committee. It will be very much her analysis of what is said at the forum. That differs greatly from the citizens' assembly model, which the Tánaiste originally suggested. Perhaps he can correct me on how the final report of the forum will be developed?

I hope we are not going to go down that path. I anticipated this approach: attack the initiative in an immediate way without giving it due consideration, which the Deputy has done. He immediately attacked it. Now he seems to be focusing on the person, which is wrong.

I am asking how the final report will be written.

We are talking about a distinguished academic with tremendous credentials, an Irish person who did exceptionally well and, in my view, is an excellent choice to chair the forum. The chair will be asked to compile a report. There is no preconceived or predetermined outcome. It is a consultative forum. It will be open to the public. The public will be able to attend and people will make online submissions, which is the way of the modern world in terms of technology. Government will consider that and then it comes back into the Oireachtas. We took this approach because we understand parties have positions here. This goes to the core of politics. Though some of the principles of the citizens' assembly are applied here, this is open to political representatives as well. We understand people have different perspectives on issues in international relations.

Undocumented Irish in the USA

Michael Lowry

Ceist:

2. Deputy Michael Lowry asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the outcome of recent discussions he had with the President of the United States and the US authorities during the recent visit to Ireland regarding the need to regularise the status of the undocumented Irish in the US and have an appropriate visa programme put in place to protect them, and the progress made in relation to securing citizenship for them; if he will consider appointing an Irish Government representative who will be solely responsible for dealing with this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19795/23]

I ask the outcome of recent discussions the Tánaiste has had with United States authorities and President Biden during his recent visit to Ireland. Did the Tánaiste have the opportunity to raise the need to regularise the status of the undocumented Irish in the United States and the need for the appropriate visa and citizenship programmes to be put in place to protect them?

Will the Tánaiste consider appointing an Irish Government representative who would have sole responsibility for dealing with this issue?

I thank Deputy Lowry for raising this matter. Addressing the status of undocumented Irish citizens in the US remains a priority for the Government. Immigration matters are raised on an ongoing basis with the US Administration and US political leaders.

The recent visit of President Biden to Ireland reinforced the strong historic, economic, cultural and family links between our two countries. The visit included exchanges with the President on matters of shared importance to both countries, including peace and economic progress on this island.

Immigration matters featured prominently in high-level political engagements during the St. Patrick’s day period. The Taoiseach discussed immigration reform with President Biden at the White House and the need to increase opportunities for young people to move between Ireland and the US with greater ease. I discussed ongoing efforts to secure immigration pathways with Congressman Richie Neal and the Friends of Ireland, and I met with organisations providing vital services and support to our diaspora, including undocumented Irish, in New York and Boston. I also raised the issue on an earlier visit to Washington.

These political contacts build on the ongoing work of our embassy in Washington, in conjunction with bipartisan members of Congress, to find innovative solutions to challenges faced by the undocumented Irish and those seeking to live and work in the US. The most realistic long-term solution for our undocumented citizens remains comprehensive immigration reform, on which the Government actively supports the Biden Administration’s efforts. However, as almost every such legislative proposal in the past decade has stalled in Congress, the challenges should not be underestimated.

My Department supports organisations that provide valued assistance to our citizens in the United States, including the undocumented. More than €4.2 million in emigrant support programme funding was allocated to organisations in the US for 2022 to 2023. Our diplomatic network across the US also proactively seeks opportunities to improve the day-to-day lives of the undocumented Irish.

With respect to an Irish Government representative on immigration, the Minister of State with responsibility for the diaspora, Deputy Fleming, and I have ministerial responsibility for our communities abroad. The Irish Embassy in Washington, together with the eight consulates general throughout the US, remains extremely active on emigration issues.

As we all know the saga of the undocumented Irish in the United States has been ongoing since what seems like the beginning of time. We have heard endless tales of Irish people who, for many reasons, have chosen to live their lives in the US despite knowing they will never share the same freedoms and benefits as US citizen. Most of them will spend their lives looking over their shoulders. For many people, the lure of the land of opportunity and the centuries-held promise of the American dream are impossible to resist. They follow in their forefathers' footsteps into the cultural melting pot that is the US. Many, even in these modern times, know they may never set foot on Irish soil again. They need the ongoing support of the Tánaiste. They are desperate for protection and a satisfactory resolution.

I agree. Last year, there was a bipartisan reintroduction of the E3 visa approach in the US Senate and House of Representatives. This is a welcome development. However, the Bill lapsed with the conclusion of the last session of Congress at the end of 2022. We are discussing options how to potentially move forward the Bill into the new Congress. This was a key theme of my meetings when I visited Washington in February. There has to be a bipartisan dimension to this. It is very challenging. On the previous occasion, one vote in the Senate prevented the E3 visa legislation from going through. We had discussions in February. Even on the recent visit, we discussed emigration issues with the delegation that came with President Biden. That delegation included members of Congress and the US Government. It is a very polarising issue in the US politically. This has made it particularly challenging. We continue to work with all state agencies in the US to try to help the undocumented as best we can.

Few countries around the globe can boast the strong ties of friendship that exist between Ireland and the US. During his recent visit, we witnessed the genuine love that President Biden has for our country and how proud he is of his Irish roots. We know that Ireland holds a cherished place in his heart. We must also be conscious of what the Tánaiste has referred to, which is that America is considered home to undocumented people from many nations around the globe. Realistically, the President's love of Ireland is not enough to change the laws of the US. The political reality is that President Biden and the Democrats do not have the majority required in Congress to make exemptions for Irish people. This can only be achieved with the support of Republicans. In his role as Minister for Foreign Affairs I am glad the Tánaiste is committing to using his network and influence to gain political consensus to achieve a positive outcome for the beleaguered Irish people living illegally in the US.

The embassy is very seized of this issue as is our ambassador in the US. I favour the approach of our diplomatic network in the US pursuing this issue and not having two strands of approach. I do not want to personalise this but when we appoint people as ambassadors to the US it is experienced high-calibre diplomats who end up in Washington. Over the years they have cultivated strong relationships with both sides on the Hill. This is continuing. When I was last there in February, we concluded an agreement to extend the working holiday visa. I discussed with former Governor and now Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and others that ideally we have to deal with the undocumented and try to get legislation passed to facilitate them. I have met undocumented people and they are in a very worrying and sad situation. They cannot get back home to family, including to ageing parents or family members who might be sick. It is a very distressing and traumatic experience for many undocumented in the United States. We are very conscious of this and of creating new legal channels between Ireland and the United States for people.

Passport Services

Matt Carthy

Ceist:

3. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the measures in place to ensure that a backlog of passport applications does not emerge in 2023; and the measures he will take to ensure that passports, including for first-time applicants, can be secured in an accelerated manner in urgent and emergency cases. [19792/23]

What measures is the Tánaiste putting in place to ensure we do not see the backlog of passport applications that we saw in recent years? Will he outline the measures that will be taken to ensure that applicants for passports, particularly first-time applicants, can have access to an accelerated processing of a passport when it is necessary?

I thank Deputy Carthy for the question. As a result of the strategic planning under way in my Department since last year, the passport service is meeting the current high demand for passports. Almost 350,000 passports have been issued to date in 2023. Just under 1.1 million passports in total are expected to be issued this year. There are no passport application backlogs and all turnaround times are at their target levels.

Staffing remains a priority and recruitment will continue in the coming months. Approximately 100 temporary clerical officers have been assigned to the passport service since January 2023 as well as more than 90 permanent staff. The customer service hub is currently responding to an average of 3,000 queries per day.

The passport service continually works to enhance its services to the public. I am pleased to announce that a number of improvements were made recently to the passport online platform. These improve a customised list of the supporting documents for first-time applicants, an eircode look-up tool to facilitate the input of postal addresses and a new integration feature with the general register office. This integration will benefit a significant cohort of first-time child applicants who will no longer be required to submit a physical birth certificate. These are very welcome innovations. So far, 5,600 digital birth certificates have been received by the passport service. Online continues to be the most efficient way to apply for a passport.

I am pleased to update Deputies further on the MLA portal. This was launched on 17 March with 33 queries received in the first week. The passport service offers an in-person urgent appointment service for passport renewal at its offices in Dublin and Cork. Due to the complex nature of first-time applications, it is not possible to process these at urgent appointments. The passport service has a dedicated team of people who expedite applications in cases of medical emergency or the death of a family member abroad, including for first-time applicants.

I acknowledge the staff of the Passport Office who turned a very difficult situation around. Unfortunately, the many people who missed the opportunity to either go on holiday or attend important events will never be forgiving with regard to the experience they had when things were at their worst. Nonetheless, I acknowledge that there has been much improvement and that when the passport service works, it works well. For simple renewals, the process is effective and efficient. Everybody involved with it should be commended. There is a difficulty, which is dealt with in a later question, with the process for first-time applications relating to children. When new and additional information is sought or there is a query on the information, an application is effectively put back to the end of the queue and the entire process starts again. I ask the Tánaiste if there are efforts to resolve that particular issue.

I will be dealing with that matter in more detail later. We are continually focusing on improving the situation for first-time applicants. I have outlined the significant innovations to facilitate that, particularly in terms of birth registration in respect of which there has always been a delay. There will now also be lower costs through avoiding the need for physical birth certificates to be supplied.

The system does have the impact that the Deputy has outlined in terms of applications going to the bottom of the pile, so to speak, but we will continue to work on this to see if we can expedite it even further. To date this year, the turnaround time has been exceptional. I appreciate the Deputy's comments in respect of the staff. The longest call on any one day last week was five minutes. Calls are being responded to very quickly. We will continue to seek to improve services all around.

This is an area in respect of which we need to improve. I am sure the Tánaiste's office has dealt with such situations. There is nothing worse than someone in a household realising that a passport is out of date or, worse, that there is an understanding of the length of time it takes for a first-time application to be resolved. In that context, I ask the Tánaiste to engage with the Passport Office to arrange for the putting in place of a facility for urgent cases. I accept that the facilities are there in emergency cases. For urgent cases, however, there should be a mechanism whereby first-time applicants can present at the office in order to get an accelerated passport. There can be many instances where that urgency is required. It is one of the final pieces that is required in order to ensure everybody using the passport service has a good experience.

Obviously, we keep urging people to get their passports organised well in advance of holidays or foreign travel more generally. There are 814 staff now assigned to the passport service, which is a significant expansion. The core of the question is what the passport service can do to ensure that applicants complete their applications correctly. As I said, the passport service continually works to streamline the application process and to improve its customer service. It also monitors the response to issues that arise for applicants during the application process.

There are a number of measures now in place to ensure that passport applicants complete their applications correctly. A recent upgrade to the Passport Online platform provides first-time applicants with a bespoke list of the documents they need to submit, customised for the applicants’ specific circumstances. The passport service offers video guides to assist citizens in submitting the correct photos and consent forms for children's applications. These short videos provide simple and easy-to-follow tips to ensure that photos and children's consent forms will meet the passport service requirements. The customer service hub is available to answer applicants’ questions by phone or web chat. The hub has handled more than 200,000 queries to date in 2023.

Ukraine War

Michael McNamara

Ceist:

4. Deputy Michael McNamara asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will outline the European Council meetings at which Ireland agreed to participate in, and fund, the European Peace Facility and the EU military assistance mission in support of Ukraine; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19794/23]

Will the Tánaiste outline the European Council meetings at which Ireland agreed to participate in and fund the European Peace Facility and the EU military assistance mission in support of Ukraine?

I thank the Deputy for raising the question. The European Peace Facility, EPF, was established by the Foreign Affairs Council on 21 March 2021. Ireland was centrally involved in the negotiations to design the EPF. Together with a number of like-minded member states, Ireland ensured the inclusion of a provision allowing member states to constructively abstain from assistance measures involving the supply of lethal equipment. Countries that abstain from the provision of lethal equipment instead provide funding to assistance measures supporting non-lethal equipment to regional organisations and third-country partners, at their request.

The aim of the EPF is threefold: it funds the common costs of EU military missions and operations under the Common Security and Defence Policy; it supports peace support operations led by international and regional organisations, as well as partner countries around the world; and it strengthens the military and defence capacities of third states and regional and international organisations. The overall budget ceiling for the EPF over the 2021-2027 period is €7.9 billion.

In response to Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war against Ukraine, Ireland has joined other EU member states in agreeing approximately €5.5 billion to support the Ukrainian armed forces through the EPF. In line with the programme for government, Ireland’s military support for Ukraine is directly solely towards non-lethal assistance. Our contribution now stands at approximately €122 million and helps to supply items such as medical equipment, food, personal protective equipment and fuel.

Together with our EU partners, we remain strongly committed to supporting Ukraine in defence of its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of ongoing Russian aggression. The EU military assistance mission in support of Ukraine, EUMAM Ukraine, was established by the Foreign Affairs Council on 17 October 2022. The mission will provide specialised training to the Ukrainian armed forces, and co-ordinate existing member state training activities.

In February 2023, the Government approved the participation of up to 30 Defence Forces personnel in EUMAM Ukraine. Their primary role will be to provide training to members of the Ukrainian armed forces in the EU member states in which the training will take place. The trainers will be supplemented by a small number of staff positions in the military planning and conduct capability, MPCC, in Belgium and the special training command, STC, in Germany.

Those agreements are, of course, not necessitated by membership of the European Union because we have an opt-out, but that does not mean we cannot opt in, in the same way that we opted out of the temporary protection directive and then subsequently opted in, with the approval of the Dáil. In reply to a previous parliamentary question, the Tánaiste told me it is anticipated we will spend €121 million towards the peace facility and the military assistance mission, of which €9.9 million was spent by the end of 2022. My question is not whether the Tánaiste thinks it is morally and strategically correct for Ireland to be involved in this. Clearly, he and his Government do or we would not be involved otherwise. I do not want to go over that. What I want to know is how do these agreements, which are not necessitated by membership of the European Union, not result in a charge upon public funds such as requires the approval of the Dáil. I am not saying the Dáil would not approve it. I am asking how do they not require the approval of the Dáil, because they are agreements and they do result in a charge on public funds.

In the normal Estimates process, they require the approval of the Dáil.

Gabh mo leithscéal.

In terms of the normal Estimates process and the Votes of Departments – the Vote of my Department and the Vote of the Department of Defence - the funding that gets allocated will be voted on by the Dáil. We are part of the European Common Security and Defence Policy. We opted into that over 20 years ago. It is one of the reasons why I think it is important that we have our national conversation on security policy and foreign policy because many people do not realise we have been part of the Common Security and Defence Policy of the European Union since the beginning. Denmark recently opted in, having opted out at the beginning. It is in that context that the temporary peace facility has evolved and developed.

I think it makes a lot of sense when we look at the Wagner Group, for example, and the new mercenaries, or call them what you like. They are now having a much more malign impact on the world, for example, if we look at Mali and the Sahel and the non-government actors there, including the various militia and mercenary forces. If we want to protect the international rules-based order, there is a role for a constructive approach from a European Union perspective.

I accept the Minister's bona fides and that he genuinely believes that it is morally and strategically imperative for us to participate. I accepted that at the outset and that is not what I am questioning. What I am questioning is our own constitutional requirement that any international agreement that imposes a charge on public funds be approved by the Dáil, as well as any participation in war. I noticed that the Minister used the word "war" repeatedly throughout his response in terms of Russia's unjustified war in Ukraine. I appreciate that we are not providing lethal weapons but we are training belligerents, albeit in de-mining. We are providing non-lethal weapons. Again, I question how that does not amount to a participation in war that requires the approval of the Dáil. I am not questioning whether the Minister believes it is strategically and morally correct to do what we are doing. Clearly he believes that genuinely, as does his Government. What I am questioning is whether the constitutional requirements at home are being complied with. The Minister said that we pass the defence Vote but that is not broken down by where we spend the money.

There is not a separate vote in this House on spending money in Ukraine or on the peace facility, to the best of my knowledge, but if there is, then I am interested in hearing more. I am also interested in hearing more on the justification provided by the Minister on the common defence policy.

First of all, there is the common security and defence policy, which we are part of and for which we voted. Then there is Ireland's position in respect of Russia's illegal aggression against Ukraine. Russia is perpetrating a war. I take issue with Deputy McNamara's talk about Ireland supporting "belligerents" and will come back to that in a second. Ireland's position in respect of Russia's illegal aggression against Ukraine and our support for Ukraine's right to defend itself in the face of an attack on its sovereignty and territorial integrity is in line with Article 51 of the UN Charter. That has been outlined in detail by the Government since last February. Our participation in training is in respect of de-mining-----

That is not training belligerents, to use the Deputy's language. I met representatives of the International Red Cross recently who told me that one of the most appalling consequences of the kind of war that Russia is waging in Ukraine is civilian casualties from unexploded ordnances, mines and bombs that have levelled parts Ukraine. Children can walk into playgrounds and have their limbs amputated-----

I agree that is wrong and indefensible.

We want to provide training to give additional de-mining capability to the Ukrainian military. The other area would be that of medical responses to injuries that occur in combat situations.

Barr
Roinn