I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 10, inclusive, together.

On 24 February, I attended an online meeting of the coalition of the willing to mark the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The meeting was co-chaired by British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, and the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, and was joined also by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine, as well as other leaders, some of whom were attending commemoration events in Kyiv.

The meeting reaffirmed the coalition’s resolve to continue to support Ukraine until a peace agreement is achieved, including protecting and repairing its energy infrastructure, and through increasing pressure on Russia to encourage it to engage in meaningful negotiation through imposing further sanctions and disrupting its shadow fleet. The meeting was an opportunity to take stock of negotiations involving the US, Russia and Ukraine, and President Zelenskyy offered us Ukraine’s perspective on progress. During the meeting, we discussed how the coalition of the willing can support these efforts to secure peace, and how the coalition can ensure that Ukraine is in the strongest possible position in those talks. I conveyed Ireland’s strong commitment to supporting efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace and security for Ukraine, as I did directly to President Zelenskyy during his visit to Ireland last December. I also underlined Ireland’s consistent position that it is for the people and Government of Ukraine to determine their future and to agree to the terms of any peace agreement.

I reiterated Ireland’s strong support for Ukraine’s path towards EU membership and said that the accession negotiations should be accelerated, emphasising that EU membership is an important security guarantee for Ukraine and fulfils the objectives of the vast majority of the Ukrainian people. I joined other leaders in strongly condemning the continued attacks on civilians and critical energy infrastructure. These attacks have left millions without electricity during the harsh winter months and have forced Ukraine to declare a state of emergency in the energy sector. Over the past six months, Ireland has contributed €27 million to provide support for Ukraine’s critical energy infrastructure and to help alleviate the humanitarian crisis inflicted by Russia’s aggression. Ireland continues to consider opportunities to bolster Ukraine’s energy security. Work will continue within the coalition to ensure that, in the event of a peace agreement, Ukraine has the security guarantees it needs. Such measures would be in accordance with respective legal and constitutional arrangements of participating countries.

Ireland' s consistent position has been that it is for the Government and people of Ukraine to determine their future and to agree to the terms of any peace agreement. It is crucial that it is a just and lasting peace, respecting the principles of the UN Charter. The fundamental principle that borders cannot be changed by force must be upheld. Any agreement must also protect Ukraine and Europe’s security. That means strong, credible guarantees that ensure Ukraine can defend itself going forward to avoid a repetition of the past. Ireland will continue to support these efforts as part of the European Union and through participation in the coalition of the willing.

It seems that, as dangerous as we think the world is, it keeps getting worse and worse. We have seen the war in Iran, which is obviously an absolutely illegal action by genocidal Israel with the absolute backing of America. We hope the American President, Donald Trump, has bitten off more than he can chew but we do not know what the future holds. It has also meant a lifting of restrictions on the sale of Russian oil. What engagement has the Taoiseach had with others on this? I reiterate what was said here earlier, in that while we obviously want to see reductions in the price of diesel and petrol, we cannot avoid dealing sufficiently with the huge costs people are paying for home heating oil. We have to protect ourselves. We also need to eventually play our part in developing a roadmap to a better world where we will not have to deal with this madness.

I welcome the fact that Ireland will continue to contribute in whatever way we can to addressing Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. We need to co-operate in a number of specific areas. One such area I want to instance is cybersecurity. Like many other European countries, Ireland is regularly on the receiving end of cyberattacks emanating from Russia. At our meeting of the Committee on Artificial Intelligence today, the Courts Service highlighted the fact that Russia is the source of many of the cyberattacks on that service. I also want to know how we are going to continue to address the problem of the shadow fleet operating in Irish waters. I refer both to Russian sanction-busting with regard to oil and to Russian submarines and naval vessels operating in those waters. It is critical that we operate in partnership with other European nations and learn from their experiences.

This morning, The Irish Times reported on work done by Conor Gallagher and the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, OCCRP, in relation to Aughinish Alumina in Limerick and how product from that facility is being used in the military industry in Russia. This afternoon, I spoke with the Ukrainian ambassador, Larysa Gerasko, who expressed her deep fears about this news. What is the Government doing and, to the best of its knowledge, what can it do in relation to this work at Aughinish Alumina to stop the sale of products from Ireland for use in the war in Ukraine?

The Middle East conflict is having wide-ranging repercussions. Two of these impact directly on Ukraine's ability to defend itself. The first is that Russia was selling Urals oil at approximately $40 dollar in the past few months, towards the end of last year. This price has obviously risen substantially since the outbreak of the conflict in the Middle East. There are two reasons behind this: the rise in global oil prices and the US sanctions waiver that is now allowing India to purchase Russian oil. It is estimated that Russia takes in about $370 million per day from oil. President Zelenskyy has said that this rise in oil prices and Russia's ability to now sell to India is worth approximately $10 billion to the Russian war effort in Ukraine. What discussions is the Taoiseach having at EU level on this matter?

The full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation under Vladimir Putin began four years and one month ago. I remember when Zelenskyy was here in the Chamber late last year. It seemed as if the whole world was upon his shoulders. It is something I will never forget. In the context of the recent geopolitical events and spreading of warfare, it is clear that tougher sanctions will be required to counter Putin's warmongering. Combined with the alarming reticence of the Trump and Orbán Administrations to join the coalition of the willing, there is a substantive question about how the coalition will impose tougher sanctions, steadfastly uphold existing sanctions on oil and gas from Russia in the midst of an energy crisis, and enforce the robust security guarantees sought by Ukraine to end the war. Will the Taoiseach make a commitment here and now that Ireland will not participate in the lifting of sanctions on Russia, including those sanctions on Russian oil and gas, that we will pursue tougher sanctions on the Russian Federation and that we will do so even in the absence of US support?

The Taoiseach has rightly and repeatedly condemned Putin for a criminal, barbaric and imperialist attack on Ukraine. Will he do the same when it comes to what Trump and the Israeli regime are now doing to Iran and Lebanon? They are bombing the hell out of civilians and infrastructure in Iran. Israel is now ethnically cleansing south Lebanon. Will the Taoiseach condemn Trump's suggestion that he might "take over" Cuba, attacking another country in exactly the same criminal, entirely unjustified and illegal way that Putin attacked Ukraine? Is the Taoiseach consistent in his principles? Will he condemn it and call it out when it is done by the United States and the regime in Israel?

On 5 March, the Fianna Fáil Minister of State, Deputy Robert Troy, told the Dáil that:

Ireland's position on the use of force where there is no UN mandate or authorisation is well established and known. For fear that anyone is in any doubt, let me be clear: it is wrong and it is illegal.

He said that the use of force without UN mandate or authorisation is wrong and illegal, which is absolutely correct. How can the Taoiseach square that with his support for the coalition of the willing in Ukraine? How can he square it with continuing to try to abolish the triple lock? The use of force is illegal unless done with a UN mandate. That is absolutely clear. It applies whether it is for peacekeeping or "strengthening international security", as it is put in the heads of the defence (amendment) Bill. Is there disagreement in Fianna Fáil over this? The Taoiseach wants to abolish the triple lock that enshrines the principle that we will only engage in the use of force with a UN mandate while a Fianna Fáil Minister of State is correctly saying that violating that principle is illegal.

I too want to raise the report by Conor Gallagher in today's edition of The Irish Times , which was carried out in conjunction with the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. It is very concerning. It is reported that Russian smelters supplied by the Limerick Aughinish Alumina plant are selling vast amounts of aluminium to a trading company that supplies dozens of Russian arms manufacturers. Is the Taoiseach's Government aware of any links between companies receiving aluminium from Aughinish Alumina and the weapons industry in Russia?

I am not sure this is pertinent.

It is the wrong area to ask about. We are on the coalition of the willing here.

It is in the context of Ukrainian people coming here following the outbreak of the war.

We will leave it to the Taoiseach.

My question is also about Ukrainians living here and what we need to do. It has been brought to my attention that many Ukrainians who are living here are having major difficulties in renewing their Ukrainian passports. Those who fled the Russian invasion and sought refuge here now find themselves unable to renew their passports in Ireland. The Taoiseach will know that, when Ukrainian children reach the age of 14, they have to get a passport of their own. Otherwise, they are fined. The current online process repeatedly times out and kicks them out of the system. Other countries, such as Spain, Italy and Poland, have put in place an in-person appointment-based DP document service to allow Ukrainians to renew their passports efficiently and without unnecessary stress. However, Ukrainians in Ireland have told me they are now forced to travel to Poland, Spain or Italy at significant financial cost. Does the Taoiseach know about this? Will he ensure it is rectified?

The question relates to my attendance at the meeting of the coalition of the willing. It is striking that quite a number of Members just avoided any reference to my attendance at that meeting, which is illustrative, and not really good enough. If specific questions are tabled, we should concentrate on those during Taoiseach's Questions because we have the Order of Business for half an hour or 40 minutes on general issues like ETBs, education, health or whatever. We also have the Leaders' Questions for a range of other issues.

Deputy Ó Murchú referred to the restrictions on the sale of Russian oil. We were seeking to impose a further round of sanctions last week. Hungary is objecting. The Hungarian position is outrageous in terms of both stopping any new round of sanctions and the €90 billion package for Ukraine. The Deputy's party opposed it as well. It is in good company with Viktor Orbán in opposing-----

For God's sake. The Taoiseach should not be obtuse.

Deputy Conway-Walsh, allow the answer please.

That is not obtuse. That is a fact. Sinn Féin has opposed the €90 billion.

It is an easy shot the Taoiseach has taken. Can we move on?

I want to finish my point. There is a view abroad-----

Deputies, excuse me.

We are either neutral or we are not.

It is about neutrality and the Taoiseach knows that.

This is not allowed.

Hungary has a view. Orbán has a view. Sinn Féin has a view. It is basically saying that Ukraine should surrender because if the Ukrainians do not get that budgetary package and a package to support them defend themselves, it is surrender. There is no other option for Ukraine-----

Hear, hear.

-----but to surrender if we do not get that €90 billion package across. I am shocked at Sinn Féin's position on it-----

I am shocked at the Taoiseach.

-----but it is reflected in its questions. When I talk about the coalition of the willing, it is about Ukraine. All Sinn Féin can offer is one question on that and another on the ETB in Athlone, which has nothing at all to do with it. It just suggests that as far as Sinn Féin is concerned, Ukraine really does not matter and that has been its position----

That is just not true.

-----since 2014.

Continue on.

The Deputy will have to take it up in another forum.

We want more sanctions and there could be challenges down the line if the global crisis continues.

Deputy Byrne raised the issue of cybersecurity. It is a huge issue, and many private sector organisations are under fairly regular attack. A lot of them are occurring from within Russia. There could be third country backers that back certain hackers or people involved in cyberwarfare, or there can be criminal entities, but that are known to the authorities in Russia. The Conti group is believed to have caused the attack on our health services during Covid-19. It is inconceivable that it would be allowed operate with the freedom that it does in Russia without some tacit acknowledgement or support from the administration or the government there.

The Deputy also referenced the Courts Service. It is a very significant source of concern for us. We have to build up. We discussed this with the United Kingdom Government the week before last when we met with Keir Starmer and the ministers. It is a big concern for them. We want to co-operate more with them on knowledge around technology and how best we can resist cyber-attacks. Collaboration is the name of the game in countering cybersecurity attacks, which is about learning from the experiences of others that have had them and about trying to pool our best brains to counter such attacks into the future.

With regard to the shadow fleet, legislation is being passed that will enable Naval Service personnel to board them or our naval vessels to intercept them. They will also be able to put queries to the operators of these ships regarding their legality and a whole range of other issues. There are a lot of environmental concerns around the shadow fleet. Many of them are potential maritime disasters if there were leakages of oil and so on, which would have devastating impacts on the marine environment. They have been disrupted by a number of EU member states. They have been boarded and so on. The idea was to try to disrupt the modus operandi of the shadow fleet and to make it less efficient in terms of its service to Russia during these times.

Deputies Ó Cearúil and Whitmore raised Aughinish Alumina. It is a very significant employer in the mid-west and it supports hundreds of jobs directly and indirectly. It also has a connection to the supply chain within Europe in terms of steel and its products. That is why there has been a general principle at European level that we should not damage ourselves disproportionately, particularly given that it is an industry that is under attack anyway from broader issues around how the global economy operates today in terms of some countries giving more protections, subsidies and so on. However, I am concerned about the report because that was never on the agenda. The report states that it supplies to intermediaries who are then supplying it on to Russia to be used for armaments. That is a concern, and we will examine it to try to get the background to it. It is not just about Ireland. It has a relevance to other EU member states in terms of its production.

In response to Deputy Boyd Barrett, I made it clear in my speech at the White House about Ireland's adherence to UN nations, the need for a UN mandate and its adherence to the international rules-based order. I articulated that strongly, as I did about the need for the war to end and for a peaceful resolution. We are dealing with a very repressive regime in Iran that has been conducting a surrogate war for years on an ongoing basis against many countries. In the Middle East, it is particularly-----

Is it more repressive than Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates?

Deputy Boyd Barrett, please do not engage.

Yes, I would argue that Iran is much more repressive than Saudi Arabia. We do not have a precise number, but thousands of their citizens who went on the street to protest were mowed down. I am not defending any other regime but this is a particularly-----

I do not know why the Taoiseach is saying this.

Deputy, it is not a back and forth. Respect other members.

UAE, Cuba.

The contrast with Ukraine is very different, but the Deputy will never acknowledge that.

It was always different from Iran.

Deputy, please.

Deputies Boyd Barrett, Murphy and others will never acknowledge that point. President Zelenskyy executed nobody before Ukraine was invaded. I believe in dialogue. I believe in the international rules-based order and a UN mandate, although the UN is paralysed. The reason we are doing the triple lock is the UN Security Council is paralysed. It is going to be very hard to get a peacekeeping mission going and because of the Security Council, UNIFIL will end at the end of this year. The opportunities for Irish peacekeepers, which is something we have been doing uninterrupted since 1958, is very much in the balance, but no one seems to care about that on the Opposition side in terms of our future role in peacekeeping.

Cuba should be resolved by dialogue. It is another regime that has a certain glorified narrative around it here but it has been quite a repressive regime as well and it has oppressed its people for far too long. It needs to get with it in the modern era and engage in a sensible dialogue to try to get a resolution. It does not need any external interventions. I have been to Cuba. When I was the Minister for Foreign Affairs, I was one of two or three European ministers in the 2007 to 2010 period who visited Cuba in the hope of getting a more liberal view of things, but, even then, it did not release the political prisoners that we had sought the release of. President Castro and his brother, who was his successor, ruled with an iron fist. That was wrong and the consequences for its citizens have been fairly dire. Hence many left and went to the United States or elsewhere. No one case is simple. There is a complexity and history to a lot of these issues that defies simplistic sloganeering. I dealt with the questions about the triple lock and UN mandate. I dealt with Deputy Whitmore's question. That is our take on it and we will examine it.

In response to Deputy O'Hara's question about the ETB-----

Was the Taoiseach aware of this?

No, not at all.

In response to Deputy O'Hara, that is a matter for the Minister for education. There are plenty of routes to try to source an answer to that question. I will reference that the Deputy raised it, but it is not appropriate to raise it in the context of the coalition of the willing.

Some 25 jobs have been lost. People were protesting today.

I know, but this is a different set of questions.

In response to Deputy Conway-Walsh, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is aware of this issue. I will talk to the Minister and come back to her. There have been challenges all around. Because of the war in Ukraine, there are lots of issues and public services that have come under pressure.