If we want to make claims about the government’s position as a whole, this is a hard question to answer definitively. For both the U.K. (for UVF and other loyalist paramilitary collusion) and Republic of Ireland (for any IRA or other nationalist paramilitary collusion), any possible collusion was unofficial and not publicly overt, and their public official stances were opposed to all paramilitary violence - and indeed many members of these governments certainly were. But unofficial collusion was revealed slowly by investigative reports, official inquiries with controversial conclusions, and with some allegations by major players both within the governments and the paramilitaries that have varying levels of corroborating evidence. The specific allegations are mostly not about the governments as a whole - whatever that would mean, and probably not a fair accusation - but individuals at various levels within them. Certainly members of the British government’s collusion is far better documented, as well as low/mid level members of the military (with allegations of directives from much higher up).

So on the Irish side, instead of making definitive claims about the government as a whole, I will point to a couple of major sources of allegations, at least one of which certainly involves funding at a middling military level.

One is everything surrounding the Arms Crisis, one of the Republic’s most controversial political scandals. The future Taoiseach (PM), Charles Haughey, then finance minister, as well as Neil Blaney, the minister for agriculture and fisheries, were effectively put in charge of a cabinet committee to provide relief to Irish families fleeing right near the beginning of the Troubles in 1969. They were more strongly in favour of the nationalist cause than the Taoiseach of the time, Jack Lynch, and they proposed limited military intervention to protect nationalists near the border from the UVA and other groups, but were warded off this due to the obvious risk of retaliation by the U.K. A mid-level underling of theirs, however, Capt. James Kelly, did direct funds and attempt to ship weapons from the Continent to a front group that in turn largely funded and armed the IRA, and the allegations were that Haughey and Blaney were directly involved. They were sacked and put on trial in 1970, but acquitted, and their political careers continued, Haughey cumulatively becoming Ireland’s longest serving Taoiseach to this day. It’s worth noting that the attempted arms import was not disputed by the judge: rather (to simplify a little), Kelly blamed his orders from Blaney, and Blaney claimed he had given no such orders, and with no hard evidence for which version of events was true, they were both acquitted in the uncertainty. What was agreed is that someone decided to do it.

Secondly, Kieran Conway, who was a senior member of the IRA and billed as their director of intelligence in the 1970s, discussed support from several prominent figures in Dublin, including politicians and military connections. As far as I am aware, there have been no formal investigations based on this that have led anywhere.

Beyond this, I’d be wading into very uncertain territory, but maybe someone else can give a more comprehensive answer.

There's only evidence for an attempted but unsuccesful collusion by many members of the state in 1969 and probably a single Garda (police officer) leaking information in 1989. So the short answer is 'no' given available information.

The long answer is that only those who don't know the Irish Republic and its history would expect there to ever be collusion. Some context is needed to understand why...

A forgotten part of history is the Irish civil war 1922-1923. It was between those who accepted the treaty Britain offered for independence versus those who did not (it fell very short of real independence). Those who accepted won, those who did not retained the IRA name and went underground. So from the outset the Irish state largely set its agenda for the next century. It was sympathetic to the plight of Northern Irish republicans, but given the choice would prefer to push ahead with pragmatically building a country. Indeed during the discussions about where the border would be, the Irish state - in exchange for a deal on national debt - quietly accepted 6 counties remaining in the UK despite only 4 having a majority remain vote. Even if there were certain politicians in government who were sympathetic to the united Ireland goal of the IRA, it was republican terrorists (and more-so their other left wing ideals), not loyalist terrorists who were considered the greatest threat to the state those politicians served. A historian summed it up with St Augustine; "Lord, make me chaste—but not yet". While the belief of probably the majority of politicians in the south was that partition was wrong, in pratice they were happy to completely ignore Northern Ireland if they could.

But of course, Northern Ireland is not an easy place to ignore... in October 1968, RTE television broadcasts a peaceful Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association march being met with violence by the RUC (Northern Irish police). Popular sympathies in the South were overwhelmingly with the nationalist community in the North who appeared as (and probably were) a violently oppressed minority. The situation steadily got worse, and by 1969 Catholics were barricading themselves in from their own government. In august 1969, there was an outbreak of massive sectarian riots (the first child to die in the troubles is 9 year old Patrick Rooney, shot by the RUC with a browning machine gun). People of both sides are getting burned out of their homes, but Catholics are disproportionately affected causing a fear in the south, especially as refugees came across the border, that an anti-catholic pogrom may be coming [I'm sure there are other viewpoints of this era, but I am just explaining what the Irish government viewed]. It is in this context, that the first alleged collusion occurs. Captain James Kelly of Irish army intelligence begins to purchase weapons. The source of money being a Irish government fund set up to help Irish catholic refugees. It's not known for certain who ordered it with suggestions was known by the Taoiseach (prime minister). These august 1969 riots are a key month in Northern Irish history. The British Army gets deployed in response. A few months later the IRA splits, and the new PIRA (when people commonly say IRA this is who they mean) is formed. In the end, Captain Kelly's weapons are never delivered because the Gardaí (irish police), exposed what was happening. I'm not sure I would call it colluding though, more than responding to a neighbouring state that looked like it was going to implode. But the point I'm trying to emphasise is that it took extraordinary circumstances for an Irish government to want to get involved in NI. Even in 1974, when the worst single day of attacks during the Troubles occurred - the Dublin and Monaghan bombings by the UVF - the Finlay report by the Irish Government was pointing at the IRA as the greatest threat.

The second and third alleged collusion events come from the 2003 Cory Collusion Inquiry. This inquiry was set up as part of an agreement coming out of the peace process that both governments would investigate particular deaths where strong allegations of collusion existed. Cory, considered independent, would select from a given list those cases where he felt a public inquiry was warranted. There were two cases related to the Republic. For the first, the death of Lord Justice Gibson, Cory found the evidence was just hearsay. For the deaths of two RUC superintendents in 1989, Cory felt it warranted a public inquiry and the Smithwick Tribunal was started by the Irish government. The tribunal found that almost certainly the travel arrangements of the victims were leaked by a Garda officer, but could not find any direct evidence to identify who. A particular officer's name has been talked about and the Smithwick report has a good summary of what is known and unknown about that individual.

There are probably more cases like that individual Garda waiting to be discovered. But as explained why above, in a 1979 study, only 2.8% of people in the Republic were found to have strong support for the IRA. That number probably fluctuated hugely after atrocities in the North such as in 1969 and the 1972 burning of the British embassy in Dublin after Bloody Sunday. But in general, such a low level of support would not suggest there are any major conspiracies waiting to be discovered. It thus really depends how you define "collusion". If an individual turns rogue, is that collusion? I would say that 'collusion by the state' requires there to have been a conspiracy, more so than 'collusion by individuals'. If this seems unduly soft on the Irish state, then it's worth pointing out the broader definition would necessarily mean the British state colluded with the UVF in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings killing of 33 people [collusion may have occured by the narrow definition too, but as yet those are allegations rather than proven].

Sources: for everything Troubles related https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/ has indexed links of most material available.

Another answer touched on the 1989 incident involving possible collusion between a Garda officer and the IRA and I’ll expand briefly on that in my answer here:

On March 20th, 1989 Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan, both of the RUC (Royal Ulster Constabulary), were ambushed by members of the Provisional IRA’s South Armagh Brigade. The ambush site was near Jonesborough in County Armagh, and the ambush occurred shortly after the car driven by Buchanan had crossed from the Republic of Ireland into Northern Ireland.

​

Breen and Buchanan had traveled to Dundalk in the Republic to meet with their counterparts in the Gardai about cooperation to address IRA operations and cross-border smuggling in the area. On their drive back, IRA members stopped the car driven by the RUC men at a makeshift checkpoint, blocked the road, then shot and killed Breen and Buchanan.

​

In Bandit Country: The IRA and South Armagh, journalist and author Toby Harnden spoke to both Gardai and RUC sources who claimed that a Garda officer, who Harnden identifies as ‘Garda X’ and who was known to be an IRA sympathiser, called an IRA source to inform them of the movements of Breen and Buchanan. This was apparently confirmed with “technical information” which showed the IRA had been contacted or telephoned by someone within the Dundalk Garda Station. These conclusions were supported by the Smithwick Tribunal, an inquiry set into motion by the Irish government.

​

Harnden also spoke with both British and Irish sources about a lack of cooperation from Irish Security Forces on IRA and border issues. But a lack of cooperation is not necessarily collusion. The border was notoriously porous and IRA gunmen would sometimes flee to the Republic after ambushing British forces or even engage in gun battles across the border. One IRA volunteer who Harnden identifies as ‘Volunteer G’ does allege that the Gardai would ‘look the other way’ when some of the IRA went to make their escape in similar situations, and even apologize when they had to arrest members of the IRA. However, that’s not quite the same level of collusion as the previously mentioned ambush.