asked the Minister for Defence the circumstances in which military vehicles or helicopters are made available for commercial purposes.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Military Transport Use.
10.
It is not the normal practice to make military vehicles available for the such purposes. Army helicopters are only made available for commercial purposes when helicopter operators cannot supply them.
11.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will confirm that all users of Air Corps helicopters, including the health boards and the Gardaí, pay for the use of them at a standard rate; and why a free security service is provided for the banks, when the health boards have to pay for emergency services.
Charges for Army helicopters are made only when they are provided for commercial purposes.
With effect from 1 January 1980, no charges are being made on health boards for Army helicopters provided under the air ambulance service.
With regard to the last part of the question, the Defence Forces, when requested, give assistance to the Garda Síochána in security operations, including operations involving the movements of large amounts of cash. As on such occasions the Defence Forces are acting in aid of the civil power the question of making a charge for such operations is not a matter for my Department.
Did I understand from the Minister's reply that this service would be available to health boards free of charge from 1 January next?
No, from January 1980.
There will be no further charge for any kind of security services provided by the Army, Air Corps or Naval Service?
I was referring to charges to health boards. I will repeat the relevant portion of the question:
With effect from 1 January 1980, no charges are being made on health boards for Army helicopters provided under the air ambulance service.
Could the Minister give an indication of the hourly rate at which helicopters are charged when commercial rates are not charged?
Question No. 12.
The Minister mentioned charges in the case of commercial activities. Are these rates reviewed and, if so, how regularly?
I am afraid I could not answer that off the cuff but I shall let the Deputy have the information.
12.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will state in relation to April 1980, the number of helicopter flights by helicopters of the Defence Forces on which personnel other than Defence Forces personnel were carried; and the names of the people involved.
There were thirty-five flights by Army helicopters in April 1980 on which people other than members of the Defence Forces were carried.
It has not been the practice to furnish the names of the people concerned.
Can the Minister tell me whether any of the people who were carried on these flights were carried at the request of the Taoiseach or of the Taoiseach's Department?
As I pointed out in my reply, it is not the practice to furnish that type of information. Military helicopters are used extensively in security operations and details of any military helicopter flights could have a security implication. It is sufficient to say that all the flights are authorised by the responsible Minister, that is, by me.
Could the Minister say whether if the Taoiseach or the Taoiseach's Department made a request for non-military personnel to be carried on an Army helicopter the Department of Defence would have any option but to accept that request?
I am not going to answer a hypothetical question.
While the Minister said there were 38 persons——
No, 35 flights.
——in which people were carried, other than members of the Defence Forces, the Minister stated security reasons for not giving the information because they are used in helping the security forces, including the police, would the Minister give us the names of people, other than those who were carried for security reasons or who had any connection with security flights?
No, I do not propose to give any names.
The Minister is refusing to give the names?
It has not been the practice to furnish the names and I do not to propose to establish a precedent.
This information has not been sought before.
I am sure the Minister will appreciate that if there was a genuine reason of a security nature we would not press for the names. I am now asking for the names of persons, other than members of the security forces, or who are not connected with security flights? Could the Minister give us those names and the destinations to which those people were carried?
I do not propose to be drawn by this type of petty innuendo.
It would clear it up.
The names of those travelling in military helicopters have never been disclosed and I do not propose to create any precedent.
The newspapers have it every day.
A taxi service—that is what it is being used for.
We in this House vote money for those flights. We are prepared to accept fully that where it is a matter of security the Minister should not be pressed but, where it is not, why should we accept that type of cover-up under the blanket of security?
There is no cover-up.
Will the Minister not give us the names and destinations?
There is no cover-up. All the flights were authorised in the normal fashion. There were no irregular flights.
The Minister mentioned some 30-odd flights. Could he give us some indication even of the number of people carried if he will not tell us their names?
Did the Minister authorise each one of the flights in question?
I am calling question No. 14.
I am the Minister responsible for the authorisation of flights.
And the Minister authorised each individual one?
Could the Minister simply tell us—in order to clear up any possible doubt—whether any of these authorised flights carrying non-military personnel travelled to Inish Vickillane and back over the Easter period?
I have made it very clear that there were no irregular flights. I stand over any flights authorised by me.
Question No. 13 is for written reply.