COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 15 Jun 2006

Vote 37 — Army Pensions.

Mr. Michael Howard (Secretary General of the Department of Defence) called and examined.

Chairman

The committee will consider the 2004 Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Appropriation Accounts — Vote 36 — Defence and Vote 37 — Army Pensions. Witnesses should be aware that they do not enjoy absolute privilege. I draw the attention of members and witnesses to the fact that, as and from 2 August 1998, section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act 1997 grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the committee's proceedings. These rights include the right to give evidence, the right to produce documents, the right to appear before the committee either in person or through a representative, the right to make a written and oral submission, the right to request the committee to direct the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and the right to cross-examine witnesses.

For the most part, these rights may be exercised only with the consent of the committee. Persons invited to appear before the committee are made aware of these rights and any persons identified in the course of proceedings who are not present may have to be made aware of these rights and provided with a transcript of the relevant part of the committee's proceedings if the committee considers it appropriate in the interests of justice. Notwithstanding this provision in the legislation, I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are also reminded that due to the provisions within Standing Order 156, the committee shall also refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or a Minister of the Government or the merits of the objectives of such policies.

I welcome Mr. Howard to the meeting and ask him to introduce his officials.

Mr. Michael Howard

I am joined by Mr. Pat Hogan, head of corporate affairs in the Department of Defence; Mr. Robbie Lyons, principal officer in the Department's finance branch in Renmore, County Galway; Mr. Jimmy Doyle, principal officer, Department of Finance; and Ms Joan Daly, assistant principal officer, Department of Finance.

Chairman

Will Mr. Purcell introduce Votes 36 and 37?

Mr. Purcell

There were no significant matters arising from my audit of Votes 36 and 37 so I was in the happy position of being able to give a clear audit report on both Votes. Approximately 70% of the Defence Vote is taken up by pay. There is a sound system in place for processing the various payrolls. The bulk of the remainder of the Vote is accounted for by expenditure incurred in equipping the Defence Forces to do their job. On the basis of our examination, we were satisfied with the procurement procedures employed.

Vote 37 reflects the rising cost of providing pensions for retired Defence Forces personnel. In 1999, this stood at approximately IR£81 million but the figure increased in the years to 2004 to €154 million. There are a number of issues on the Defence Vote that have interested members in the recent past. These include compensation payments for hearing loss, the financial status of our claims on the United Nations for the recovery of costs associated with overseas missions, the charging regime for bank escort services provided by the Army and the return and use of the proceeds from the sale of surplus property by the Department. The Accounting Officer has previously furnished information to the committee on these issues and will undoubtedly be able to update members today on the current state of play in respect of each of them.

Chairman

Will Mr. Howard make his opening statement?

Mr. Howard

Total gross expenditure on defence in 2004 amounted to €887 million, comprising €733 million under the Defence Vote and €154 million under the Army pensions Vote. Appropriations-in-aid amounted to almost €43 million, including more than €25 million in respect of the sale of Clancy Barracks. As the Comptroller and Auditor General noted, over 70% of expenditure is accounted for by the pay, allowance and pension costs of the Defence Forces and the pay of civilians employed with the Defence Forces. The Defence Vote includes an administrative budget of approximately €21 million covering the civil element of the Department.

At the end of 2004, the strength of the Permanent Defence Force — Army, Air Corps and Naval Service — was 10,500, while there were 917 civilian employees attached to units of the Defence Forces and 387 civil servants in the Department. In addition, there were approximately 12,500 personnel in the Reserve Defence Force.

In 2004, significant further progress was made in the programmes of investment in modern equipment and facilities for the Defence Forces. During the year, 25 additional armoured personnel carriers, APCs, costing €33 million, and eight fixed-wing training aircraft for the Air Corps, costing €60 million, were delivered. Contracts were placed for two light utility helicopters and four utility helicopters to the value of €61 million. The two light utility helicopters were delivered in 2005, while two of the utility helicopters will be delivered later this year and the other two in 2007. The programmes for the acquisition of both nuclear biological chemical equipment and night vision equipment continued during 2004.

As a general rule, the cost of all major equipment purchases is spread over a number of years. Payments made in 2004 included a €19 million part payment for eight trainer aircraft, including €9 million in VAT; a €14 million down-payment on six helicopters; a €10.5 million part payment for 25 APCs; and a €5.5 million part payment for a medium range anti-tank guided weapon system required to provide the Defence Forces units with an effective anti-armour capability while on peace support operations. Delivery of the system was completed in 2005 at a total cost of €13 million.

Expenditure on capital building works in 2004 was €18 million, while a further €11.5 million was spent on maintenance works. Major building works completed in 2004 included new technical stores and upgrade of accommodation and office facilities at the naval base at Haulbowline at a total cost of €5.7 million, an upgrade of storage facilities at the Curragh at a cost of €2 million and a new non-commissioned officers' mess at Custume Barracks, Athlone, at a cost of €1.2 million.

Ireland's Presidency of the EU in the first half of 2004 had a major significance for the defence organisation due to the development of European security and defence policy in recent years. I am pleased to be able to say that the Department and the Defence Forces responded positively to the extra demands arising from the Presidency and played their part in achieving a successful outcome.

Expenditure on loss of hearing claims continued to fall in 2004, resulting in a substantial underspend in subhead T of the Defence Vote. Total expenditure on loss of hearing claims, including plaintiffs' legal costs, was approximately €5 million in 2004, compared with €14.6 million in 2003 and €33 million in 2002. Overall, the position is that a total of some 15,600 claims have been disposed of to date at a cost of €281 million, including €95 million in plaintiffs' legal costs. The estimated cost of outstanding claims and costs is €12 million.

In 2004, implementation plans were prepared for the decentralisation of the Dublin-based staff of the Department to Newbridge and the decentralisation of Defence Forces headquarters to the Curragh. Implementation of these plans is ongoing.

At the end of 2004, there were 770 Defence Forces personnel serving in 19 different overseas missions throughout the world. The largest overseas deployment at that time was the contingent of more than 430 personnel with the United Nations mission in Liberia. At present, there are approximately 680 Defence Forces personnel serving overseas. The main deployments are 334 personnel in Liberia, 213 personnel with the NATO-led international security presence in Kosovo and 60 personnel with the EU-led operations in Bosnia Herzegovina.

Chairman

May we publish Mr. Howard's statement?

Mr. Howard

Yes.

Deputy Fleming

Mr. Howard mentioned that €95 million to date has been spent on plaintiffs' legal fees in loss of hearing claims. How much were the State's legal fees?

Mr. Howard

If the Deputy will bear with me, we can extract that figure.

Deputy Fleming

It appears that €186 million of the €281 million expended to date on loss of hearing claims has been spent on compensation for soldiers and that €95 million, or 50% of the amount paid to the soldiers in question, has been spent on legal fees.

Mr. Howard

That is correct.

Deputy Fleming

It appears that it was more compensation for the legal profession than for the soldiers in question. The legal profession appears to be doing extraordinarily well out of this affair. It appears that €95 million was only spent on the legal costs of the plaintiffs, rather than the legal costs of the plaintiffs and the State.

Mr. Howard

Yes. I should explain that the State's legal costs are paid by the Chief State Solicitor.

Deputy Fleming

That is fine.

Mr. Howard

Obviously, I am not the Accounting Officer for this expenditure but I believe we will be able to obtain the figure for Deputy Fleming in a moment. It is of a lesser order of magnitude but does include payments to the barristers who represented the State.

On legal costs, the rate charged is not determined by us. In that sense, we are what economists would call price takers. A number of issues must be borne in mind. While it is counter-intuitive, where firms of solicitors have taken large numbers of similar cases, it appears that the fee per case does not vary much. When costs and bills of costs are presented to the Chief State Solicitor, there is the option to bring them before the Taxing Master and this has been done. They are scrutinised fairly thoroughly and what is eventually paid is in accordance with, for want of a better phrase, the market rate.

As part of the early settlement scheme we operated, the Chief State Solicitor imposed what would be a rigorous fixed scale of costs from the point of view of the legal profession. From the lay person's point of view, one might be entitled to conclude that even this rigorous scale is reasonably generous. To the extent that it is within the hands of the State to be managed, we have been very mindful of it.

Deputy Fleming

I do not want to spend too much time on this matter. If the information is presented in the next few minutes, that is fine. If not, will Mr. Howard send the information to the committee in written format?

Mr. Howard

Very well

Deputy Fleming

On the Department of Defence Vote, and before I discuss the pensions Vote, it is stated on page 339 that the Department received €2.8 million from banks for cash escorts. Does this figure represent the full cost to the Army? There are many reports of money transfers to banks without Army or Garda escorts being robbed. Who decides whether an escort accompanies a particular shipment of cash?

Mr. Howard

To answer the last question first, it would be a matter for An Garda Síochána, who would liaise with the Army. The Defence Forces would attend in aid of the civil power at the request of An Garda Síochána. I understand that it has worked out arrangements with the banks and cash companies as to when escorts will be provided. Sometimes the Garda will carry out escorts alone. On other occasions, it will ask the Defence Forces for assistance.

On the amount paid, the figure does not cover that year's full cost. Our estimate of the full cost of escorts in 2004 would have been €7.5 million. The situation has since changed in that the Minister for Defence has engaged with the Irish Bankers Federation, which represents the industry, and reached an agreement whereby it would reimburse the full cost in future. We only recently settled the amount of €6 million, which is the full cost of the escorts provided last year.

Deputy Fleming

I do not understand how the cost in 2004 was €7.5 million, when it will only be €6 million this year. It is the only time I have heard of a cost decreasing.

Mr. Howard

From our point of view, it is a demand-driven cost and is related to the number of times the Garda requested an escort. It could rise or fall in the course of a year.

Deputy Fleming

Mr. Howard expects a cost of approximately €6 million this year.

Mr. Howard

Yes.

Deputy Fleming

I am intrigued by something on page 337 of the report to the committee, namely, that the Department wrote off €610,000 in respect of reimbursements from the UN for court awards arising from the death and disablement of members of the Permanent Defence Force who served with the UN from 1994-96. What is the amount outstanding from 1996 to 2006 and does Mr. Howard expect to write it off also?

Mr. Howard

The position in respect of UN payments——

Deputy Fleming

I refer to the specific write-offs in respect of the death and disablement of members, not the overall UN payments. The Department had a claim with the UN but wrote it off as unrecoverable. I refer to note 7 on page 337. I will discuss the wider issue shortly.

Mr. Howard

On the specific issue and subject to correction, the UN changed its procedures over the years and imposed limits on how much it will pay out. There are particular issues in that we submitted claims and, as part of tidying up this matter during 2004, we needed to make the decision that certain claims would never be paid. For some time, it would have been apparent that they would not be paid, but one is always reluctant to let go while there is any prospect of recovery. The decision was taken in 2004 and the claims were written off.

Deputy Fleming

That includes claims until 1996. If Mr. Howard does not have the figure for claims made since 1996 with him, he could supply it to the committee later.

Mr. Howard

Since 1996, the UN has put a cap on what it will pay for either death or disability. The limit is $50,000 for a service related death and a lesser amount pro rata for disablement. As we would be far more generous in the payments we would make, the UN will only pay for part of the expense.

Deputy Fleming

The UN would only contribute to a small part of the Department's costs.

Mr. Howard

Yes.

Deputy Fleming

If I read the figures on page 339 properly, the Department recovered €5 million from the UN in respect of overseas allowances, etc. On page 340, it is stated that the Department incurred costs of €19 million in respect of United Nations missions. What is the position regarding the €14 million? Is it all payable, how much are we owed by the UN or is the amount an Irish contribution to international peacekeeping? What is the net position?

Mr. Howard

The global position is that the United Nations does not fully reimburse the cost of missions. It has placed caps on troop costs, for example, where we would pay troops at a higher rate than the UN would be willing to reimburse. It is also important to point out that the UN only reimburses where it directly organises the mission. We do not receive any reimbursement in respect of the missions in the Balkans, which are organised by, on one hand, NATO with a UN mandate or, on the other, the EU with a UN mandate. In those instances, we must pay our own fees.

Deputy Fleming

I refer only to what is described on page 340 as €19 million in respect of UN missions.

Mr. Howard

I do not want to split hairs but they are all UN missions of a kind, which is important as a policy issue from our point of view. There is a difference between the missions the UN organises and those it mandates.

Deputy Fleming

I suggest that the figures should be separated in next year's accounts so that we can know the difference between the categories. We might understand it better.

Mr. Howard

We can certainly do that. The UN is making payments in respect of the amounts owed but is sometimes, particularly in light of how we claim, doing so in arrears. The amount owed at the end of December 2004 was €11.88 million and we received €6.69 million. By the end of 2005, in the course of which we received €17.32 million, the amount owed had been reduced to €3.66 million. Our general interpretation of how matters are proceeding, predominantly in respect of UNMIL, is that while the scale of costs would not fully reimburse us, the UN is generally paying on that scale.

Deputy Fleming

I appreciate that.

I will now address the Vote on Army pensions. Mr. Howard might recall that I mentioned this topic last year. I understand that the military service allowance was introduced in 1974 and that people who retired after 1 August 1990 received it as part of their pensions. In other words, it became pensionable for those who retired after 1990 but was not included in the pensions of those who retired before that date.

Are any arrangements being considered to rectify what I consider an injustice? How many people were in receipt of the military service allowance until that date but did not receive it in their pensions? Effectively, how many people were cut off from their pension entitlements even though they received the allowance while they served? Does Mr. Howard have any information to hand in this regard? If not, he could send it to the committee in writing.

Mr. Howard

I will be obliged to communicate with the Deputy because we must work out the number of people who retired.

Deputy Fleming

My question relates to the number of non-commissioned officers who were in receipt of the military service allowance from 1974 to 1990 but who did not receive it in their pensions if they retired before 1 August 1990. The Comptroller and Auditor General has stated that the Department has a good payroll accounting system, so we will test it now. Mr. Howard might be able to revert to the committee on this matter in due course. I find it grossly unfair that non-commissioned officers may be in receipt of a pension based on, for example, 30 years' service but, when they reach retirement, the pension is based on a maximum of 21 years. Does that apply to officers as well as ordinary soldiers?

Mr. Howard

It seems that 3,750 pensioners have service prior to 1990 but did not serve prior to 1974. I will revert to the committee to confirm that figure. The military service allowance was made pensionable following a recommendation in 1990 by the Commission on Remuneration and Conditions of Service in the Defence Forces, the Gleeson commission. It was made pensionable in the case of those who retired on or after 1 August 1990. The policy is consistent with a settled public service pension policy which provides that the benefit of an allowance being made pensionable for serving personnel does not extend to existing pensioners. This does not apply solely to the Department of Defence but across the public service.

Deputy Fleming

It is conceivable that those who retired before 1 August 1990 with several years of military service allowance will not receive a pension, even though those who retired after that date and with a much shorter military service allowance will receive a pension based on that service.

Mr. Howard

Yes, it is conceivable that someone who retired in July 1990 does not receive this benefit while someone who retired in September 1990 does. Other differences in service would not affect entitlements.

Deputy Fleming

Does that apply to officers?

Mr. Howard

Yes, but there are other differences in the pension systems of officers and non-commissioned officers.

Deputy Fleming

When officers reach the age of 65 or 66, their Army pension is not reduced in the same way as that of non-commissioned officers. These soldiers have contributed to their old age pension. Why is the Army pension reduced as a result of receiving the old age pension to which they have contributed? This does not apply to officers.

Mr. Howard

The pension schemes for officers and enlisted personnel are different. Officers do not pay the full rate of PRSI and do not qualify for the contributory old age pension.

Deputy Fleming

What is the current position?

Mr. Howard

Officers appointed from 1995 onwards pay full PRSI.

Deputy Fleming

They have made PRSI contributions over ten years. Officers retiring now would be entitled to the full contributory old age pension in the same way as non-commissioned officers. Will the years of pensionable service be cut for officers in the same way as non-commissioned officers?

Mr. Howard

There will be integration in the future for those officers but none of them has retired so it has not arisen yet.

Deputy Fleming

When will it apply?

Mr. Howard

We must distinguish between those who joined the Defence Forces and have paid the full rate of PRSI and those who served prior to 1995. Nobody who has paid the full rate of PRSI has accumulated enough service to retire on a pension. For officers, it has not yet arisen because of the timing of the rules. An officer can qualify for a modest pension after 12 years but no serving officer who has paid the full rate of PRSI has accumulated 12 years' service. When an officer does so, the pension entitlements will have to be co-ordinated with the contributory old age pension due at the age of 65. The co-ordination arrangements apply across the public service to anyone who receives an occupational pension and the contributory State pension.

Regarding the additional increment paid to those with service between 21 and 31 years, enlisted personnel have always paid a modified rate of PRSI. This provided full entitlement to a contributory old age pension, which was not paid until 65 years of age even though they were obliged to retire before reaching this age. The additional payment was intended as a transitional payment that would tide the retired personnel over until the contributory old age pension was due. The Defence Forces required personnel to retire before they were entitled to the contributory pension. This is explained to individuals when they retire, but perhaps it has been forgotten by the time the co-ordination takes place some years later. Perhaps it is not fully understood by everyone on retirement. This is the application of co-ordination arrangements which, mutatis mutandis, must apply across the public service.

Deputy Fleming

Could Mr. Howard supply a written explanation of the co-ordination of the State pension for officers based on current regulations and information? The pensions Vote will decrease accordingly once this comes into effect. Perhaps Mr. Howard can provide an estimate of how many people will be affected by the change in regime. This change would not have been introduced without the Department knowing the numbers that would be affected.

Mr. Howard

The introduction of full-rate PRSI was introduced in the context of changes across the public service. There is a difficulty with projections.

Deputy Fleming

Mr. Howard could supply us with the current figures.

Mr. Howard

People may have an entitlement to retire after 12 years' service but very few do so in practice. The extent to which the Vote will be affected depends on the decisions people make. If we project forward, we must guess at what this factor will be. It changes over time based on the economic cycle and other considerations.

Deputy Fleming

It is the job of an Accounting Officer to make projections for next year's Estimate. That is a bread and butter task for the Department.

Mr. Howard

I trust the Deputy will understand if the projections do not correspond exactly.

Deputy Fleming

We will not hold the Department to the projections but we would like some indication.

Concerning officers who have been discharged on medical grounds, what facilities are available to them? We have heard about St. Bricin's Hospital. To what degree is this used and is it available to those discharged by the Defence Forces on medical grounds? Who is responsible for these people at that point?

Mr. Howard

The medical care of those who retire from the Defence Forces is the responsibility of the health service in general. There is no provision for using military resources to provide medical care for retired personnel. It is common knowledge that, within the Defence Forces, we have had to go to some lengths to fill enough medical officer appointments to serve urgent military requirements, especially overseas. There would be no slack capacity in the system to treat an additional patient group. When such people are discharged from the Defence Forces, they are provided for by the medical services generally.

Deputy Fleming

What is the occupancy and utilisation of St Bricin's Hospital?

Mr. Howard

St. Bricin's Hospital is the only medical hospital run by the Defence Forces. It provides a range of diagnostic and health screening procedures. It has a small inpatient capacity. The number of inpatients tends to be small because elaborate surgical procedures are not carried out. We may be able to provide the average occupancy rate at the hospital before the end of the meeting, but it is comparatively low.

Deputy Fleming

Would this be in the range of ten to 20?

Mr. Howard

Possibly fewer.

Deputy Fleming

Information on a number of points will be received in writing in due course and I will pursue these further at that stage.

Deputy Hayes

Mr. Howard referred to 15,500 cases of deafness. Will more cases arise?

Mr. Howard

We settled approximately 15,500 cases and approximately 1,000 remain. We still receive new cases occasionally but we regard the issue as largely settled. We handed over responsibility for its management to the State Claims Agency. Where new cases are presented, it is highly likely they will be defended on the grounds of being statute barred. This problem has been highlighted in the public domain for an extremely long time. As a general rule, we have opposed any claim brought since mid-2002 on the grounds that anybody who served in the Defence Forces and felt he or she had a problem should have come forward previously.

Paradoxically, our problem with the remaining cases is that we had a difficulty in getting people to settle. We suspect many of them may not have had a great deal of merit and were brought at a time when the tariff paid out by the courts was quite generous. When the tariff was brought under control and fell to a realistic level, I speculate that those suffering from minor impairments may have felt it was not worth processing a claim. We value the remaining 1,000 cases at approximately €12 million. That is our best estimate. While we would be happy to settle them on modest terms, our expectation is they are of little or no merit.

Deputy Hayes

What was the total cost to the State, including the legal fees about which Deputy Fleming asked, an extremely important issue which has not been addressed?

Mr. Howard

Including a reasonable estimate for the State's legal costs which we believe amount to approximately €40 million, we have paid out approximately €310 million or €320 million.

Deputy Hayes

That figure includes everything.

Mr. Howard

Yes, with a further €12 million in hand. I emphasise that none of the 1,000 cases will be paid out by rote. Only if people have a meritorious claim, will a pay-out be made.

Deputy Hayes

Does Mr. Howard have an estimate of how much will be paid out on the 1,000 cases?

Mr. Howard

Approximately €12 million.

Deputy Hayes

The total will be approximately €332 million.

Mr. Howard

Yes.

Deputy Hayes

Regarding the statement on assets and liabilities, in 2003 the Department had stocks of €105 million, which increased to €151 million in 2004. That was a major increase.

Mr. Howard

The equipment we buy for the Defence Forces as part of the modernisation programme accounts for part of it.

Deputy Hayes

It is a huge increase in stocks.

Mr. Howard

When we take new equipment, it is also common to take a large amount of dedicated spare parts for that new equipment. That is one element. Other stores such as ammunition and fuel are bought in large amounts. We will examine the matter to provide a better breakdown. A major development plan is ongoing. I note that during the year we took delivery of eight Pilatus aircraft which would have been accompanied by spare parts. We also procured stores equipment and ammunition for the Defence Forces, which may also be reflected.

Deputy Hayes

Why are spare parts included?

Mr. Howard

A Pilatus aircraft costs €60 million. Aircraft parts are expensive. We probably should have the figure analysed. When we buy new equipment for the Defence Forces, we also expect to buy expensive spare parts.

Deputy Hayes

Should the Department assess this? A great deal of money is tied up.

Mr. Howard

We have formal stock policies in place for each area. The Deputy is correct to state a great deal of capital is tied up. However, the Defence Forces are often the sole users of particular equipment in Ireland and we must hold the stocks ourselves.

Deputy Hayes

The Civil Defence Board received €5.5 million. Is that a small amount, given the good work Civil Defence does? Will it be increased?

Mr. Howard

The allocation of resources is a policy question for the Government. The amount of €5.5 million is higher than it was before. There has been redevelopment. Civil Defence also benefited from the establishment of the new Civil Defence Board which is in the process of moving into its new headquarters in Roscrea, another major development. It is a voluntary organisation, which is highly admirable. The major asset it brings, the unpaid work of thousands of volunteers, does not cost any money. This illustrates that one gets value for money when one considers the voluntary nature of the service. By historical standards, the allocation is reasonably generous.

Deputy Hayes

A number of years ago the closure of barracks was a major issue. What is the Department's agenda?

Mr. Howard

The Minister for Defence has stated he has no plans to close barracks.

Deputy Hayes

Is Mr. Howard happy with this?

Mr. Howard

I am always happy with what the Minister for Defence states.

Deputy Hayes

I will tell him so in Clonmel.

Deputy Curran

With regard to cash escorts, Mr. Howard mentioned that in the year under review, 2004, the cost was approximately €7 million. This year it is €6 million. Does that represent a reduction in the level of activity on cash in transit by the Defence Forces?

Mr. Howard

From our point of view, it is a demand driven service. If the Garda Síochána requests an escort or support, it is provided on that basis. The full cost figure I presented may include some social welfare escorts. The banks which paid €6 million this year only pay for the escorts provided for them. This may account for a small part of the difference. The majority of escorts are provided for the banks. We went through a major costing exercise with the Irish Bankers Federation, over which we are happy to stand. It has the benefit that both sides accept it represents the full cost.

Deputy Curran

The Defence Forces provide a range of services. In many cases no payment is made from other Departments or agencies. I am interested in one curious figure on page 339 which deals with receipts in respect of fishery protection. The estimated figure was small and the outturn smaller still. I imagine the level of activity in fishery protection is more expansive than this indicates.

Mr. Howard

The figure represents the amount refunded to us by the European Union for equipment purchases. The major item in 2004 was LIRGUARD, an IT-based system which was under development at the time. Most of our expenditure on fishery surveillance is not recouped by the European Union which has a number of programmes, under which it will make a contribution towards the cost of acquisition. In recent years this has been relatively minor but that figure in no way represents the cost of fishery surveillance.

Deputy Curran

Ireland has a particularly large coastline and sea area. However, we do not receive any contribution from the European Union to protect our fisheries. Is that correct?

Mr. Howard

In the 1970s and 1980s the EU gave us quite a substantial contribution towards the capital costs of acquiring equipment for surveillance but it has never paid for the ongoing costs. In recent years, the EU has taken the view that it is a national, State responsibility. My recollection is that the EU made a substantial contribution in the early 1990s towards the cost of our maritime patrol aircraft and during the 1970s, towards the construction of three, if not four, of our fishery protection vessels. However, the last two such vessels we bought, Roisin and Niamh, were fully funded by the Exchequer.

Deputy Curran

On an annual basis, therefore, the State pays for EU fishery protection in its own jurisdiction.

Mr. Howard

That is correct.

Deputy Curran

Of interest on page 341 of the report is the fact that the accounts include the full operational costs of the Garda fixed-wing aircraft and one Garda helicopter but only the pilot costs of the second Garda helicopter. Is that arrangement not slightly unusual?

Mr. Howard

I can correspond with the Deputy on that matter but my memory tells me there was a servicing contract in place with regard to the second helicopter. The helicopter was operated by the Air Corps but I think the servicing of it was contracted out. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform pays for that service contract. I will correspond with the Deputy to confirm that, if I may.

Deputy Curran

From an administrative point of view, it seems unusual that one helicopter is paid for fully by the Department while only the pilot costs are paid for the other one.

Mr. Howard

The helicopters were acquired separately and although similar, they are slightly different models.

Deputy Curran

Does Mr. Howard have an estimate of the annual cost of providing the helicopter and fixed wing aircraft to the Garda Síochána?

Mr. Howard

I do not have those figures with me but we can examine the matter and I am sure we can produce an estimate for the Deputy.

Deputy Curran

The estimate for the provision of equipment and expenses was €44 million and the outturn was €55 million. I do not have any problem with the money being spent but the increase is significant. The notes outline the fact that a deposit for helicopters had to be paid. Nonetheless, the difference in the figures is significant and I am interested in the issue of planning. Did something happen suddenly or——

Mr. Howard

At a general level, with regard to much of the equipment we buy for the Defence Forces, we are running a 36-month procurement operation on a 12-month budgetary cycle. We are a comparatively small purchaser of defensive equipment and while we do our best to predict when deliveries will take place, every year we find ourselves having to manage the whole range of supply sub-heads and it is not uncommon, in defence, that we have to move from one to the other.

In the year in question, the excess is accounted for by the payments for the helicopters. Obviously when one accepts a tender, the manufacturer has a schedule of when the product can be delivered. When work begins or the contract is signed, a deposit has to be paid. During 2004, we paid a deposit of €11 million on the four utility helicopters and €3.17 million on the two light utility craft. We had counter-balancing savings elsewhere in the Vote——

Deputy Curran

I am not disputing that, but I am interested to hear that this is an ongoing difficulty. The variation between €44 million and €55 million is significant. It appears that this is something with which the Department struggles annually, because of the lead time.

Mr. Howard

I would not say that it is a difficulty but something that we must, and do, manage. It means that we must liaise closely with those making deliveries. I only mentioned it as a consideration and explanation for the discrepancy in the figures and not as a complaint. It is one of the challenges of having a budget to spend on equipment and one we are happy to have. It is just a consideration and there is very little anyone can do about the fact that we may order equipment, receive an estimate of when it will be delivered but the supplier may then tell us that it will not be ready until the following year. In other cases, one orders equipment and the supplier is ready to deliver it almost immediately but requires a deposit. With careful management and good liaison, it is something we can handle.

Deputy Boyle

I note that previous questions related to army deafness costs. The Department has been exposed to other costs from court proceedings in the recent past, including cases related to bullying and discrimination, even though the Employment Equality Acts would not apply directly to the Defence Forces. What costs have arisen from military tribunals, for example, that would place?

Mr. Howard

With regard to general claims, that is, those not arising from army hearing loss, in 2004, we spent a total of €4.2 million. A total of 126 cases were settled and 18 were withdrawn or dismissed. At the end of 2004, 793 court cases were on hand, of which 350 were with the State Claims Agency and 440 were with the Department. As of the end of April 2006, we have received 16 claims alleging bullying and nine alleging harassment. Five of the bullying and two of the harassment cases have been disposed of. We have received a number of other claims relating to post-traumatic stress disorder injuries.

Deputy Boyle

I wish to refer to a specific set of court cases involving the involuntary retirement of a member of the Defence Forces in the early 1970s. The person's name is Mr. Donal de Roiste. I am interested in the costs that arose from the litigation and also from the preparation of an internal report by the Department, at the behest of the then Minister for Defence. That report was struck down in a recent court case and the Department was deemed not to have followed fair procedures in its preparation. What was the cost to the Department of preparing that internal report?

Mr. Howard

I do not have that information with me. I will obtain it from the Department and write to the Deputy.

Deputy Boyle

Is Mr. Howard not familiar with the court case to which I refer?

Mr. Howard

I do not have a figure for the costs of the court case.

Deputy Boyle

The second part of the question relates to the cost of preparing the internal report that was subsequently struck down.

Mr. Howard

Again, I do not have an estimate for that to hand. However, I should point out that the State's costs arising from litigation of that nature are paid from the Chief State Solicitor's Office and do not fall within the defence Vote. That is not to say that we cannot ask that office for a figure but I am not the Accounting Officer for that expenditure.

Deputy Boyle

I understand that but I am interested to know that activities, independent of the Department, impacted on how public money was spent. I would like to know what the impact was in this case. An internal report was prepared by the Department and was struck down by the courts. How much of the Department's own time and resources went into the preparation of that report?

Mr. Howard

The report was authored by the Judge Advocate General, for the Minister. I have no information regarding the cost of the report and cannot speculate on it. I will look into the matter and write to the Deputy.

Deputy Boyle

That is fine.

The opening statement referred to new equipment being acquired by the Defence Forces, all of which is valid and necessary. Does the Department have an estimate of the additional costs to the State for participation in the battle groups programme? I hope I am not anticipating legislation that is due next week in this regard, but there is certainly an expectation of participation and additional costs resulting from same.

Mr. Howard

There is an expectation of legislation, which the Deputy will understand I cannot address. There is no certainty that any additional costs will arise from participation in battle groups. The exact nature of our involvement is not yet agreed. It is still at the stage of being a proposal. The Minister has indicated that there are a number of different options regarding our participation. It is likely to be at the lower end of the scale and we do not expect it to give rise to any major costs. The battle group is a standby provision, so costs will not arise if it is never deployed.

Deputy Boyle

Does involvement in joint operations not require a degree of compatibility? The resources and equipment used by other armies would have to be considered. This would entail additional expenses.

Mr. Howard

While I want to be as helpful as possible, the Deputy will appreciate that I would prefer not to deliberate on policy issues because they come within the domain of the Minister. The issue of compatibility is not unique to battle groups but arises in all the missions to which Defence Forces personnel are sent. For example, Irish and Swedish contingents are serving in one unit, a quick reaction force, in Liberia. We are obliged to engage on the issue of compatibility to some extent every time we contribute to international peacekeeping missions, procure equipment or train troops. In that sense, the issue has not arisen recently but it has been with us for some time.

Deputy Boyle

There is one small difference in that active UN operations are conducted for a set purpose. Battle groups may eventually pursue similar purposes but, ostensibly, they are being formed to conduct rehearsals.

Mr. Howard

The Minister has put it on the record that Irish participation will only take place under a UN mandate.

Chairman

I do not think the Deputy is exploring policy issues. It is legitimate to ask whether additional costs will be involved and I ask Mr. Howard to outline for us any expenses that would arise from ensuring compatibility with the equipment of different armies.

Deputy Boyle

I would be happy to receive the relevant information later.

I have one further question to ask on a specific issue pertaining to my constituency. I accept that the disposal of the barracks in Ballincollig is no longer the responsibility of the Department of Defence. A delay arose in respect of this matter on foot of a court case concerning a fee simple on part of the property. According to the reply I received to a parliamentary question I tabled some years ago, the judge in the case found that a false claim had been made. However, the Department had managed to pay ground rent to the claimant for a number of years. Has that matter since been revisited?

Mr. Howard

We will commence an investigation into the matter, if we have not already done so.

Deputy Burton

With regard to helicopters, is the Department responsible for providing ministerial transport?

Mr. Howard

Air Corps helicopters are occasionally used to provide such transport as part of the ministerial air transport service.

Deputy Burton

How does that work? Are services provided on request? How often and at what cost are helicopters used for ministerial transport?

Mr. Howard

In 2004, the Air Corps' Dauphin helicopters, which are being phased out of service, and Allouette helicopters were used for ministerial travel on 11 occasions.

Deputy Burton

What is the current level of use?

Mr. Howard

I do not have a figure for 2006 but I imagine it is similar to 2005, when 13 missions were flown.

Deputy Burton

Can Mr. Howard indicate the approximate cost of the service?

Mr. Howard

I do not have the figures to hand. A policy set out in 1992 provides that the President, members of the Government, Ministers of State, authorised officials of the public service, husbands and wives of the above persons, if they are on a delegation list approved by the Taoiseach as accompanying their spouses in a representative capacity in Government or official business, or any other persons authorised by the Minister for Finance in conjunction with the Taoiseach may avail of the ministerial air transport service.

Deputy Burton

Is the Department responsible for flight arrangements in respect of ministerial transport?

Mr. Howard

The Air Corps is responsible for providing the aircraft, while the costings would arise in the Department of Defence Vote.

Deputy Burton

Can Mr. Howard supply a figure in respect of the costings?

Mr. Howard

The flying cost of the Gulfstream IV is €3,500 per hour, the manufacturer's estimated direct hourly cost for the Learjet is €1,000 per hour and the direct cost of the Beechcraft is €1,200 per hour.

Deputy Burton

How many hours were flown during ministerial transport missions?

Mr. Howard

I would be hesitant to calculate the figure on the back of an envelope but I will revert to the Deputy with the correct information.

Deputy Burton

Does a policy exist in the Department with regard to promotion from other ranks to officer level? How many serving enlisted personnel were commissioned as officers this year?

Mr. Howard

A proposal has been made for a class to be commissioned from the ranks. Enlisted personnel frequently compete in the cadet competition and achieve officer rank by that route. In addition, a number of technically qualified people have been commissioned over the years. A general review is being conducted on human resources strategies and, subject to the principle of merit, we are committed to advancement within the forces. A number of the officers who came through the cadet school originally enlisted as private soldiers.

Deputy Burton

Does Mr. Howard agree that promotion from the ranks to officer level is perceived as being more difficult in the Irish Defence Forces than in the armed forces of other countries? Has any study been conducted to compare promotions internationally?

Mr. Howard

I am not sure that we compare badly with others.

Deputy Burton

Most modern armies have active programmes to promote bright and capable enlisted personnel to officer rank.

Mr. Howard

Precedence is given to enlisted personnel in the cadet competition and a higher age limit, 28 years, is allowed for people who have served in the Defence Forces. The perception referred to by the Deputy may exist but I do not accept that it is entirely justified. I have met commissioned officers who enlisted in the Defence Forces as privates. There may be more upward mobility than some people are willing to concede. I accept that the issue is a priority for representative associations. We have engaged with the latter and are moving in a positive direction.

Deputy Burton

I am aware of comparisons between defence forces. Many personnel, particularly those serving on UN missions, come into contact with forces belonging to other nations, in which there seems to be much more mobility. We have a professional Army, so does the Department have a positive policy of offering internal promotion to people who served in the ranks? Such people would have good qualities and experience to offer if they undertook the appropriate training for officer level.

Mr. Howard

I agree. At present, many of the young people who enlist are very bright and able and have a great deal of development potential. We would be positively disposed toward that and I know the Minister would be supportive. We have held discussions with the representative associations on the matter and I hope they recognise that the Department is positive and supportive.

Deputy Burton

Is there a developed policy for dealing with incidences of post-traumatic stress and other disorders involving personnel serving on overseas missions? What after-care arrangements exist?

Mr. Howard

Comprehensive arrangements are in place and briefings are given to all personnel before they travel overseas. There is an emphasis on ensuring that everybody is aware of the potential problem and that staff are trained to recognise symptoms and follow up on them. It is important to deal with such incidences as close as possible to the time and place at which they occur. There is widespread awareness in the Defence Forces of the need to address the problem.

Deputy Burton

Given that members of the Defence Forces work with guns and other military equipment, does the Department have any strategies to deal with suicide prevention or self-harm?

Mr. Howard

There is a high degree of awareness in the Defence Forces of such issues and the medical corps has spent time studying them. Substantial effort has been devoted to a personal support service in the Defence Forces. There are trained personal support staff in all Defence Forces barracks and leaflets are given to all personnel, particularly those about to be posted overseas, providing information in respect of psychological health.

Deputy Burton

The Department has difficulty recruiting chaplains and underspent on that particular part of its budget. Are chaplains members of religious orders or are lay chaplains appointed? Given that many religious denominations employ lay personnel, has the Department given any consideration to appointing lay chaplains? Chaplains have traditionally played a very important role for members of the Defence Forces and their families.

Mr. Howard

The chaplains we appoint are clergymen. There is no provision for lay chaplains. There is a provision for appointing officiating clergymen in addition to full-time chaplains. There are 18 full-time chaplains but there are also a number of part-time chaplains and they play an important role in the welfare of Defence Forces' personnel. The filling of vacancies occurs on foot of nominations from local bishops. The full-time chaplains are predominantly Roman Catholic, though there is a Church of Ireland chaplain in the Curragh and others are employed on an occasional basis.

Deputy Burton

Given that many lay people now study theology and qualify in that field, if the shortage of chaplains continues would the Department give consideration to opening vacancies up to lay people? Do any religious sisters operate as chaplains in the Defence Forces? It happens on a widespread basis in third level institutions.

Mr. Howard

I do not believe that there are any female chaplains. There are long-standing arrangements for the filling of chaplaincy appointments. If we were to address the issue, we would be obliged to take on board the views of the churches concerned because they, not the Department of Defence, have historically selected those whom they wanted. We could suggest it to the churches but we would also be obliged to be guided by their belief systems.

Deputy Burton

How is decentralisation progressing? Are the general headquarters at Infirmary Road and the Department of Defence integrated within a single premises?

Mr. Howard

We also have offices housing civil and military staff at Coláiste Caoimhín in Glasnevin. We operate together in both locations.

Deputy Burton

When the Department relocates to Kildare, will GHQ separate from it?

Mr. Howard

The most senior military officers, such as the Chief of Staff, the two Deputy Chiefs of Staff and the assistant chief of staff and his support staff will be located in the departmental headquarters building in Newbridge.

Deputy Burton

Who will be stationed at the Curragh?

Mr. Howard

Various technical corps directorates and sections of the Defence Forces headquarters. Some may come from McKee Barracks, so not all sections will be collocated. Some will be technical military staff but it will also include some of the staff from Parkgate and Coláiste Caoimhín.

Deputy Burton

It appears that the proposal is effectively to have two headquarters. I know the campuses are 20 miles apart——

Mr. Howard

No, they are much closer. They are only three or four miles apart. The Curragh is quite close to Newbridge.

Deputy Burton

Is it not more expensive to have two campuses? What was the rationale behind two campuses, one for the headquarters of the Department and one for that of the Army?

Mr. Howard

It was a Government decision to relocate the Department of Defence to Newbridge and the Defence Forces' headquarters to the Curragh. Subsequent to that, and to ensure we had continued integration, it was decided there would be a substantial military element in the departmental headquarters at Newbridge.

Deputy Burton

Does that not confirm the point? There was always, as should be the case, a high level of integration in the premises on Infirmary Road. How will the Department deal with the operational changes that will inevitably arise from the decision to effectively have two headquarters? I am not asking Mr. Howard to stray into discussing policy issues.

Mr. Howard

The decision has been taken that the most senior military personnel and their support staff will remain at departmental headquarters.

Deputy Burton

Will they also have offices at the other location?

Mr. Howard

No. They will be based at Newbridge in what will be the headquarters building for the Defence Forces.

Deputy Burton

Does Mr. Howard have estimates as to what the two sets of buildings are likely to cost?

Mr. Howard

I do not. The building at Newbridge is on the brink of going to tender. We have not yet received tenders, however, so the process is still in train.

Deputy Burton

What is the take-up so far? I presume that, because the new offices are in the greater Dublin area, there will be significant interest.

Mr. Howard

We are comfortably oversubscribed. Some 60 staff, out of approximately 200, will relocate to Newbridge. There are more than 300 volunteers in total.

Deputy Burton

So 140 staff have opted to stay in Dublin.

Mr. Howard

Yes, approximately.

Deputy Burton

What will they do in Dublin?

Mr. Howard

It is a service-wide issue and there are arrangements in place for the exchange of staff between Departments that are decentralising and Departments remaining in Dublin. That process is ongoing. As we speak, staff exchanges are taking place.

Deputy Burton

How many staff members are allocated to Coláiste Caoimhín? Is it correct that the staff members located there find it particularly difficult because of traffic in the greater Dublin area to go to Newbridge or the Curragh? What is the take-up?

Mr. Howard

I do not have a figure for the take-up of the staff. We have approximately 30 or 40 Civil Service staff. It is a smaller component, and our main office is on Infirmary Road, with a larger number of people there. I do not know if the number of people in Coláiste Caoimhín who volunteered to go to Newbridge is greater or less than the average.

Chairman

I have a number of questions. With regard to the Naval Service, I understand three vessels are to be decommissioned. I presume these will be replaced. What is the programme of decommissioning and replacement?

Mr. Howard

The ships are still in service. A number of ships are approaching the expected end of their life. We are considering the type of ship that might be used as a replacement. The Naval Service is currently formulating proposals that will be submitted to the Department for consideration. There is an expectation for a ship replacement programme.

Chairman

What period of time is being envisaged?

Mr. Howard

The process will occur over a substantial period of years, which has not yet been settled. I am speculating on this. From the tendering for a ship to receiving a ship, the period would possibly be two to three years.

Chairman

How soon is the first of the three ships expected to be decommissioned?

Mr. Howard

If one is working on the premise of approximately a 30 year life, the three vessels LE Eimear, LE Aoife and LE Aisling were commissioned originally in 1978, 1979 and 1980. These would be replaced as we approach 2008, 2009 and 2010 or 2011.

When we speak of roughly a 30 year life, the ship does not become unserviceable after 30 years and a day. It is an observed fact that the ships wear out and require more servicing. More modern vessels are available. There is an expectation, and there will be a ship replacement programme.

Chairman

Is there currently a difficulty in recruiting naval personnel?

Mr. Howard

Not especially. The personnel strength in the Naval Service is the same as it has been for several years.

Chairman

With regard to disposal of fixed assets, is there a current programme of selling buildings or other types of fixed assets?

Mr. Howard

There is a programme of reviewing and selling off parcels of land. There is no programme relating to closure or disposal of barracks. There is a process in train of reviewing the property we hold to see if we can identify parcels of land. One of the features of the Department of Defence property portfolio is that we inherited much land at the foundation of the State. We have been working through it since. There are some isolated properties, such as sites that may be outside barracks walls etc. In 2006, we expect to receive approximately €7 million from the disposal of property.

Chairman

Some years ago there was a commitment that proceeds from the sale of fixed assets would be used for better equipping the Army. There appears to have been a change of policy. Land is now being used for social housing. At our meeting last year, the witnesses were not quite sure if the full market value would be paid by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for land transferred by the Department of Defence to it for social housing purposes. Mr. Howard stated:

The question of the affordable housing initiative arises from a decision taken by the Government. I understand that the credit or compensation to be received by the Defence Vote is still under discussion.

I then asked Mr. Howard if full market value would be received and he stated it was still a matter for debate. What is the current position?

Mr. Howard

With regard to the general position, it is accepted that we will receive the benefit of the sales of properties. The affordable housing initiative is in some ways a special case. The discussions with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government are still under way. We are confident we will agree a gain sharing arrangement with the Department.

Recently it has become apparent, especially with the site at Gormanstown, that rather than using a site for affordable housing, it may be employed as an element in a public private partnership exchange. This has been done in other places where a site has been exchanged with a developer. We are negotiating with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government with regard to how we might share in the benefit of that.

Chairman

Will similar discussions take place over the headquarters when the personnel move to Kildare?

Mr. Howard

The Office of Public Works owns the Department of Defence buildings in Dublin, although the Department owns the barracks. We are a Department, like others, and the Office of Public Works owns the building in Infirmary Road.

Chairman

There is no expectation of a revenue flow from that building to the Department of Defence.

Mr. Howard

It would accrue to the Office of Public Works.

Chairman

Is there not a conflict between the two positions? Disposal of fixed assets will be used to better equip the Army on one hand, but on the other hand, the negotiations with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government may have been agreed if market value for the land was given. It would be a simple base to agree on. It logically follows that if there is still debate and discussion, it will be settled at less than market value. There is a conflict between the two policies.

Mr. Howard

The general policy certainly stands. The re-equipment programmes for the Defence Forces are continuing. From that point of view our needs are being met. It is clearly open to Government to implement its policies in whatever way it sees fit. It is open to Government to take a special initiative with regard to affordable housing if it wishes.

Chairman

There is an auditing and financial issue at the core of this. If the Department is not realising full market value for the assets transferred to other Departments or agencies, the assets for re-equipping the Army and providing it with more up-to-date weaponry will be less than what they should have been. There would be a cross-subsidisation from the Department of Defence to a social housing policy. That is an audit issue, not merely a policy issue. Has this been examined and has there been an attempt to qualify the issue?

Mr. Howard

If the Government decides to reallocate resources, our role is to implement the Government's decision. The general position, as we understand it, remains. Proceeds from the sale of land which we identify remain with the Department of Defence. If the Government makes a decision that a particular State asset is to be used in a specific way for the State, our role is to co-operate.

Chairman

Yes. Is there any provision for Army facilities for traditional married quarters? Has it been discontinued?

Mr. Howard

The policy is to get out of the business of providing people with married quarters. It would be generally preferable for people's homes to be independent of the place where they work. It became quite a considerable difficulty with over-holders. People would leave the Defence Forces but not vacate the married quarters. We were left with a situation where people occupied the property and we may not have been in a position to get any rent.

Where possible, we have pursued a fairly vigorous policy of encouraging the occupiers of married quarters to buy them out. We have applied terms similar to the terms of schemes made available to local authority tenants. It is generally our policy not to construct new married quarters. Where they exist, we encourage the people living there to buy them out.

Chairman

How many Army families are housed in Army married quarters?

Mr. Howard

We currently have 152 married quarters, with 34 for officers and 118 for enlisted personnel. Of the 152, 59 are occupied by over-holders, or people who have left the Defence Forces but who have not vacated the property.

Chairman

Mr. Howard stated that schemes similar to tenant purchase schemes in local authorities are in place, but is he not restricted in applying such schemes owing to security concerns? One cannot have private land holdings in the middle of an Army barracks.

Mr. Howard

The Chairman is correct. When we started, the majority were either outside the barracks or else kept separate, but there are problems when they live within the walls of the barracks in a location that cannot readily be sealed off.

Chairman

I do not know if Mr. Howard wishes to comment but it seems anomalous that, on the one hand, land for social housing is provided to local authorities and, on the other, the Army's personnel is no longer housed and, consequently, those in the ranks are going on local authority housing lists.

Mr. Howard

Our view is that it would be preferable for Defence Forces personnel to provide their housing independently of where they work. There is a significant turnover in the ranks of the Defence Forces nowadays and, for many serving, it does not represent a career for life. People may have a second career afterwards. If personnel occupy homes dependent on a job which will not be kept for a full working life, an unsatisfactory situation is presented from their point of view and from ours.

Chairman

What is the position on single men and women serving in the Army? Is there still a policy to provide them with accommodation?

Mr. Howard

There is still so-called living-in accommodation but I am told relatively few avail of it.

Chairman

What is the policy position on this? Are people encouraged to live outside the barracks?

Mr. Howard

Most people wish to live outside the barracks. It is up to the officer in command of each barracks to ensure that enough people are living in, so to speak, to meet any urgent requirements that might arise, but generally it is preferable that people make their own living arrangements. Experience shows that most people want to do this.

Chairman

Does the Department interact with retired Army personnel, veterans associations and so on?

Mr. Howard

I believe we do.

Chairman

Does the Department provide them with grants-in-aid towards the purchase of venues where veterans can meet?

Mr. Howard

They are allowed to avail of facilities in Army barracks, but I do not have details of such arrangements to hand. We interact with them and we have provided them with assistance.

Chairman

Army accommodation is not always suitable for such purposes for a variety of reasons. Sometimes they do not want to go back and sometimes they would prefer a downtown location. This may apply particularly to Army veterans who are unmarried, widowed or have social problems and where peer support would be beneficial. They may require drop-in facilities. They have plans to develop such facilities but, to put it bluntly, they do not get much support from the Department of Defence or the Army. I suggest that the Department examine this area.

Mr. Howard

We would certainly be very happy to examine it.

Chairman

A small grant-in-aid would help. Members of this committee will have experienced approaches from retired Army personnel and veteran associations asking them to contact the health authorities and the local authorities regarding grants-in-aid for accommodation.

Mr. Howard

The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has supported some of the veterans' associations in this regard and we had peripheral involvement in facilitating this. These organisations provide valuable resources and make a substantial contribution.

Chairman

The Department should develop a position on this and speak to the committee on it next year.

The parliamentary year is moving on and there are 12 specific items which have not been addressed by the Department. We request it do so as quickly as possible.

Mr. Purcell

I will augment some of the information on hearing loss and related legal costs referred to by Deputy Fleming. An earlier missive from the Department breaks down these costs and shows there is little percentage difference between legal costs awarded to plaintiffs in the categories of court awards, out of court settlements and the early settlement scheme.

Compensation under court awards was €4.9 million and plaintiffs' costs paid came to €2.8 million. Compensation in out of court settlements was €135 million and plaintiffs' costs paid were €70 million. Under the early settlement scheme compensation was €46 million and plaintiffs' costs paid came to €22 million. Legal costs came to, more or less, half of the compensation awarded in each of these categories, even when the case did not go to a full court hearing.

Deputy Curran mentioned the second Garda helicopter. There was a chapter on this in the annual report some years ago which goes back to the origins of this problem. There were issues relating to the delivery of the second Garda helicopter and the fitting of the hovering autopilot. There were also problems relating to the training in night flying of Air Corps personnel. There was a tug of war between the Departments on the operation of the craft and there is some history there and we are reminded of this fact today by the by-line in the appropriation accounts.

Deputy Fleming

On Army deafness cases, it has already been pointed out that State legal fees were approximately €40 million and Mr. Purcell has outlined figures of €95 million which means legal fees totalled around €135 million out of a total cost of €320 million. This suggests compensation of around €165 million was paid out. The ratio of compensation to legal fees appears to be around 60:40.

Chairman

That is outrageous.

Deputy Fleming

It is a disgrace. That is why I teased out this issue because I was unaware of the €40 million when I asked my question. Out of all moneys paid relating to Army deafness cases, the legal profession walked away with 40%, and this is a disgrace. A committee must examine the costs received by the legal profession in such cases where they walk away with almost as much money as the actual victim.

Chairman

That is the outstanding issue. Did they double charge and take some of the compensation back from those who made the claims?

Deputy Fleming

Perhaps they also took money back from them.

Chairman

It is suggested there are at least 100 cases outstanding. Is it within our remit to examine legal charges?

Mr. Purcell

If it relates to payments made by the State, then it is.

Deputy Fleming

This is an issue we could return to and on which we may request the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General to carry out a report. I am not formally requesting this now but we could discuss it in the future.

Mr. Purcell

By all means.

Deputy Fleming

The Department of Finance is preparing a report on legal costs paid by the State across all Departments.

Chairman

Are Votes 36 and 37 agreed? Agreed. The agenda of the committee's next meeting on Thursday, 22 June 2006 is the 2004 annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and appropriation accounts: Vote 19 — Office of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, chapter 5.1 — enforcement of deportation orders, and Vote 20 — Garda Síochána. I thank Mr. Howard and his colleagues for appearing before the committee today.

The committee adjourned at 2 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Thursday, 22 June 2006.