asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the present sum owed to this country by the United Nations in respect of services by our Defence Forces; and the steps being taken to recoup the outstanding amount.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - UN Debt to Ireland.
8.
The amount outstanding from the United Nations on 31 December 1980 in respect of claims made and of certain troop costs, for which specific claims are not required, arising from Ireland's participation in United Nations peace-keeping forces is estimated at approximately £3.4 million. Approximately £0.5 million of this amount refers to Ireland's participation in peace-keeping operations other than the UN Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL. The remaining £2.9 million arises out of participation in UNIFIL.
Some of the expenses of peace-keeping operations, such as recoupment of certain pension awards, may not arise for some time after we have ceased participating in a particular operation. These expenses, in fact, account for the greater part of the sum owing from peace-keeping operations other than UNIFIL and we are in constant touch with the United Nations about them.
As regards the amount outstanding in the case of UNIFIL, the Deputy will be aware from previous discussion of this subject that, because of the withholding by certain member states of their assessed contributions, there is a deficit of some 22 per cent in the UNIFIL account. This has resulted in countries which contribute troops to UNIFIL not being reimbursed their full entitlements under the UNIFIL financial arrangements.
However, the extra cost actually incurred by the State over and above regular expenses such as ordinary pay, in providing a contingent for service with UNIFIL, is less than our entitlement under the reimbursement arrangements. It is estimated that for the period from May 1978 to December 1980, this extra cost did not exceed £8.3 million. On the basis that only £7 million of this amount would be reimbursed by the UN, because of the withholding of contributions, the net extra cost to the State of providing a contingent to UNIFIL for the period in question would be £1.3 million.
Since the situation concerning UNIFIL finances first came to light two years ago, we have urgently pursued the matter with the United Nations in New York in conjunction with the UN Secretariat and other troop-contributing countries. The Irish delegation to the General Assembly both in 1979 and in 1980 was deeply involved in the drafting and presentation of the resolutions dealing with the financing of UNIFIL. In addition to some minor adjustments, the major improvement brought about over this period and finalised some months ago at the General Assembly, has been a revision of the basic amount that troop-contributors are to be paid per man per month. Since December 1980 this has been increased from $680 to $950. This increase should result in a substantial improvement in the reimbursements under this heading where to date the shortfall in the UNIFIL account has been particularly evident.
I am of course keeping this whole question under review and shall continue to take any action open to me to try to improve the finances of the force.
Obviously the United Nation's efforts to recoup this money have not been successful. I should like to ask if the Irish Government have made any effort to get the countries who are defaulting to pay their share? Have they made any diplomatic approaches to these countries and could the Minister name the countries who are in arrears?
Let us be frank about it. We are talking about Soviet Russia and most of the countries of the Eastern European bloc who are not contributors. There is very little that can be done in regard to them because of their attitude. We have been engaged in trying to increase the amount per man, as it were, to get a revision of the basic amount which we are to be paid per man per month. By “we” I mean the troop contributors. We got an agreement on this to raise it from 680 dollars to 950 dollars, which is a substantial improvement and will go a long way to meet the shortfall. That is the realistic approach we have taken to the matter, rather than engaging in polemics where we know polemics will not succeed.
The Minister knows they will not succeed? Surely that is what diplomatic approaches are all about? The Minister has not approached the individual states?
I mentioned the individual states. We have approached everybody. The attitude of these states is well known in the United Nations. This is a long-term matter. We have to try to approach it in a realistic manner. We have done that and we hope the shortfall will be met largely by this increase which involves an increase in the contributions from the rest of the UN other than the defaulting nations.
That amounts only to playing around with figures to make the Minister's own case look good. Will the Minister approach these countries on a separate basis, on a diplomatic basis?
This is repetition.
Will the Minister approach them separately?
The Deputy does not know the politics of the United Nations. He should ask Deputy Ryan.
Ceist 9.
I know the politics of money and we are £3.4 million down.
We will all get a fright when we get a straight answer from the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
I have given a very straight answer.