In the past hour, we heard of the Government's decision to expel a Russian diplomat because of the nerve agent attack in England. I absolutely agree with the Tánaiste's statement that the use of chemical weapons in any circumstances is wholly unacceptable. He is correct in that. I also fully understand the need to protect what is called national security, which is also correct. The expulsion from Ireland of Russian diplomats acting as intelligence officers is a more than suitable action to be pursued if indeed they are behind the attack in England on Sergei and Yulia Skripal. Regardless of this particular attack, diplomats of any country acting as spies should be expelled from any state or jurisdiction. However, we do need to see the evidence underpinning this decision. It is not sufficient to simply cite solidarity with Britain. Such a significant and dramatic Irish foreign policy decision should be dictated by Irish security analysis. In this case, it seems as though a decision has been based on information from a foreign security intelligence service, which is unprecedented. Essentially, the Taoiseach is asking us to trust Boris Johnson, which, dare I say, might not be the wisest course of action.

The move shows a disregard for Irish military neutrality and is completely in line with the efforts of Fine Gael and the Government to undermine and dismantle that neutrality. The Government has pushed for a more militarised EU through its support for permanent structured co-operation, PESCO, which would see Ireland participate in EU military operations and funding EU military research that is intended to complement NATO missions and strategic goals. As recently as the beginning of this month, Fine Gael's four MEPs published a document which seeks to tear up Ireland's military neutrality. The document proposes to give the Government the power to deploy Irish troops as part of military missions that do not have UN approval and this would eventually see Irish resources deployed at the behest of NATO.

The principles of neutrality and independence have always been at the centre of Irish foreign policy and Irish people overwhelmingly support the continuation of this policy. It is the Taoiseach's job to defend and reinforce that neutrality.

We cannot allow Government decisions to be based on assessments by British intelligence which - let us face it - does not have a good track record when it comes to Ireland. Does the Taoiseach intend meeting with the representatives of political parties in the Dáil to offer a full and frank explanation as to what has led to this dramatic shift in policy?

At last week's European Council meeting EU leaders unanimously agreed with the assessment of the Government of the United Kingdom that the Russian Federation is highly likely to have been responsible for the attack in Salisbury on 4 March and that there is no plausible alternative explanation. We affirmed that all EU member states stand in unqualified solidarity with the United Kingdom in the face of this grave challenge to its security, or rather our shared security. The use of chemical weapons, including the use of toxic chemicals as weapons by anyone anywhere, is particularly loathsome and reprehensible. The attack in Salisbury was not just an attack on the United Kingdom, but an affront to the international rules-bases order on which we all depend for our security and well-being.

In light of the conclusions of the European Council, and following an assessment carried out by our security services, Defence Forces intelligence and Garda intelligence, in consultation with the Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Tánaiste briefed the Government on our intended course of action this morning. The Secretary General of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has met with the Russian ambassador and informed him that the accreditation of a named member of his staff with diplomatic status is to be terminated in line with the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The individual in question is now requested to leave the State. This is very much an act of solidarity with the United Kingdom. As a country, Ireland has no quarrel with the Russian people, whom we respect and many of whom live here. Let us not forget that this is a dark and difficult time for the Russian people, who are mourning following the death of more than 60 people, including 40 children, in a shopping centre in a fire that reminds us of the great Stardust tragedy. I extend our deepest condolences to the Russian people on their loss.

As I mentioned, in terms of evidence the decision was made in solidarity with the UK but the decision on which person to ask to leave was based on intelligence and advice from Garda intelligence and Defence Forces intelligence. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade already briefed the spokesperson for the major Opposition party at his request. He is also willing to convene a briefing for party leaders and party spokespeople today if that would be helpful. We are happy to do that. On our neutrality, Ireland is a neutral country. We do not join military alliances, we will not be joining NATO and we will not be part of a European army. However, when it comes to terrorism, assassinations, the use of chemical weapons and cyberterrorism, we are not neutral. We are joined with other neutral countries including Finland and Sweden, who have taken the same course of action as us, in expelling diplomats.

I suggest to the Taoiseach that it is not sufficient that he selectively brief his colleagues in Fianna Fáil on such a major development. This story, the abhorrence of anybody using chemical weapons in any circumstances, and not least the attack itself have caused unease and disquiet. I do not think that anybody would argue but that the State and Government have to take action where there is a prima facie case and where there is absolute concrete evidence of any such action and that a diplomat or diplomats must be expelled or an embassy punished in such circumstances. The story in the public ether however is that this is a matter of solidarity with the UK and that alone. I asked the Taoiseach if he would brief the leaders of the parties in this House. I take from his response that he will, but I put it to the Taoiseach - he should acknowledge this - that his position on military neutrality and an independent Irish foreign policy is threadbare. The recent actions of his four MEPs have served to reinforce the fact that he does not care a whit for that policy. The Taoiseach might tell us who on the Fianna Fáil benches was briefed and explain why it is that Fianna Fáil enjoys such selective treatment.

As I mentioned earlier, the Tánaiste will be happy to brief spokespeople or party leaders. The Deputy is welcome to send her spokesperson or to attend herself if she wishes. I will be here for the next few hours and then I will be back in Cabinet. I then have an Article 28 meeting with the President so it is just not possible for me to do it today, but the Tánaiste is available to do so.

I apologise. I have forgotten the second part of the Deputy's question.

Why Fianna Fáil-----

There is a provision in the confidence and supply agreement that there should be no surprises. We thought it appropriate that there should not be a surprise in this case.

We asked for it.

There is no such agreement with Sinn Féin.

Order, please.

I would point out as well that when this was done by other countries - and in the past, it was done without even a Government decision - it was done simply as a decision of the foreign Minister. However, we decided not to make our decision at the same time as the 14 other European countries that acted yesterday afternoon because we thought it appropriate to brief Cabinet on that decision this morning, and that was done. However, as I said, we are happy to provide a briefing to party leaders or spokespersons today.