The prospect of a temporary end to Israel’s brutal bombardment of Gaza and the expected and hoped-for release by Hamas of women and children hostages including, we hope, Emily Hand, offers a glimmer of hope in what are very dark days. However, we all appreciate that work must continue and diplomatic efforts internationally must intensify until a permanent ceasefire can be agreed. We have heard from the Israeli Government that it has two stated aims, namely, the release of all hostages and the elimination of Hamas.

While hope remains that a pause will last until we see hostages released, we know that tragically Netanyahu’s approach to that second stated goal has involved the merciless killing of so many children, women, men, doctors, UN staff, journalists and others. We must not be naive about the enormous challenge of protecting what remains of Gaza and preventing what looks hideously increasingly likely to be the genocide of its civilians.

For our part, I think we can all agree that Ireland has the benefit of our diplomatic reputation and the respect of countries internationally. That position morally obliges us to act to challenge in the strongest possible terms the horror that has been unleashed by the Israeli Government and to seek to end the bombardment of the people of Gaza. We have heard workers from the United Nations and Médecins Sans Frontières saying that this is the worst situation they have witnessed in their careers. Gaza is now the most dangerous place in the world for a child and the average age of a person killed in the conflict is just five years old. It is heart-breaking to think of those five-year-olds.

We need to act. We need to deploy tactics, such as those that were used against South Africa during apartheid, to put an end to the brutality of the Israeli regime. We need to act to impose strong sanctions on Israel and end trade with the occupied territories. While we may be militarily neutral, we are not politically neutral in the face of the brutal bombardment of Gaza. We have yet to use all the diplomatic tools that are available to us in the Gaza context. That makes even more frustrating yesterday’s surprise announcement by the Tánaiste about the triple lock, which does have a link with our neutrality. We cannot separate the two.

Despite the Tánaiste’s denials when the Consultative Forum on International Security Policy was formed, it is clear that his announcement in the wake of that represents a creeping drift in the Government away from our longstanding policy of military neutrality. In the Dáil, the Tánaiste effectively asserted last night, and indeed again today, that the triple lock leaves us at the whim of five countries and in particular at the whim of Russia on the UN Security Council.

I share the Tánaiste’s views on Russia. I absolutely share them. I have no time for the Russian regime. Yet, it is the answer to the wrong question to say that we should move away from the triple lock because there is a problem with Russia’s veto on the UN Security Council. The question we should be asking is the question of reform of the Security Council to remove that veto and move away from the power the UN Security Council has. The reality is that our triple lock in the Defence Act provides that we may participate in international peace-keeping forces that are mandated by the UN General Assembly, as well as the UN Security Council. We need to see the power of the UN General Assembly being asserted and brought to the fore in the United Nations.

If I may, I think the Tánaiste is putting the cart before the horse in seeking to change a longstanding policy that is represented and protected by the triple lock. We are asking him to abandon plans to end the triple lock and instead to enshrine Ireland’s neutrality in the Constitution.

Thank you Deputy. We are way over time.

We must use all the diplomatic tools at our disposal to bring about a ceasefire in Gaza.

The Deputy has raised two issues, the first of which is the Middle East and the current situation there. I agree with everything the Deputy has articulated in respect of the appalling killing of children, innocent civilians and humanitarian aid workers whose work is extraordinarily brave and courageous. It is outrageous that the UN humanitarian workers are being killed, as it is in respect of medical care workers and journalists who are reporting bravely on the situation in the Middle East.

We welcome what we are hearing about the truce, albeit a short one, in respect of getting the hostages out. We pray and hope that Emily Hand will be one of those hostages and indeed that all the children who are hostages are released. There is no moral justification for hostage-taking at all. That needs to be called out. We want to build on that truce to create a permanent cessation of violence. I will be attending the Mediterranean ministerial meeting between Arab countries and EU ministers on Monday. We will be working with other like-minded EU states to build on the truce and create approaches to a road map to peace from the appalling war and loss of life that is currently under way and to chart a way incrementally and develop confidence-building measures to ensure that peace comes to the Middle East. It has to be on the basis of a two-state solution, but we need to create a road map for that where there will be two states in which people can co-exist in harmony and peace. That has to be driven internationally and it has to be done strongly. Israel in particular must stop the aggression of settlers in the West Bank and the violence that is under way there. Yes, we must pursue that with sanctions if it continues. It must also link the West Bank to Gaza and the Palestinian authority to oversee that. These are the issues we have to work on.

In respect of the triple lock, I have received no answer. The consultative forum was a very good forum, despite the attempts by Sinn Féin and others to undermine it. They did not even want to give it a chance, which I find shocking.

I was at it every single day, but you were not.

I found it shocking that people did not even want to give a debate a chance. They attacked the chairperson. They sought to undermine it. Then, when they went to it-----

Who did?

You did.

I did not.

Then, when people went to it-----

Resume your seat, Deputy Carthy.

I want that to be corrected. I did not attack the chairperson of the consultative forum.

Deputy Carthy, resume your seat.

The record shows that and I want that to be corrected and I want that to be corrected immediately.

That is a serious challenge.

Are you going to sue him?

Sue him Matt. You sue all the journalists for saying that.

Excuse me-----

In any event, it was-----

Excuse me, I am making a legitimate point of clarification. The Tánaiste is after accusing me of attacking somebody who I did not attack.

Tánaiste, please.

Deputy, you did-----

Deputy Carthy you are out of order.

I want that to be clarified and corrected on the Dáil record.

Hear, hear.

Deputy Matt Carthy you are out of order.

I am suggesting-----

You are out of order. I am ruling that you are out of order.

I am suggesting that the Tánaiste is very much out of order.

Resume your seat.

Could I say to Deputy Bacik, in terms of the triple lock-----

Tánaiste, please. We are not proceeding like this. We are not proceeding like this. The time is now up. I ask for co-operation in relation to this and for a little respect for Leaders’ Questions.

Through the Chair, in respect of the triple lock, the consultative forum was a very rational, reasonable, very well-balanced debate. That is important. There was clear consensus about supporting military neutrality. There is no question about that. In the context of the triple lock, there has not been a peacekeeping mission sanctioned by the UN since 2014.

Tánaiste, time is up.

I just happen to believe-----

We are way over time.

-----that we cannot allow Russia, China and everybody else to dictate what we do.

The Tánaiste’s comments on sanctions are welcome and I hope we will hear more about that. He is right to commend the UN aid workers and the UN role in Gaza. But it is undermining of the UN to suggest that because of flaws in the UN that we should somehow abandon our triple lock. That was not the recommendation that was made by Professor Richardson or her forum. She acknowledged the matter was contested and her report had other recommendations that are vitally important, including more spending on the Defence Forces.

Senator Wall raised this in the Seanad yesterday, calling for urgency in implementing recommendations of the Commission on the Defence Forces such as access to the working time directive. Deputy Howlin reminded us that in the budget the increasing defence spending has soared to the dizzying heights of just 1% of GDP. We need to do much more to support our personnel in the Defence Forces and ensure they are well-equipped to engage in UN-mandated peacekeeping missions. It is entirely ill-conceived to start talking about dismantling or undermining the triple lock or undermining and critiquing the role of the United Nations, which, however flawed, is a global forum and agency for peace that was established after the carnage of the Second World War. We have a proud role and history in Ireland with the United Nations. It is wrong to talk about dismantling the triple lock and removing that requirement for a UN mandate just because most of us have an issue with Russia.

I was 12 years of age in 1972, when the referendum on joining the European community took place. Parties across here opposed it at the time. There were groups, which are still at it today, arguing that if we joined what is now the European Union, we would have NATO troops and nuclear warheads parading down O'Connell Street within a few weeks. This is what was said as far back as 1972 and I have heard the same mantra throughout the debates on all the European treaties since then, which people have opposed, and it never happened. We put a provision into the Constitution which prohibits us from joining a European Union common defence pact, yet we are happy to go along with Russia and the Wagner Group replacing UN missions in areas-----

We are not.

Because of their geopolitical ambition and agenda, they do not want peacekeeping missions around the world any more. We know where the world is today. It took six weeks-----

What is the alternative?

The alternative is we stay consistent to fundamental human rights and the UN Charter. The UN Charter mentions regional actors; the EU or the African Union are bona fide actors. We should not just react-----

It is imperfect but what is the alternative?

-----in a knee-jerk way to what I proposed yesterday in terms of amendments. We should have reasonable debate but there seems to be an inability in this House to have a reasonable debate about these matters and false hares get sent up the field.

Deputy Bacik, resume your seat.

Thank you because I was not part of the pathetic shouting earlier.

I excuse you from that.

The childish petulance.

If the Deputies want to change the rules on Leader's Questions, they should do so at the Business Committee or the reform committee. It is not interactive. Those are the rules so we will stick to the rules until the body changes the rules. In the meantime, I am moving on to the next question from the Regional Group and an Teachta Berry.