I would like to ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs to give us a report on his preparations for the upcoming consultative forum on international security policy. He might indicate whether he will advocate a change to the State's foreign policy. Will he make a statement on these matters?

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. The international security environment has changed significantly over the past year. We have seen Russia's blatant disregard for international law and for Europe's collective security architecture, bringing war to the Continent. Ireland's commitment to a rules-based international order and our traditional policy of military neutrality do not inure us from the need to respond to this new reality. Against this backdrop, I hope that the upcoming consultative forum on international security policy will build a deeper understanding of the international security environment and the policy options available to the State.

The forum takes place later this month, on 22 June, at University College Cork, on 23 June at University of Galway, and on 26 and 27 June at Dublin Castle. The four days will comprise a number of panel sessions involving a wide range of stakeholders, with participation from civilian and military experts and practitioners. Attendance will consist of members of the general public, alongside representative organisations and invited guests with expertise and practical experience in the areas to be discussed. In-person attendance by members of the public is being allocated on a first-come-first-served basis. All discussions will be livestreamed, so anyone interested in engaging with the process will be able to do so. A written consultation exercise is also being run in parallel, which allows submissions to be made until 7 July.

This forum will engage in a broad discussion, focusing on a range of foreign, security and defence policy issues, and will not focus solely on the binary issue of neutrality. It will look at Ireland's work to protect the rules-based international order through our engagement in peacekeeping and conflict prevention, as well as our response to threats in the cyber, hybrid and maritime domains. As I have said on several occasions, the Government is not prejudging the outcome of discussions at the forum. There are no predetermined outcomes and participants will be free to raise any relevant issues. The independent chair, Louise Richardson DBE, will produce a report to be delivered following the forum's conclusion. Once the chair's report has been submitted to me, I will consider its findings and decide whether to bring forward recommendations to here or to the Government. Information is available and can be found at www.gov.ie/consultativeforum .

A wide range of speakers, yes; a wide range of viewpoints, I do not think so. I have the speaker list here. Let us go through it. It includes Andrew Cottey, NATO research fellow, Chris Johnson, fellowship in the US Air Force, Caitríona Heinl, who has advised NATO, and Christian Bueger, who has worked for the US Department of State and trained members of the Singapore Navy. Singapore was a dictatorship the last time I checked. John O'Brennan has raised joining NATO. James Mackey is director of security policy and partnerships in NATO and has worked in NATO for 20 years. Commander Roberta O'Brien of the Irish Naval Service is currently on secondment to the NATO defence-capacity-building unit. I give the last word on the matter to economist Dan O'Brien, who stated: "I think we would be right to join NATO." They say that birds of a feather flock together. If that is the case, it would seem to me that many hawks are flying into Cork, Galway and Dublin over the next couple of weeks. How can the Tánaiste say that this is anything other than a pro-NATO jamboree?

That was a disgraceful presentation. The Deputy mentioned Andrew Cottey. He is the holder of the Jean Monnet chair at UCC. The Deputy should not name people and try to undermine them in the way he has just done. That is shocking intolerance of the whole idea of debate. Why is the Deputy so opposed to people with different perspectives coming together in a framework to have discussions?

Because I do not think the perspectives are very different.

In this House, there are different perspectives on all sorts of issues. It seems as if the Deputy is saying that if someone holds a particular position, he or she should not even be in the House. Deputy Berry might have a particular view on a range of issues which differs from that of Deputy Barry, but Deputy Barry seems to have an approach of complete intolerance when it comes to Deputy Berry's right to speak. I am sorry for dragging Deputy Berry into it, but that is my point. Deputy Barry did not mention Roger Cole or others with perhaps different perspectives who will also be speaking at this forum, nor did he refer to people who might have different perspectives generally.

Give me a few more names.

The Deputy has the names.There are quite a number of them. He picked five or six. He has been unfair to those individuals too. His intolerance of debate and his attempt to try to undermine people by attacking them as opposed to the commenting on issues is reprehensible. I have no time for this; it is outrageous carry-on.

The Tánaiste can rant and rave all he likes. The point is this. He mentioned Roger Cole, who is with the Peace and Neutrality Alliance. A representative of one NGO has been chosen to speak. I challenge the Tánaiste to name one, two or three people from the long list he has in front of him who will present an alternative point of view in a broad sense.

Alternative to what?

Alternative to the agenda that the Tánaiste is promoting of militarisation, increased military co-operation, and edging the society towards closer co-operation with NATO. The list of names the Tánaiste spoke of is more groupthink than a debate in Irish society or a real forum. He has picked the judge, jury and overwhelmingly pro-NATO witnesses. It would seem that members of the public have the right to ask questions but not really to speak, address and engage at the forum. I will conclude by saying that I welcome the fact that the Cork Neutrality League will be protesting outside the first meeting at UCC next Thursday. I wish it well, as I do those who will be protesting in Galway and Dublin. Their voice needs to be heard. It is the voice of those who oppose military alliances.

Our position on military neutrality is very clear. It is not changing, even in the context of this conference. There is no predetermined outcome. Is the Deputy saying that Professor Gary Murphy is problematic? I can go through the full list. It is not fair to single out any individual. These are people who have achieved academic positions in various institutions. I find the thought process behind the Deputy's approach most troubling. To a certain extent, it is more than just intolerant of the right to free speech and different perspectives. A plurality of views is needed when we are discussing issues, whether national or global.

The Tánaiste has not got them at this forum. Where are they?

The Deputy's perspective is one where if a person even has a hint of a view that is different to his, that person should not be given a platform.

Not at all.

The Deputy mentioned Dan O'Brien. Ireland is about free media, free speech and free rights to ideas and opinions. The Deputy seems to want to extinguish certain ideas before they even have a chance to get a platform. He does not even want to give platforms to people who might have an alternative view to his. That is extraordinary.

That is precisely what the Tánaiste has done with this biased and one-sided speaker list.

There is a very broad range of views. I challenge Deputy Barry on this. He is not going to get away with snuffing out debate by attacking people as opposed to dealing with the issue.