Vol. 509 No. 4
34 Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Defence if he will report on the accident investigation which is currently taking place into the fatal Air Corps crash in July 1999; the scope of the inquiry and the progress to date; the individuals who are involved in the inquiry; the expected date of completion; the plans, if any, he has for investment in aircraft for the Air Corps; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20586/99]
35 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Defence the investigation which has been held into the fatal crash of a helicopter on 2 July 1999 in which four members of the Air Corps lost their lives; the preliminary findings, if any, available from this investigation; the new safety procedures, if any, introduced as a result of the crash; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20433/99]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 34 and 35 together.
Following the accident at Tramore, County Waterford on 2 July 1999 in which four members of the Air Corps were tragically killed, my colleague, the Minister for Public Enterprise, and I jointly directed that the accident be investigated under Statutory Instrument Number 205 of 1997 – Air Navigation (Notification and Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1997. Pursuant to this direction the investigation is being conducted by the Air Accident Investigation Unit of the Department of Public Enterprise. A senior Air Corps officer with appropriate training is acting as investigator-in-charge. He is being assisted by inspectors from the AAIU, Air Corps personnel and two experts from overseas, a principal inspector from the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch and the head of military psychology of the Swedish Armed Forces.
The purpose of this investigation, which is wide-ranging and complex, is to determine the circumstances and cause or causes of the accident in order to prevent future such accidents. The report of this investigation will be made public. The regulations provide that the report should be published, where possible, within 12 months of the date of the accident. There is no provision for the publication of preliminary findings. Any safety measures proposed by the investigating team will be implemented as a matter of priority.
In addition to the aforementioned investigation, a Military Court of Inquiry has been convened to inquire into the circumstances of the accident. Its main thrust will be an examination of both the report of the Air Accident Investigation Unit of the Department of Public Enterprise and the coroner's report.
The question of future equipment requirements for the Air Corps will be dealt with in the context of the White Paper on Defence which I plan to bring forward by the end of the year. Following the review of the Air Corps which was carried out by consultants Price Waterhouse, I asked the chief of staff to prepare, in conjunction with the general officer commanding the Air Corps, a draft implementation plan for my consideration to give effect to the effectiveness and efficiency recommendations made in the consultants' report. The draft plan was submitted in recent days and is under examination.
Obviously in any discussion of this tragedy our first thoughts are with the families who have suffered an appalling loss but I want to put a number of questions to the Minister. In relation to the Dauphin, the helicopter being used at the time, I understand the Air Corps made their views known to the Minister that the Dauphin should not be replaced by another Dauphin but by a medium range aircraft. Has the Minister made a decision on that? Does he accept that a medium range helicopter would be a safer aircraft for the Air Corps to use in search and rescue work because of the extra fuel for diversion and better capacity to uplift more survivors?
It is important to state that all of the equipment and aircraft used by the Air Corps are fully examined to ensure the safety of the pilots, the personnel in the aircraft and whomsoever may be rescued or carried for whatever reason. That being said, it is probably unlikely that a similar type of aircraft would be purchased in the context of changes that have taken place since that time. We have just received the implementation plan from the chief of staff, which I have not yet had an opportunity to read, and we are also finalising the deliberations on the White Paper. Those two combined will be avail able soon and will signpost the type of developments we envisage for the Air Corps which will be very positive, but the determination of the type of aircraft is a specialist area which requires a great deal of attention. As soon as we have made a determination on that I will inform the House but it is unlikely that it will be a similar type of aircraft to what is currently in use.
What contacts have been made with the manufactures of the Dauphin in relation to the crash? I understand this helicopter has been replaced on the south east coast. What new safety procedures, if any, have been put in place? In light of the seriousness of what happened on this terrible occasion, has anything been highlighted in the inquiry so far, to warrant the provision of extra safety facilities in that area?
The investigation and the court of inquiry is ongoing and we should not reach any premature conclusions on the cause of the accident. However, safety and safety requirements, as far as the Air Corps is concerned, is something we must constantly review in the light of new information and changed circumstances. The Deputy and the House can be assured that in conducting their duties Air Corps personnel consider safety, and all measures related to it, as a top priority. With the type of work they do, we could not stay in business ten minutes unless these matters were observed to the fullest possible extent.
There has been contact with the manufacturers. They are not involved in the investigation but parts of the aircraft have been sent back to the manufactures. All of the international opinion I have read in relation to the Dauphin aircraft is strong on safety. Nonetheless parts of the aircraft, for obvious reasons, have been sent back to the manufacturer and we will await the observations that will be made in due course in the context of the overall inquiry.
I am disappointed the Minister has not yet made a decision to reinvest in aircraft for the Air Corps. Will he accept that it is difficult for our Air Corps pilots to see Bond Helicopters, which supplies the service from Dublin and Shannon, using medium lift helicopters even though our pilots are doing equally dangerous search and rescue work? When will the Minister make a decision about investment in the Air Corps? Will he agree that if we are to attract more pilots into the Air Corps, they must see that the Minister is investing in the service?
Part and parcel of any good organisation is to make sure that we re-equip and provide the best possible facilities to carry out the functions determined by the Government as required from the Air Corps. The Deputy should not be disappointed. We have had an exhaustive examination of the Air Corps. An implementation plan has just come to hand which I have not yet seen. A White Paper to develop medium-term policy for the Defence Forces as a whole will be published before the end of the year. From recent discussions with senior Air Corps personnel on this matter – assuming we were in a position to decide today the type of aircraft we require – it appears that there would still be a time lag, both in terms of the provision of funds and the acquisition of that aircraft. However, we will be engaged in that work in the very near future.
What are the Minister's views on the newspaper reports that the Air Corps was pressurised into introducing the 24 hour service in this region sooner than it would have liked? This statement was refuted by the Defence Forces' spokesperson. However, does the Minister have any statement to make on it?
I am not accountable for press reports. From my observations of the Air Corps since I was appointed Minister, it goes to the extremes, in terms of safety, before flying aircraft. There were occasions when I would have liked that situation to be slightly different because I wanted to get somewhere on time. Anybody who is any way associated with the Air Corps would say that any such statement does not have a foundation.
The safety procedures of the Air Corps are not in question here. Deputy Wall raised the question of whether there was political pressure to introduce the service early. The key point I was making was not about the safety record of the Air Corps itself, but about the resources and type of aircraft that have been made available and the delay in providing helicopters, such as the Sea King used by the RAF, the Super Puma used by the French or the Sikorsky which the Bond company uses.
The two things are interconnected. The determination of the Air Corps and air personnel to adhere to very stringent safety procedures means that political pressure could not ever make them ignore any of those fundamentals. Why should it? We are dealing with life and death in such situations and there are not any second chances.
I have answered the question about equipment many times. I inherited this situation and I could talk about how little was done at different times. However, I will not do that because the responsibility is now mine and I will fulfil that responsibility to the best of my ability.
