Before I go to the proposer and seconder, I welcome the Social Democrats leader, Deputy Cairns, and members of the Social Democrats Party: Deputies Gannon, Rice, Whitmore, Cummins and Farrelly and Councillor Caroline Winstanley. They are all welcome to the Distinguished Visitors Gallery.

We would have brought everyone from the Canadian side over there, but they would not all fit. I thank them all for being here for this Private Members' Bill from their party's Senator and the Cross-Party Group.

Over in our Public Gallery, we have guests from the Ireland Canada Business Association. I welcome them to the Seanad Éireann. Their Prime Minister will be joining us in Dublin. I am looking forward to that visit and his visit to County Mayo. We had another Head of State visiting Mayo not so long ago. As the guests will hear quite often, Mayo is quite good at world leaders, but they just cannot win the all-Ireland football final.

Do not start it.

I know, I am just saying. One of our Senators here is from Mayo. They are like a crowd that could not win a one-ticket raffle.

Out of order.

It might be out of order, but they are excellent at world leaders. We will give them that.

I call Senator Stephenson to propose the motion.

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

I am sharing time with Senator Black.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank the Minister of State for coming in. Of course, I am disappointed that it is not the direct line Minister, given the importance of this legislation.

The Bill is a response to the ongoing evidence that weapons are routinely transiting through Ireland. I understand that the Government is opposing this Bill on the basis of some very minor arguments. We have a ten-Stage legislative process in Ireland for the purpose of amending legislation. This Bill was drafted by the Office of Parliamentary Legal Advisers, OPLA, who have advised me that it is legally sound. If the Government is not happy with elements of this Bill, I wish it would make amendments with me. I would be very happy to work with it. I have a proven track record of working collaboratively across the House. The Government's stated justification for opposing the Bill does not engage in any meaningful way with the policy intent behind it.

The Bill identifies a serious legislative gap in the inspection of flights. It is designed to address the gaps expressed by the former Minister, Eamon Ryan. He committed under the previous Government to address this matter. Did this policy issue fall under the new coalition? Does the Government not care about these overhead flights any more? Has the issue just completely changed for it? It is bitterly disappointing that the Government is opposing the Bill instead of meaningfully engaging with it.

Shannon Airport has been used as a transatlantic gateway for US military operations for the past 30 years. Weapons have been carried by military planes, which are required to apply for diplomatic clearance. However, commercial airlines are also being used to ferry weapons through Ireland without any oversight by the Government. Our laws unequivocally forbid the passage of weapons through our airspace. Banning the transportation of weapons through Ireland is not new. It has been a long-standing principle borne out in Ireland's neutrality. The Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation states that no munitions of war may be carried in or above the territory of another state except by permission. The Taoiseach has previously noted that it is expressly prohibited for civil aircraft to carry munitions of war in Irish sovereign airspace without being granted an exemption to do so by the Minister for Transport, so the Government knows the rules.

Why do we see reports again and again on the passage of weapons through Ireland, which the Government chooses to ignore? What is the point of these rules if we do not enforce them? There has not been a single Government inspection of an aircraft in recent years. Under the Hague Convention on neutrality, Ireland as a neutral state has a responsibility to ensure that belligerents do not move troops or munitions of war through our territory. The High Court found us to be in breach of our own regulations and obligations under the convention in 2003.

We have heard consistently from the Government that it simply does not have the power to carry out on-the-spot inspections of planes and that it lacks any legislative basis to do so. As such, I have brought that legislative basis. My Bill addresses these gaps, which were first identified by Eamon Ryan in 2024. It would confer powers on An Garda Síochána to carry out inspections of planes to deter the misuse of civil aircraft in the transportation of weapons. It expands the definition of "state aircraft" to include military, customs or police, which will need to request permission to fly over or land in Ireland, broadening the scope of who needs to inform the Government. Under this Bill, it would be a criminal offence, punishable by fine or imprisonment, to obstruct the investigation of an aircraft.

These enforcement powers and the accompanying penalties laid out in my Bill would be a deterrent to any airlines that consider breaching our rules. Up until this point, it seems that no airlines have been deterred by any of our existing legislation. Lufthansa, Delta and Israel's El Al have all transported Lockheed Martin combat jet munitions to Israel via Ireland - parts used to weaponise the F-35 jets that have bombed Gaza and Lebanon. FedEx, also carrying F-35 components, was aided through our airspace by AirNav Ireland. Challenge Airlines, the Belgian-Israeli airline, was under investigation by the Department of Transport in 2024, but was allowed to continue the illegal transport of F-35 jet parts through Irish airspace.

The first section of this Bill responds to the growing concerns regarding the use of Irish territory to facilitate human rights abuses. I am referring to the repeated use of Shannon Airport as a refuelling stop for a number of inhumane Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, ICE, deportation flights from the US, which reportedly took place between May 2025 and February this year. Some of these flights were part of forced third-country removals, with the individuals being deported to countries, such as Rwanda and Djibouti, where they had zero prior connection and where there have been subsequent reports of individuals being subject to arbitrary detention. Amnesty International has expressed serious concerns regarding Ireland's facilitation of these third-country removals and our potential complicity in enabling human rights violations. Media reports regarding one of these flights detailed how, in January, a group of Palestinian men being deported to the West Bank through Shannon Airport were shackled by their hands and ankles, a horrifying image.

Why are our airports being used to facilitate the Trump Administration's cruel and inhumane mass deportation system? How can this Government accept a situation where we have not been notified, let alone where we can prevent this kind of thing happening on Irish soil? We cannot afford to treat this kind of activity as business as usual when dealing with a rogue US Government that has shown utter contempt for human rights.

My Bill extends what qualifies as a state aircraft by including custom flights, requiring ICE flights to abide by human rights standards and seek exemptions before landing in Shannon. It is my expectation that no Government would ever provide an exemption for ICE-style deportations and would therefore stop these flights landing in Shannon. However, if the deportations are conducted using commercial airlines, the provisions for random inspections in this legislation would provide safeguards.

I wish to move on to the issue of weapons flying through Ireland, which is the so-called do not ask, do not tell rule. We know that the Minister of State's Department regularly provides exemptions for military planes to land in Shannon. I do not agree with it at all. The practice fundamentally undermines our neutrality and credibility as a country that upholds international law when those weapons are being used, for example, in the US Government's illegal war in Iran. The Irish Times reported this year that there was a significant uptake in these flights coming through Ireland before and during that war. Of course, correlation does not always mean causation, but that an increase of 248 flights went unchecked in Irish airspace due to an administrative error is alarming. How can we be confident that the Government knows that there is nothing of concern in these planes that pass overhead when it cannot even accurately count the known flights, never mind the others?

Beyond the known exemptions, the Government has routinely held that there are no weapons landing in Shannon or being transported through Irish airspace. Just this year, the Taoiseach said during his St. Patrick's Day trip that there were no weapons landing in Shannon, but we know that there are weapons routinely transiting through Irish airspace on civilian planes. Eamon Ryan said in the Dáil in 2024 that "unless an air operator has sought an exemption to carry munitions of war, there is no mechanism by which my Department will have knowledge of the type of cargo that is being carried on such overflights." In 2024, the Taoiseach claimed that the Government had no prior knowledge of civilian aircraft that had illegally been transporting weapons through Irish airspace with overflight permission. The Taoiseach said that all the Government could do was simply tell airlines that they were not allowed to do it. The Taoiseach said, "We're not going to be flying planes, shadowing planes, that's not going to be a reality, let's be honest." I agree that shadowing planes would be utterly ridiculous. However, our current enforcement mechanism amounts to relying on the word of private companies that they are simply not doing it. It is a system of blind trust.

Just last week, Amnesty joined legal action against the Belgian subsidiary of FedEx for the alleged illegal transit of arms through Belgium, including parts once again for F-35 fighter jets. That is another example of multinational companies showing their utter disregard for domestic law. That is the very reason we need to have a random on-the-spot inspection regime.

The Government previously claimed that we were powerless. Is this Government willing to acknowledge what the dogs on the street know? Weapons are routinely transiting through Ireland without approval. It is a direct breach of our rules and national sovereignty. Is the Government turning a blind eye? Is it wilful ignorance or does it really believe that it has no power to have any oversight over this?

Given the number of military exemptions routinely made, I assume that the Government is not particularly interested in knowing what goes on in our skies and in policing the consistent breaches of our rules. However, I appeal to the Government's own self-expressed commitment to neutrality and ask that it seriously consider the proposal before it.

This Bill only seeks to codify into law powers that will enable the Government to enforce its own existing rules.

In the face of Government inaction and hand-wringing about the inability to inspect flights, this Bill provides an inspection regime to put a stop to this illegal practice. I refer to explosives, detonators for use in missiles, missile launchers, sniper ammunition, grenades, handguns, tear gas, parts for F-35 jets - all items used to murder and main Palestinian civilians and journalists, bomb hospitals and target ambulances in Gaza. These inventories are listed on the airway bills of flights passing through Irish airspace and that is simply a fact. Far from doing everything we can to aid the people of Gaza, the Government is repeatedly facilitating the US and Israeli war machines to commit violence in the Middle East. I am sure that will be a very uncomfortable thought for many of us but it is simply what is going on and this is why my Bill matters.

The issue is not going to go away. We should not really be having our hands in any violence. I do not believe any of the Irish people want any part in indirectly facilitating the death and destruction of Palestinians or anyone else across the globe. Why would we facilitate any elements of war by allowing weapons to transit, and why would we undermine our own standing internationally? The vast majority of Irish people - 77% - supports Irish neutrality. They do not want to see weapons flying through this country. We are obviously facing a world that is more complex than it ever was before. Civilian suffering has been normalised. The number of dead people in places like Palestine has lost all meaning. They are just faceless, nameless people but they are not faceless, are they? They are humans with loved ones, with people who cry over their deaths and feel their absence like an ache in the hearts. I have no doubt that the Minister of State and his colleagues at Cabinet feel their pain as much as I do. I am not claiming to have any monopoly on empathy but the Government has to wake up and see that it facilitates this violence when it allows these weapons over our skies or in our airports.

"Ireland the peacebuilder." We often hear this refrain - that we are peacebuilders. People see us uniquely in the world because of our history, what we have done, and the great things we have done for peace across the globe. However, if we are serious about conflict prevention, peacemaking, peacebuilding and our peacekeeping work, we simply cannot allow this practice to continue. We often hear from the Government that Ireland is perceived as an honest broker internationally at the UN and different forums. Does the Minister of State think we can actually claim to be an honest broker while allowing these weapons, which are tools of war, killing, maiming, murder and destruction, to fly through Ireland? This is a direct question. Can the Minister of State not see how wrong that is?

On the one hand, the Government says it wants global peace and an end to the killing of children in Gaza, and it is a sentiment I strongly agree with but, on the other hand, we facilitate the transportation of killing machines. Is the Government happy that weapons that may have been used in Gaza, Lebanon or Iran have flown through Ireland? Does that make us proud? I think that is a stain on us as a country. It seriously calls into question all of Ireland's credibility on issues of peace. We are seeking to earn a seat on the UN Human Rights Council this year, while at the same time, people have flown through Shannon, shackled together to be deported to what is effectively a warzone. We allowed that this year and this year we seek to be on the UN Human Rights Council. The dichotomy is stark and I have got to say it feels like pure hypocrisy. We should be following the likes of Spain, Switzerland and Austria, which have all restricted airspace to US military planes en route to Israel.

I would like to finish by emphasising that this is a good and strong Bill. I thank the legal drafters at the Office of Parliamentary Legal Advisers, OPLA, for ensuring it is sound and robust. I would particularly like to thank Ms Maeve Gleeson. I thank the tireless staff of The Ditch and the volunteers of Shannonwatch, who provided so much of the factual evidence in my statement today. In light of all of this, I ask the Minister of State to take this Bill seriously and understand that it actually fulfils our own obligations and sovereign roles under the Constitution. I did not make us a neutral country. I am glad that we are one. I did not write the Constitution. I am glad the safeguards are in there to emphasis our neutrality. I did not write the Chicago Convention or the Hague Convention. These are things that just exist - that we have signed up to, ratified and written ourselves and, yet, under the current practice we are just turning a blind eye to all of those things. Do not ask, do not tell; it is not happening; we do not know it is happening; we cannot inspect it; we are powerless. I do not believe that is true. If there is a will, there is a way, and this legislation is a pathway. I urge the Minister of State to seriously consider working with me on Committee Stage to strengthen it.

I call on the next speaker and the seconder of the motion. I welcome the members of the Limerick Rotary Club, who are guests of the Leas-Chathaoirleach, Senator Maria Byrne, to Seanad Éireann. They are most welcome. Anois, an Seanadóir Frances Black.

I second the motion. I warmly welcome this Bill and I thank Senator Stephenson and her colleagues for introducing it. I want to start off by asking a simple question. What does it mean to be a neutral country? At a minimum, it means that you do not allow your territory to be used for actions that violate international law. It means that when people are being deported to zones of armed conflict in breach of non-refoulement obligations, they are not refuelled and sent on their way through an Irish airport. That is the bare minimum, and yet, that is precisely what has been happening at Shannon.

According to Amnesty International, as Senator Stephenson has said, US flights using leased civilian aircraft passed through Shannon for five separate ICE removal operations between May 2025 and February 2026. People were removed to the West Bank, an active conflict zone. People were deported to Rwanda and Djibouti, a violation of international human rights law, through an Irish airport with the State effectively powerless to stop it. The reason is a gap that should have been closed years ago, in that only military aircraft required ministerial permission. Customs, police and ICE deportation flights did not. This Bill ends that, extending prior approval to all state aircraft and grounding it in the 1944 Chicago Convention.

Legislation without enforcement is just words on paper. This Bill gives authorised persons, including An Garda Síochána, the power to inspect and detain aircraft and to carry out random searches, and it requires an annual report to both Houses. Ireland, at this moment, cannot speak about international law at the UN while all our airports are used to breach it. We are complicit in it all. This Bill closes that loophole. It says that our neutrality is not a technicality. It is a commitment and it is now time to enforce it.

The Minister of State has indicated that he wishes to speak now.

I thank the Cathaoirleach. First of all, I thank Senators Stephenson, Cosgrove, Higgins, Black, Harmon, Ruane and Noonan for initiating this Private Members' Bill. While I am pleased to attend the debate here today, the Government will be opposing this Bill on Second Stage. I understand the rationale and motivation behind the introduction of the Bill but there would be significant challenges associated with its implementation and enforcement. The Ministers, Deputies O'Brien and McEntee, agree that these challenges would make the Bill unworkable.

The Bill proposes amendments to the Air Navigation and Transport Act 1946 to require that all state aircraft seeking to overfly or land in the State obtain the express permission of the Minister for Transport. The Bill relies on the existing definition of "state aircraft", meaning the aircraft of any country used in military, customs or police services, consistent with the Convention on International Civil Aviation, otherwise known as the Chicago Convention. The requirement for foreign military aircraft to obtain permission from the Minister for foreign affairs is set out in the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order 1952. As currently drafted, this Bill would transfer responsibility for the provision of diplomatic clearance for foreign military and state aircraft to overfly or land in the State from the Minister for foreign affairs to the Minister for Transport.

Section 2 of the Bill also revokes the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order 1952. There is no rationale presented for this proposal. Transferring this function from the Minister for foreign affairs to the Minister for Transport would represent a major policy change from the current process, which has been in place for more than 70 years.

Section 1 of the Bill would further amend the 1946 Act to provide that all state aircraft seeking to overfly or land in the State with the express permission of the Minister for Transport "shall comply with such stipulations as the Minister may make in relation to such aircraft." A provision of this nature is already provided for in Article 4 of the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order 1952, which provides that all state aircraft will comply with such stipulations as the Minister for foreign affairs may make in relation to the aircraft.

As the Government has made clear on many previous occasions, diplomatic clearance granted to foreign military or state aircraft to overfly or land in the State is subject to strict conditions. This includes that the aircraft is unarmed; it carries no arms, ammunition or explosives; it does not engage in intelligence gathering; and the flight in question does not form part of a military exercise or operation. This policy of diplomatic clearance is well known and is fully understood by the United States and other international partners. It is done in full compliance with Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality.

Section 1 of the Bill provides that "it shall be an express stipulation of any ... permission" for overflight or landing of state aircraft that "human rights and equality would be upheld aboard that aircraft" and that "all persons aboard that aircraft will be treated with fairness, dignity and respect". It is not clear how these proposals could be monitored, implemented or enforced, particularly in relation to aircraft which are overflying the State. In relation to state aircraft landing in the State, the rule of sovereign immunity would preclude the possibility of inspection or other enforcement action.

Section 1(6)(a) of the Bill proposes to define "human rights" as "the rights, liberties and freedoms conferred on, or guaranteed to, persons by the Constitution". It is not clear how constitutional protections could be applied to non-citizens, particularly on aircraft either overflying or landing in the State. Section 1(6)(b) further defines "human rights" as "the rights liberties or freedoms conferred on, or guaranteed to, persons by any agreement, treaty or convention to which the State is a party and which has been given the force of law in the State". This provision invites further uncertainty as it is not clear how this would apply or how it would be enforced in respect of an aircraft registered in a state that is not party to these international agreements, treaties or conventions.

The Government's position on the inspection of military aircraft has been very clear: foreign state or military aircraft which are given permission to land in Ireland are not subject to inspection or other enforcement measures. Sovereign immunity, a long-standing principle of customary international law, means a state may not exercise its jurisdiction in respect of another state or its property, including state or military aircraft. This principle applies automatically to foreign state or military aircraft in the same way as it applies to Irish state or military aircraft abroad. It should be noted that civil aircraft chartered by governments remain civil aircraft and will therefore fall outside the definition of "state aircraft" under the Air Navigation and Transport Acts. This means that the specific provisions contained in the Bill related to human rights would not apply to these aircraft operations.

The Convention on International Civil Aviation provides for the rights of air operators of contracting parties to operate non-scheduled flights and stop for non-traffic purposes, such as refuelling, in the territory of another contracting party without prior authorisation. Private and commercial charter flights making technical stops for non-traffic purposes and not picking up or setting down passengers fall into this non-scheduled category.

Additional implementation challenges relate to the introduction of inspections of any aircraft in or over the State to ensure compliance with the entire suite of the Air Navigation and Transport Acts and any orders that are made under those Acts. Orders captured under the proposed Bill would include those in relation to the carriage of munitions of war, currently implemented by the Department of Transport. Under the Air Navigation (Carriage of Munitions of War, Weapons and Dangerous Goods) Orders 1973 and 1989, the carriage of munitions of war is prohibited on any civil aircraft in Irish sovereign territory and onboard any Irish-registered civil aircraft, wherever they may be operating, unless an exemption is granted by the Minister for Transport. Each year, the Department of Transport issues exemptions to air operators to permit the carriage of munitions of war in Irish sovereign territory. The operators that receive these broadly fall within one of two categories. The first relates to Irish-registered civil aircraft operating outside of Ireland and typically carrying small numbers of armed police or military personnel between locations in the EU, mainly on regularly scheduled flights between locations in Scandinavia. The second category relates to US registered civil aircraft specifically chartered by the US military for the purpose of moving its personnel between the US and locations overseas. These flights do not carry ammunition but may carry the personally issued weapons of the military personnel.

Article 8 of the Air Navigation (Carriage of Munitions of War, Weapons and Dangerous Goods) Orders 1973 and 1989 already empower the Minister for Transport to enter and inspect a civil aircraft seeking to depart from a location in the State where there is an appearance of intention or likelihood of contravention. The Bill before the House does not explain how an inspection of an aircraft flying over the State could be facilitated. We know that directing an aircraft in transit to land for inspection raises complex issues relating to flight safety and international aviation law. In providing for a new and distinct inspection regime, the Bill does not appear to have taken account of existing legislation provisions in relation to the functions or powers of authorised officers. It risks duplicating measures that are already in place. Consideration has not been given to the fact that some responsibility for the implementation of the Chicago Convention and its associated annexes has been conferred on the Irish Aviation Authority through the Air Navigation and Transport Acts. The broad approach adopted in this Bill would inadvertently extend ministerial functions into areas which are no longer within the Minister's statutory remit.

While the Bill seeks to impose explicit penalties for those who do not comply with its provision on the inspection of aircraft, it has not assessed the potential legal and financial ramifications for the State of operating the inspection regime. It is not clear if the proposed inspection regime would apply to state aircraft, including military aircraft. However, as already mentioned, the rule of sovereign immunity would preclude the possibility of inspection or other enforcement actions in relation to state aircraft.

In conclusion, there are fundamental issues with the scope, implementation and enforcement of the Bill. The measures proposed would create onerous obligations on the State and on the air operators concerned. It is not clear how the proposed stipulations requiring the maintenance of human rights standards aboard state aircraft could be verified or enforced in practice. The provisions relating to the proposed inspection regime are incomplete. The potential application of the Bill to state aircraft, including military aircraft, is contrary to the principles of sovereign immunity. For these reasons, the Government is not in a position to support this Bill.

Fianna Fáil opposes this Bill at Second Stage. Ireland has a well-established procedure in place for the diplomatic clearance of the overflight and landing of state aircraft. This diplomatic clearance is subject to strict conditions with full respect to Ireland's policy of military neutrality. These conditions include that the aircraft must be unarmed and carry no arms, ammunition or explosives. The aircraft must not engage in intelligence gathering and the flight in question must not form part of military exercises or operations. These requirements are well understood by all parties and our partners, including the United States.

The Bill is very far reaching. There is an extensive suite of aviation law which could potentially be impacted, but it has not been appropriately considered. The Minister of State outlined the Government position very carefully. I listened to all speakers so far very carefully. I understand the sentiment and place this is coming from. I sympathise with the position but I heard a lot of hyperbole from the proposer and seconder. The allegations of the contravention of law and the carriage of munitions of war on civil aircraft began in August 2024 following some media reports. The Department of Transport has begun examining these allegations in detail. I believe a report to the Minister for Transport will be prepared and presented once these allegations have been examined. We should wait to see that. I know the Minister will very much protect our neutral status as a country. This position that the Government is taking is right and appropriate.

I acknowledge Members across the floor for putting forward this Bill. I know it is very well intentioned. I do not want to sound patronising but obviously, I support the Minister of State and the Government in terms of the practical reality of its implementation. From the Fine Gael side of the House, we will not be supporting the Bill. We see what is happening before our eyes and especially over the past number of years, it has been absolutely devastating. However, in the practical reality of implementing this legislation, it is not possible.

The Minister of State is welcome to the House. Fáilte isteach. I commend Senator Stephenson and the Cross-Party Group on bringing forward this Bill. I am disappointed with the position that the Government has taken. I know that the Minister of State is not the line Minister, and that he is here to read out the Government's position, so I do not mean any personal slight to him whatsoever. I know him to be a person of the highest integrity. Like me, as a family man, I know the Minister of State is as horrified as we are by what is transiting through our airspace.

I want to give a little bit of context. Are weapons of war being brought through Shannon Airport for use in the Middle East and elsewhere? They are. In 2005, as The Irish Times' security analyst, I got the opportunity to interview US troops in Shannon and, as I have said here previously, journalists do not get permission to do that from Shannon Airport. They get it from the US State Department. It has a permanent military liaison officer in Shannon. At the time I was there, he was at the rank of lieutenant colonel. I have his mobile phone number if the Minister of State wants to call him or her and ask them what they are doing here.

One of the civilian aircraft that is chartered by the United States Government from airlines like Omni Air International and others landed while I was there, and I asked if could go on board and see the troops arriving in Shannon. When the door opened, I went up the steps with a photographer from The Irish Times and went in. The aircraft was full of weapons. In fact, the cabin crew said welcome to Shannon and asked people to please leave smaller weapons in the overhead bin and larger weapons under the seat in front of them and to please not carry weapons or ammunition into Shannon Airport duty free. That was in the newspaper. It was published in The Irish Times. It is free to download. People do not need to have a subscription to The Irish Times. If people put in "Tom Clonan", "Shannon", "weapons" and "Irish Times", they will get the full article. Let me be clear, weapons do transit through Shannon on aircraft that do not have sovereign immunity, and which can be searched, but for the fact there is an unwillingness to do so on the part of the Government and its agencies.

Further to that, I was subpoenaed to the trial of Mick Wallace and Clare Daly in Ennis District Court after they breached the airport boundary, and I gave evidence to the effect that there are weapons on board and that evidence was accepted by the judge. For anybody here who suggests that this is an overstatement or hearsay, I can tell them that I have seen it.

The other issue I have is not just what is on the ground but what is passing through our airspace. There has been a huge increase in the volume of US military air traffic through our controlled airspace since 7 October 2023 and in the past few years the Irish taxpayer has paid over €10 million to AirNav Ireland to pay for the onward transit of these aircraft to the Middle East which are ferrying munitions to Israel. Imagine, the Irish taxpayer is making a material contribution of over €10 million to send cluster munitions and other weapons to be used in Lebanon as part of the ethnic cleansing south of the Litani river. Those weapons are being used in proximity to Irish troops. The Guardian reported that cluster munitions have been found in the little villages and wadis around the Irish positions. What other country would ask its taxpayer to make a financial contribution to weapons fired at its own troops, that is, our young men and women out there; the best of us?

At the moment, the United States provides 78% of all Israeli weapons and munitions and since 7 October 2023, there has been a spike in that delivery of up to $12 billion per year. Where does it transit through? It goes by rapid response airlift through our airspace, and we are paying under EUROCONTROL the navigation charges for those things.

If this Bill is progressed and enacted, we could at least purge ourselves of the moral responsibility for the slaughter of innocent Lebanese civilians. Again, people may talk about hearsay, I have witnessed this. I know there are some people in Government who do not like people speaking to their lived experience but, how and ever, I shall continue to do so. High explosives cause limb separation, decapitation, the pulping of internal organs and the shattering of bones of small children and elderly people. That is not hyperbole. That is the reality on the ground. If someone sees it, they will never forget it. When I turn on the Flightradar24 app on my phone and look at the air traffic corridor over us, I am conscious that those weapons are passing through our airspace with our consent and us making a financial contribution to it and that is completely at odds with our neutral status.

At a recent session in this Chamber, the Minister of State had a great argument. He said, "No, they do not", and I had to point out to him that he is completely and utterly out of depth. As for the situational awareness on the part of this Government in relation to the Middle East and the export of alumina to Russia, I am going to say that it is unwilling to acknowledge it, as opposed to unable to, but I ask the Government to think about this, reflect on it and please support this Bill.

Sinn Féin fully supports this Bill. I thank Senator Patricia Stephenson for bringing it forward. It is a Bill that is important, timely and something that is long overdue. As Senator Stephenson said, the OPLA has indicated that it is legally sound, so if there were issues, the Government could work through them on Committee Stage. Consequently, it is disappointing that it is not being accepted.

Senators Higgins and Black and the other members of the Civil Engagement Group should also be commended on their important recent legislation in this area, which the Government unfortunately chose to oppose in this House back in April.

This Bill is an opportunity for the Government to correct that mistake and to finally take some action to ensure that our airspace in not being used to enable war, genocide and human rights abuses. It is frankly a complete disgrace that this Government has allowed our airspace to be used to facilitate Israel's genocide in Gaza, as well as America's escalating wars in the Middle East. That is a well-known fact at this point, although Ministers love to gaslight the Opposition. In many ways, it is like listening to Trump because the Government says one thing but the reality, which everyone knows, is the opposite.

Shannon Airport is a key logistical cog in America's military machine and is clearly central to its support for Israel's genocide and its own illegal attacks on Iran. The Government appears to have a policy of giving the United States a blank cheque when it comes our airspace and Shannon Airport.

The Government also seems to have a policy in giving a blank cheque to Israel because it is failing to hold Israel to account. It is failing to ensure that there are any consequences and is failing to ensure that international law and human rights are upheld. The sanctions that have been put in place on the International Criminal Court's members, judges and prosecutors are not being challenged by the Government. At that same time, the Government is welcoming the game against Israel, which faces no consequences for the genocide, killing and destruction of so many Palestinian families.

This Government lets them do what they like and we do not ask any inconvenient questions. While it is illegal for civil aircraft to transport arms through Ireland or for foreign military to use our airspace without prior permission from the Government, what is the point of these rules when America and the arms industry are automatically allowed to bypass them?

The 2026 statistics available from the Department of Transport's records show that every application for commercial aircraft to transport arms through Ireland was approved by the Minister. Likewise, the Department of foreign affairs' statistics from this year show that not a single application for American military aircraft to transit through Ireland was refused.

What is worse than this automatic American exemption is that the State clearly makes no effort to enforce the prohibition on arms transiting our airspace in civilian aircraft. On paper, foreign military aircraft cannot carry any sort of weaponry through our airspace, while civilian aircraft can only do so under strict criteria. As has been thoroughly documented, although the Government continues to deny it, these basic rules are not being followed. The Government holds up its hands and tells the public and Members of the Oireachtas that it is not aware of these rules being broken. It is not aware for one simple reason: it does not want to know. Astoundingly, it does not carry out any weapons inspection on civilian aircraft and closes its eyes to clear breaches by the US military. The State puts its head in the sand, as it were, lets the US military treat Shannon Airport as its own territory and lets commercial aircraft operate without any substantive obligation to abide by Irish law.

The Government says it cannot inspect foreign military aircraft due to diplomatic protocols and has no power to ensure they abide by the law. In that case, the State should not allow these aircraft into the country if there is a clear likelihood they will not abide by our laws or are supporting military operations that are illegal and immoral. The State should follow the example set by Switzerland and Spain in not allowing the use of airspace and airports by the US military to facilitate or support its illegal war against Iran. It should be refusing any request for the transit of weapons or military aircraft with a destination in Israel.

With regard to commercial flights, the Government claims it does not have the legislative authority to inspect aircraft and ensure they are not carrying armaments without proper approvals. There are many known instances of commercial aircraft transporting weapons or weaponry components through our airspace without exemptions. Senator Clonan has documented that. This legislation would require the Government to finally take action to prevent these clear breaches.

We have a responsibility to assert our sovereignty and neutrality but we also need to stand up to the Trump and Netanyahu regimes and their attacks on human rights and international law. The Government has failed to do that. It has failed to stand up to Trump, it has failed to stand up to Netanyahu and it has failed to stand up for international law.

I welcome Jody Blake, former Clerk Assistant of the Seanad. It is good to see her and other members of staff who served in Leinster House over the years. They are most welcome to Seanad Éireann. Jody is rightly in the Distinguished Visitors Gallery. I thank her for all her work for the Seanad down through the years.

The Minister of State is welcome to the House. This Bill purports to offer clarity, control and enhanced protection within our aviation system. Such aims are both necessary and commendable. However, it is incumbent on us as legislators to look beyond the language and intent and to scrutinise the substance of what is proposed. On that basis, I contend that the Bill is, in its current form, populist in concept and unworkable in practice.

At its core, the Bill reduces highly complex international integrated systems into a series of overlaid, simplified measures. Aviation is not a policy domain that operates in isolation; it is governed by rigorous international standards, co-operative regulatory frameworks and technical precision. Any attempt to impose sweeping unilateral changes without full alignment with these structures risks significant operational and legal consequences. The Bill places considerable emphasis on decisive national action. However, decisiveness alone does not equate to effectiveness. By prioritising immediate political appeal over careful policy design, the legislation introduces provisions that may conflict with established international obligations and practices. This creates uncertainty for airlines, regulators and international partners – uncertainty that could disrupt operations, increase costs and undermine confidence in our aviation sector.

Serious concerns arise in relation to feasibility and implementation. The Bill purports to expand oversight and enforcement responsibilities, yet it is notably silent on practical means by which these responsibilities are to be discharged. I will make an analogy. We could introduce a traffic law and provide no gardaí to enforce it. What do you do? It means absolutely nothing. There are no clear provisions for the resources, staffing or institutional capacity required to give effect to these measures. Legislative ambition without corresponding operational support inevitably results in provisions that are ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. The imbalance places an undue burden on regulatory authorities which are already tasked with maintaining the highest standards of safety in a demanding and complex environment. To extend their obligations without equipping them adequately risks diluting rather than strengthening the effectiveness of oversight.

The potential economic implications cannot be overlooked. Aviation is a vital component of national connectivity, trade and tourism. Any policy framework that introduces regulatory uncertainty or operational friction has consequences that expand far beyond the sector itself. The cumulative effect may be to weaken rather than reinforce a strategically important industry.

There is also a broader institutional concern. The enactment of legislation that cannot effectively be implemented risks eroding public and stakeholder confidence in the legislative process. That is an important point. If you cannot effectively implement the legislation, what is the purpose behind it? What are we doing? Laws must not only be well intentioned, they must also be credible and enforceable.

The issues this Bill seeks to address are legitimate in every way and I commend those who put it together. Safety, accountability and the protection of national interests are matters of importance. However, these objectives cannot be achieved through measures that prioritise visibility over viability. A more appropriate approach would involve thorough consultation with industry experts, close alignment with international regulatory frameworks and a clearly articulated resource implementation strategy. Effective legislation in this domain must be grounded in technical expertise and operational realism. In its present form, the Bill falls short of those standards. It offers the appearance of decisive action but lacks the structural integrity required to deliver meaningful outcomes.

For these reasons, I cannot support the Bill as currently drafted. I urge that it be reconsidered and substantially revised to ensure any legislative changes are practical and effective and that they serve the long-term interests of our aviation system and the public it supports. There are two clear issues that have to be looked at here. One is the Vienna Convention and the other is our obligations under the United Nations. I humbly suggest my colleagues go back and look at the obligations under both of those. I thank Members for their time and regret not being able to support this. There is talk of genocide, etc., taking place in the world. If we cannot see what is up there or intercept what is travelling through our airspace, then we are merely providing wallpaper to cover a crack. That is not the way to do legislation.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I thank Senator Stephenson for raising this and I am proud to be a member of our Cross-Party Group. We are using our Private Members' time for this vital Bill. I also give credit to the Civil Engagement Group and Senators Higgins and Black, who have done a lot of work in this area and have brought forward similar legislation.

The Bill will introduce a random inspection and enforcement regime for state flights through Irish airspace and landing in Irish airports. Contrary to what Senator Craughwell said, the OPLA has deemed it legally sound. It is deeply disappointing that the Government is indicating it will not support the Bill. I wish I could say I was surprised but I am not. For years we have come into this Chamber and debated again and again the systematic undermining of our neutrality by US military flights over our airspace or landing in our airports. The Government response again and again has been a stubborn refusal to even recognise the problem, let alone address it. Week on week, we see new reporting that the scale and scope of these military flights is rising. Again, the Government's response is to close its ears, as it were, and pretend there is no problem.

No matter the circumstances, the refusal to implement a proper inspection regime or to take action on unsanctioned weapons flights is a betrayal. No matter what way it is dressed up, it is a betrayal of Irish neutrality. That is true at the best of times, but when those flights are in active support of a brutal and genocidal war in the Middle East, it becomes a deep moral failure on the part of our State. According to data collected by the military plane tracker Shannonwatch, at least 1,300 U.S. military and military-contracted civilian aircraft flew within 37 miles of Shannon Airport between January 2024 and March 2026, including at least 45 flights that travelled to or from Israel.

We know that in October the Government granted an exemption for an Omni Air International flight chartered by the US military to carry arms to the Israeli military. It was the first time in almost 20 years that a Government had openly acknowledged authorising the transfer of weapons through Shannon to Israel. This came two years into a genocide. This Government has utterly failed to deliver on the clear call from the Irish people to take real action and to stand with the people of Palestine against the brutal onslaught they have been subjected to. Ministers will point out that ultimately symbolic actions like the recognition of the State of Palestine, which I commend, will show that they are listening to the clear calls from the Irish people. However, time after time, when it comes to taking a really firm stand, the Government shirks that responsibility. Think of all the abject failures we have seen already this week. There was the failure to include services in the occupied territories Bill and a failure to take any action towards a boycott of the Ireland-Israel football match. This is something we can do. The passage of weapons through Ireland to Israel is the clearest illustration of the utter failure of the Government to match rhetoric with any meaningful action. It is a cut-and-dried case of Irish complicity in Israeli crimes. This is shameful and demands action.

I thank Senator Stephenson and the civil society groups she has worked with for bringing this Bill forward. It is not overly complicated. By introducing a proper, enforceable, random inspection regime, it would make it crystal clear that Ireland would no longer stand idly by while military and weapons flights flout our rules and undermine our neutrality. Crucially, it would also take action on the shameful use of Shannon for ICE deportation flights, which have been outlined here by Senators Stephenson and Andrews. We have seen the reports of this recently. These customs flights would be required to abide by human rights law and seek exemptions before landing in Shannon. According to data gathered by ICE flight monitors, five ICE flights using leased US civilian aircraft passed through Shannon conducting removal operations between May 2025 and February 2026. These ICE flights included third-country removals where individuals are forcibly taken to countries to which they have no connection. Imagine any of us being pushed into that situation. We can no longer be complicit in these flights or the military flights that are undermining our neutrality and adding fuel to the fire of the illegal wars in the Middle East. We have lagged behind other European countries on tackling the arms supply to Israel. Slovenia, Spain and France have all brought forward restrictions or embargoes and it is long past time that we played our part. For a long time, Labour has called for a complete ban on the use of Irish airspace and airports for the transport of weapons of war. This is a principled position that we root in our commitment to peace, neutrality and international law. This is why we are very proud to support this Bill and I urge colleagues across the House to do the same. This is a very tangible step that we can and should do. The Minister of State is a Gaeilgeoir. We as a country experienced genocide ourselves. Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireann na daoine. We know that we are living in each other's shadows in this world. There is only one world and this is something that we can do.

In the boarding school that I went to as a teenager, the favourite book for last study was an atlas. It was so favoured because underneath it you could hide your war comic. The people who read war comics as teenagers ended up in later life being aircraft geeks. As an aircraft geek living in Tramore, I can now recognise the distinctive drone of a C-130 as it goes across in the early hours of the morning, usually under cover of darkness. I immediately go to my phone and look at the Flightradar24 app, and I find that the C-130 has come from either Bangor in Maine or Halifax in Nova Scotia and is heading for Brise Norton in Oxfordshire, I think, or Germany, or going on to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus. The stealth of those planes and their frequency since 7 October leads me to surmise that they are carrying probably the most offensive weapons in existence. Like everybody here, I am not happy about the fact that they are going through our airspace.

We hear a lot of mention about how it compromises our neutrality and the rest. For the past 15 or so years, I have been thinking about this long and hard and I came to the conclusion a few years back, mainly since the second invasion of Ukraine, that our concept of neutrality was long redundant. It does not suit the state of affairs in the world because our life in what is generically called the West is under threat from bad actors in the world that we all know too much of. We have to wise up to the fact that our society and values are being eaten away by bad actors in the world. We have to wise up to our responsibilities as members of the European Union. We have to begin to look towards a contribution to defence and towards the idea of not piggybacking on other people's defence statements.

The Government has great challenges from the pragmatic point of view because we are dealing with a time when we have a very tenuous and unpredictable regime in the United States. Whether we like it or not, we are inextricably and economically bound up with the United States and its economy, its goodwill and all of the things that go along with that. This idea that we should be adhering to neutrality was fine 80 or 90 years ago when Mr. de Valera was taking on Mr. Churchill on the airwaves and all that entailed. I have said this here time and again: it does not go down awfully well but the idea of adhering to a policy of neutrality is strategically myopic and is not fit for purpose in this day and age. Whether we like it or not, these flights are going to continue, be they going outside Irish airspace or not. Tramore is on the extreme south coast. It will not take a great reconfiguration of the navigation lanes for those planes to go outside and down off the south coast. It would only be a matter of ten minutes of a divergence.

I can understand how well-intentioned this Bill is and I can understand the awful slaying that is going on in the Middle East at the moment. None of us can countenance that. However, there comes a time when we have to look at the bigger question, which is that we have to maintain in this country and in Europe the values that are dear to us. There will come a time when we have to make difficult choices. We will have to align with people that it would have been foreign for us to do so in times past. I would love to be in a position to support Senator Stephenson's Bill and all that it stands for because it is so humanely intentioned. It is so cogent in its appeal for the defence of the defenceless in the Middle East. However, I am speaking as an Irishman who does not believe in neutrality and who does believe in standing up for ourselves. As I often remind the House, I am in my eight decade. I have seen a lot going on and I know that the time is fast coming when we are going to have to stand up for ourselves.

That means joining an alliance and playing our cognisant part in that alliance. It is going to cost, and it is going to call for us to make a seismic shift in our strategic thinking over the coming ten years.

We have joined alliances. They have included the United Nations and include the international system of international law, to which we have signed up. There are difficult choices. The brave choice is not about who we get behind and what compromises we make. War is not comics. With great respect for the good intentions of all who speak, war and weapons kill. The tools of war, when transited, are engaged in death. The death being dealt by the weapons that have passed through our airspace has been in breach of international law and of the greatest alignments and commitments we have made to play our part in the world, which is to be part of that structure of international law. Those core points and the idea that you do not use aggression are the four we heard from the ICC judges who were here this week. You do not destroy self-determination or engage in crimes of aggression. There is a morality in war. You do not kill civilians and children. You do not target children. The weapons and military equipment that have been used and have travelled through our airspace to Israel have broken all of those laws. The difficult choice, which I do not think should be difficult if you have a conscience, is to say we are brave enough to stand up for ourselves and to say we do not want to be complicit in war crimes. We do not accept being part of war crimes. The difficult choice is to be willing to ask if we can inspect this plane. There is this idea that we will step up. Again, I say this with absolute respect to those who speak, but when we talk about things we need to be clear.

What is not happening right now and where Ireland is failing in courage, while people have this idea we will be part of these armies and save European values, is that we do not even have the courage to stand up to look at the planes and inspect them. We have an eyes wide shut approach that has been there for decades including through the illegal Iraq war. It has been there and it continues to be there. We do not look at what is in the planes. We have powers. I have been through three iterations. I had my own arms embargo Bill before this. The Bill being brought through now by Senator Stephenson is incredibly important, but the previous Bills were the same principle. We have heard different lines from Ministers. We heard the then Minister, Eamon Ryan, tell us he needed new random inspection powers. That is being offered here. We had the current Minister, Darragh O'Brien, say he is going to use the existing powers. Two years on from that and there have been zero inspections. They have powers they are not using. My Bill was trying to tell them to use the powers they already have. There are powers we are told would be needed to do random inspections. These are being provided by the Bill. I have details of how it works. They are very clear powers to allow a regime of random inspections to take place.

There is an argument put in that asks if we have to fly alongside the planes and stop them in mid-air, as if that is what is being asked for. No, the measure is simply that there is legitimate information like a manifest when they pack the plane in Halifax or wherever. When they pack the plane with weapons there is a manifest that says there are weapons in the plane, and it is on its way to wherever it is on its way to. Those are the grounds. If that plane has not even had the decency in some cases to seek an exemption, because they have such disregard for our laws, the Minister should be able to say we are concerned about what we have been told is in the flight, and as they did not seek an exemption, we would like them to land for inspection. You do not have to drag them from the sky. However, by making that request for compliance and them breaching that request if they continue on and do not land, then you already have a breach. These are not shadowy vehicles. They are Lufthansa and FedEx. They are real companies. Those real companies that in many cases have headquarters in Ireland can be fined. We then enter a world of consequences. This is the minimum for breaching our laws and refusing to bother even asking for an exemption. That leaves aside the fact that in my legislation I was looking to prohibit exemptions in certain circumstances. Senator Stephenson's Bill does not go that far. She is literally just asking to inspect the planes. She is presenting the tool the Government said is needed to inspect the planes and saying to inspect the planes. There is no justification for turning our eyes away again and refusing to step up to it.

It does matter because our neutrality is our strength in the world because part of it is that we are credible actors. The fact is that lots of countries have brought in arms embargoes. Spain has brought it in. Slovenia has brought it in. This is not some impossible thing. The Government can limit the transit of weapons, but at minimum let us begin by looking honestly and directly. I urge that the Minister of State will not just say why he is or is not supporting this Bill, but that he will tell us what the Government is going to do about the flights and the illegal transit of arms through our airspace. What is the Government's plan? Is it to work with Senator Stephenson or does it have a new plan? We have been waiting years.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill, and I thank Senator Stephenson for bringing it to the House. I support and agree with this Bill. It is sensible legislation that addresses a clear gap in our law. It is not radical or complicated. All it states is that if Ireland has rules governing what can pass through our airspace, then we should have the means to enforce those rules. At the moment, this is not the case. The law requires permissions for weapons of war to be carried through Irish airports or Irish airspace, but we have repeatedly heard that there is no proper inspection regime and limited ability to act when those rules are breached. That leaves us in the absurd position where we have laws without meaningful enforcement. Passing this Bill would give gardaí powers to inspect aircraft, would introduce penalties for breaches and allow for random inspections so that compliance can be verified rather than simply assumed. It also addresses concerns about state-operated flights from the US, including deportation flights. We need to ensure that Ireland is not inadvertently facilitating actions that may run contrary to international humanitarian or human rights law. If our airports or airspace are being used in this way, that raises serious legal or ethical questions. Surely we should have the power to find out.

I think most of us are in agreement that Irish sovereignty should mean something. The laws passed by these Houses have to be enforced by the State. If they cannot be enforced then there is no point to the legislation at all. A recent poll in The Irish Times showed that 71% of people believe a guarantee of Ireland's neutrality should be added to the Constitution. People want our neutrality to govern how we interact with global conflicts. They want more than just lip service paid to the concept of neutrality. If we claim to be neutral but turn a blind eye to what passes through our airspace and airports then we allow neutrality to be nothing more than a label. In the past two and a half years, tens of thousands of children in Gaza and the West Bank have been killed. Their lives have been treated as completely disposable. Only last Friday, seven-month-old Sam Fahd Abu Haikal died in his mother's arms after being shot dead by the IDF. He is not just a casualty of war. That family has lost their little boy. I know the majority of Irish people want no complicity in that kind of violence.

None of us can say with certainty where every bullet or round of ammunition originated but we should ask ourselves whether we are content to operate a system where aircraft pass through or over Ireland carrying military cargo with no prospect of inspection. Is that really the standard we want to set? Is it what the Irish people expect when they talk about neutrality? Investigative reporting has repeatedly raised concerns about commercial flights carrying ammunition and other military-related cargo over Irish territory. If there are no investigative powers and no penalties for these airlines, they will continue to breach Irish and international law.

This debate comes at a time when the Government is proposing major changes to Ireland's approach to neutrality through the removal of the triple lock. This would be a disastrous mistake. Poll after poll has shown that neutrality has enduring support among the Irish public and is, in fact, a key part of how people understand Ireland's place in the world. The majority do not wish to see the triple lock removed. If the Government is so sure of its mandate, it should put it to the people. Moving Ireland away from our long-standing history of neutrality should require a referendum. The only reason the Government will not call a referendum is that it knows, as do we, that the removal of the triple lock would be voted down. It is concerning that the Government would push ahead with this knowing that it does not have the support of the Irish public. Fianna Fáil has abandoned its roots and given in to Fine Gael's desire to be militarily aligned in Europe.

As I see it, this Bill is about consistency. If we value neutrality, we should enforce the laws that protect it. If we value sovereignty, we should ensure our authorities have the powers to uphold it. I once again thank Senator Stephenson for bringing forward this Bill. I hope the Government changes its mind and supports the Bill. I also note that the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, is once again missing in action. This shows the amount of respect he has for the people and for this House.

That is unfair. That is not fair to him. That is cheap.

I ask the Senator to withdraw that comment. It is not a fair comment and does not reflect reality.

It is not fair.

The Minister of State will have 15 minutes to respond.

I just requested the Acting Chairperson to ask the Senator to withdraw her comment in relation to the Minister, Deputy O'Brien.

A request has been made.

I said nothing wrong.

Ministers from the Department of Transport are here regularly. I am here regularly as a Minister of State at the Department.

This is not about Deputy Buttimer.

The Department is represented here.

It is about the Minister, who very rarely stands in this House. He has been requested to stand in this House but has not. It is not about Deputy Buttimer. What I have said is factual. It is not insulting to anybody.

He has been in the House.

It is factual and I will not withdraw anything. It is happening again. This Bill deserves a response from the line Minister.

I point out that we have had two Ministers at the Department of Transport here this evening to represent the Government. They deserve respect for their office and for their work. They regularly show up here, as does the Minister, Deputy O'Brien. I think the Senator has some sort of personal vendetta against the Minister. It is unfair. I note that the Senator is not going to withdraw her statement but, to be honest, I think it is really shoddy behaviour. I will leave it there.

The Minister of State who was here before Deputy Buttimer said that it was too expensive to do this and to enforce our own rules. I believe he also used the term "onerous", which is extraordinary language to use when we are talking about enforcing our own rules. All we are asking for is an inspection regime. There seems to be some sort of vast misunderstanding on the other side of the House as to what the Bill actually does. People kept talking about military flights. This Bill actually does not deal with military flights in any way. This is about the inspection of civilian aircraft that are carrying weapons. It seems to be suggested that weapons are not actually being carried through Ireland. That is absolutely factually incorrect. I noted a comment that the Department's investigation has been ongoing since 2024. That is fantastic. It has been going on for two years. When will this investigation land on our tables? When will we know that the Department actually knows what is going on? Someone else said that we cannot direct planes but, of course, I never said we should. Senator Higgins was very clear on the purpose of this Bill. If a plane does not land, the company can be fined. We know about these planes from the manifests. It is not secret. I have listed them all out before. There was an assertion that this could not be effectively implemented. As I have said, this is a very implementable Bill, unless we do not believe in the Office of Parliamentary Legal Advisers and think it is not up to scratch. I do not believe any of us in this Chamber would agree with that.

On the grounds for opposing the Bill, I personally do not see an issue with the transfer of ministerial responsibilities. It happens all of the time. Frankly, I do not care which Minister provides the exemptions. My primary focus and the sole focus and purpose of this legislation is to implement tighter controls in respect of the inspection of aircraft. I am not remotely tied to any vehicle or mechanism or to a particular person exempting state aircraft. What I care about is making it more difficult for ICE deportation flights to stop over in Ireland and stopping the illegal transportation of weapons. I therefore feel a bit frustrated. It is a bit pathetic of the Government to oppose the Bill on this ground because it knows that this could have been worked through as part of the legislative process, including on Committee Stage. However, the Government is unwilling to do so.

The Government is not serious when it comes to this issue. It is not seriously willing to engage. I have been told that I am well intentioned. I am, but I also see a serious legislative gap in this area. It is a serious issue. Our own rules are being breached. As I said before, I did not create the rules. They were created by the people who sat in these Houses before us. Instead of offering any solutions to this problem, the ongoing egregious breach of our own sovereign rules, the Government is just saying that this Bill will not work. It is not willing to commit. I have demonstrated an openness to cross-party collaboration but the Government will not work with me on this. It did not do it with the previous Bill, the arms embargo Bill, either.

There were questions around enforcement issues and sovereign immunity. The Bill was drafted with sovereign immunity in mind. It seeks to push the policy objective as far as possible within what is permissible. This is why it is framed as an express stipulation as part of an invitation to fly or land. We have pushed sovereign immunity to its limits. We are requesting that state aircraft respect human rights. It is entirely directional. Should we not want to give that direction? Should we not want to tell aeroplanes that land that we would like them to respect human rights? Should that not be a basic requirement?

There was also an assertion that constitutional protections would not be applied to non-citizens. The legal advice I have received from the OPLA tells me that, if a person was subject to rendition in Ireland, a court would find that he or she had constitutional protections. I do not agree with the three points the Minister of State put forward as to why this Bill is not being allowed to move to the next Stage and amended to strengthen it.

The Bill is legally sound and implementable. There seems to be an absolute misunderstanding. I believe that may be on purpose and that there may be a wilful desire not to really and meaningfully engage with the detail of the Bill and the idea of the inspection regime, something that came out of a previous government. I did not pick this out of nowhere. It is bound in previous debates in the Dáil and in the Seanad. We know that weapons are being flown through Ireland. We know that weapons have been flown through Ireland on the way to Israel. We know that there are weapons being flown through Ireland for which exemptions have not been sought. That is breaking our own rules. I can only assume that the Government is happy with the status quo, does not find this egregious breach to be a problem and believes the fact that it undermines our neutrality to be perfectly okay. None of the statements today challenge that. None of the statements actually engage with the policy intent of the Bill. It was all about potential challenges to implementation, points I utterly disagree with. There was no meaningful engagement with the issue. Do we agree that we are breaching our neutrality by allowing these planes to fly through Ireland against our own rules? Do we agree that we are breaching our own sovereign independence by permitting this to happen without any exemptions in place? That is what is happening.

I am frustrated that there cannot be any opportunity for collaboration on this issue. This is something people really care about. It is not just me off doing my well-intentioned stuff. This is something that has meaning to the people of Ireland. I really cannot fathom why we would see Palestinians shackled in Shannon Airport and not try to put mechanisms in place to prevent that. I am deeply disappointed that the Government will not allow the Bill to progress to Committee Stage, where we could work together to amend it. I am serious about working across the floor on good legislation that addresses serious legislative gaps.