President issues unprecedented apology over ‘throwaway remarks’ about neutrality chairwoman

President Michael D Higgins has issued an unprecedented personal apology over “throwaway remarks” that questioned the objectivity of the chair of the Government’s Consultative Forum on International Security Policy.

President Higgins singled out Prof Louise Richardson in a weekend interview where he pointedly referred to her status as a Dame of the British Empire (DBE).

A statement issued by Áras an Uachtaráin on Monday said the President’s reference to Prof Richardson of Oxford University and her “very large letter DBE” was made in a casual manner during the course of a long interview with the Business Post.

“The President intended no offence by such a casual remark. He apologises for any offence which he may have inadvertently caused to Professor Richardson by what was a throwaway remark,” said the statement.

Ireland ‘scrutinising’ Russian diplomats’ visa applications amid spying concerns

---

Varadkar attends ‘Davos for Defence’ for first time to discuss neutrality and push for Gaza ceasefire

---

Legislation to get rid of triple lock being drawn up ‘without delay’, Tánaiste tells Dáil

---

‘An offhand comment’: Louise Richardson on the President’s broadside in the neutrality debate

---

It is the first time in almost 12 years in office that the President has issued a specific statement of apology.

[ Did President Michael D Higgins cross a line with his neutrality remarks? You bet he did ]

The reference to Prof Richardson and her DBE title was received in some quarters as disparaging her objectivity. It formed part of a strong attack on the forum by the President in which he claimed Ireland was on a “drift” away from neutrality.

He also claimed the speaking panels for the forum were stocked with “the admirals, the generals, the air force, the rest of it”. He also asserted that representatives from Nato countries were invited to speak to the exclusion of speakers from militarily neutral countries.

Yesterday, Tánaiste Micheál Martin stood over the forum, which will discuss defence and security policy as well as examining the question of neutrality. In his second robust defence of the forum in two days, he doubled down on remarks he made on Sunday in which he also implicitly criticised President Higgins’s remarks, without naming him.

Yesterday, Mr Martin, who was visiting London, said he did not want a situation where academics were being decried for attending and speaking at conferences.

“Part of the [forum] initiative was about facilitating debate and now we are having debate,” he said.

He declined to directly condemn the president’s remarks: “I have never sought to embroil the presidency in any controversy and I’m not going to do so now.”

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar disputed any suggestion that Ireland was going to join Nato. “That’s not on the agenda of this Government,” he said.

“It is very clear we are going to continue with our military neutrality.”

However, Opposition leaders continued to support the arguments put forward by President Higgins. Labour leader Ivana Bacik said it reminded us of the positive reputation Ireland has internationally as an advocate for peace.

Matt Carthy, Sinn Féin’s spokesman on foreign affairs, said Mr Higgins had made a valuable contribution by setting out the positive aspects of Irish neutrality.

Prof Richardson will chair the forum which will be held in Cork, Galway and Dublin this week and next week and will feature a range of international and national experts, academics, diplomats and politicians.

Separately, last night President Higgins called for the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and different development banks to come together and create a global fund for migrants and refugees that would be targeted at the places to which they would most likely be displaced.

“It is the most coherent proposal I can think of to counter illegal trafficking, it has the advantage of being a managed, transparent system, and all of the indications are that it is possible to return the investment in such bonds within five years and certainly before 10 years,” he said.