Latest news with #DefenceBill
Irish Independent
24-07-2025
- Politics
- Irish Independent
Wexford councillors oppose Triple Lock amendment as chair goes against his party to cast deciding vote
The Triple Lock refers to Ireland's method of sending Defence Forces Personnel overseas to serve as part of peacekeeping or peace enforcement operations. It requires UN approval, a decision by Government and a vote in the Dáil. However, in May of this year, the government published a proposed amendment to the Defence Bill which would remove the requirement for UN approval when deploying members of the Defence Forces outside the State, thus ending the Triple Lock system. At the July meeting of WCC, Councillor Jim Codd forwarded a motion requesting that the council express its opposition to the proposed changes. Arguing that any amendments to the current Defence Bill would 'signify a breach of trust with the Irish electorate and a serious diminution of Irish neutrality', Cllr Codd called upon his colleagues to support his motion. Although the motion was swiftly seconded by Cllr Paddy Kavanagh there was some pushback from members of Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil. 'The facts of the matter on the Triple Lock are that the government makes a proposal and it goes to the Dáil, no other representative from any country should have any say on a decision made in Ireland on what to do with our troops,' said Cllr Darragh McDonald (Fine Gael). 'I trust the government, I trust all the people in the Dáil across all parties to make the right decisions, and I think they can act responsibly for the people of this country.' While he was 'glad' that Cllr McDonald had such trust in the government, Sinn Fein's Tom Forde didn't share that sentiment. Offering his support for the motion, Cllr Forde said, 'This is an important safeguard for our neutrality. I'm glad Cllr McDonald has trust in our government in relation to this, I don't.' His party colleague Aoife Rose O'Brien argued that this was an issue 'which should be discussed at every local authority meeting' and said she 'would be very disappointed' if any of Wexford's TDs members went against this motion. Cllr John Dwyer was particularly strident in his support of the motion, arguing that removing the Triple Lock would see Ireland become an implement of the EU. 'It's through small incremental steps that our neutrality will be taken,' he said. 'If you look at the disgraceful behaviour of Ursula von der Leyen (President of the European Commission) in supporting the genocide happening every single day in Gaza, then you will see exactly the direction the EU is taking. Let there be no doubt the EU wants an army it can deploy. "It is obsessed with Putin and undermining and attacking Russia. I fully support this motion. Seán Lemass was an ardent advocate of neutrality and I would ask the Fianna Fáil members here to reflect on his views when considering this motion.' ADVERTISEMENT One of those Fianna Fáil members had considered the motion and remained steadfast in her objections to it. 'If we maintain the Triple Lock, when peace comes to Gaza, we won't be able to send peacekeeping forces there,' said Cllr Barbara Anne Murphy. 'This is about peacekeeping, something we have honourably been doing for many, many years. There has been no UN peacekeeping mission mandated since 2014, none. And we are now living in a whole new world.' Cllr John Fleming (also Fianna Fáil) described the motion as 'stupidity' while Pip Breen (FF) said the Triple Lock was 'not for purpose any more and has to go'. With the chamber divided, Cllr Codd asked for a roll call on his motion but not before he took a sideswipe at his Fianna Fáil adversaries. 'This is a sad day, I'm mindful of Redmonditism rearing its head again,' he said. 'I'd understand that in Fine Gael but now it seems to be in Fianna Fáil as well.' He reckoned without Cllr Sullivan, though, who, on this occasion, chose not to follow the party line. 'I'm absolutely conflicted,' he said. 'I hate war and anything which contributes to the death and destruction of human beings. We've had the Triple Lock in place for a number of years and it has served our country well. Ireland is one of the most respected international peacekeeping countries in the world, there is huge value in our neutrality, so this is a vote of conscience for me., "But I believe in the Triple Lock, and if I sit here and vote against something I believe in I am a fraud.' The motion was subsequently put to a vote with Cllrs Vicky Barron (LAB), Jim Codd (Aontú), Craig Doyle (SF), John Dwyer (IND), Tom Forde (SF), Paddy Kavanagh (Wexford Independent Alliance), Leonard Kelly (IND), Marty Murphy (WIA), Aoife Rose O'Brien (SF), John O' Rourke (IND), Michael Sheehan (IND), Joe Sullivan (FF), and Biddy Walsh (LAB) voting in favour. On the other side, Cllrs Pip Breen (FF), Trish Byrne (FG), Anthony Donohue (FG), John Fleming (FF), Pat Kehoe (FG), Donal Kenny (FF), Garry Laffan (FF), Darragh McDonald (FG), Barbara Anne Murphy (FF), Bridín Murphy (FG), Frank Staples (FG), Robbie Staples (FG), and Oliver Walsh (FG) voted against. With the vote tied at 13 apiece it was left to Cllr Sullivan, as cathaoirleach, to have the deciding say. 'I stand by what I said, ' he announced to much cheering from the chamber.
The Journal
10-07-2025
- Politics
- The Journal
Military union warns 'vague' Defence Bill could lead to 'unreasonable suspensions' for soldiers
A MILITARY GROUP has told an Oireachtas committee that new 'vague' Defence legislation could breach soldiers' rights to fair procedure and lead to 'unreasonable and protracted suspensions'. The Representative Association of Commissioned Officers (RACO) is appearing before the Joint Committee on Defence and National Security which is carrying out pre-legislative scrutiny of the proposed Defence Bill. So far invited speakers have focused on neutrality and new measures to deploy troops abroad, RACO is the first to address the changes to the workplace which will include powers of suspension and the summary dismissal of personnel. The group said, in its opening remarks this morning, that they have significant concerns about the drafting of the bill and a lack of consultation with them. It told the committee members that a conciliation and arbitration mechanism to raise their concerns is not fit for purpose and is 'unproductive' due to lack of resourcing and long delays in resolving issues. RACO said that it has 'little accountability' and has an 'inability to address the issue it was created to resolve'. The military group examined three draft heads of the Bill, dealing with suspensions of members, the dismissal of soldiers and how soldiers will be compelled by law to tell their commanding officers they are under investigation. These measures were introduced following high profile cases, including that of former soldier Cathal Crotty, who was found guilty of assaulting Natasha O'Brien in Limerick city. He was initially not imprisoned at Limerick Circuit Court but he was later jailed when the Director of Public Prosecutions appealed the case in the wake of it being raised in the media. Crotty was not suspended from the military as the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces did not have powers of suspension. A report by Peter Ward, which was commissioned by then Minister for Defence Micheál Martin, found that there was an urgent need for a clear suspension policy to allow the military to impose suspensions in certain circumstances. The Bill proposes that it will grant powers to a 'designated authority' to suspend soldiers under the rank of Major General. This includes for reasons of in the public interest, national security or serious misconduct. This measure was introduced to the Bill after it emerged that there was no real power of suspension for the RACO in its address today said that it welcomes a suspension policy but has called for a greater degree of clarity in the provisions as set out in the Bill. Advertisement It said that: 'we remain very concerned by the loose, vague and subjective language in the current drafting'. 'Such phrasing lacks the thoroughness and rigour needed to protect members' rights to the presumption of innocence and opens the door to interpretation without robust oversight or even an appeal mechanism,' the group added. The garda use of suspensions has been heavily criticised by the Garda Representative Association and the Workplace Relations Commission, in a finding against An Garda Síochána, said that its process was a 'rubber stamp' exercise . RACO told the committee that the suspensions in advance of due process would carry 'real consequences' for an individual's mental health and professional reputation. 'The principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' must be protected—not just legally, but through fair process and proper supports. A balance must be struck between operational discipline and the dignity and safety of those who serve. 'We note that suspension is an embedded feature of many other public sector organisations and are aware of a concerning reported trend of seemingly endless, elongated suspensions without regular review or due process, where the suspension in fact becomes the punishment,' the group added. Dismissal RACO raised the issue of dismissal of officers by the President 'for any prescribed reason' – it said again this was too vague and wide ranging drafting which lacked precision. The group told the committee that it 'lacks the clarity and safeguards necessary to protect members from arbitrary or disproportionate action'. RACO also called for redrafting in regard to the new measure in which military personnel will be compelled to inform their commanding officer if they are under garda investigation. The issue is centred around the measure which would require them to keep that officer up to date on progress. It said there was no formal or informal data sharing mechanism between gardaí and the courts martial system. RACO warned that this meant there was no obligation on the investigating garda to keep the Defence Forces updated on the probe. It has recommended that the Head of the Bill be updated so that it is only necessary where a military member finds themselves arrested, interviewed under caution or charged by the gardaí. 'We respectfully contend that the draft Heads as they currently stand are overly vague (even for primary legislation), and lack crucial detail on appeals mechanisms, checks or balances which could lead to a wave of unnecessarily unreasonable and protracted suspensions. 'We suggest that more detail is required to ensure clarity and support for our members who will be required to operate and administer a suspension policy, and that essential safeguards are necessary for all Defence Forces members who may be the subject of suspension or indeed dismissal into the future, in keeping with the principles of natural justice and fair procedures,' RACO conclude. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
