Vol. 556 No. 4
50 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the extent to which budgetary or other restrictions are likely to result in a curtailment of the development of various facilities, equipment, buildings, training or personnel within the Permanent Defence Forces; the proposals in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20567/02]
82 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the serious concerns expressed by the General Secretary of PDFORRA that the current round of cutbacks and adjustments will have serious implications for the development of the Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20506/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 50 and 82 together.
A key focus for the Minister for Defence since his appointment has been the acquisition of new equipment and the provision of modern accommodation for the Defence Forces. Significant investment has taken place which has ensured that the Defence Forces are now well equipped for their roles at home and overseas.
While much has been done, both on the equipment and the infrastructure fronts, the Minister is aware that more needs to be done. While expenditure programmes will now have to be prioritised due to the changed financial situation, substantive equipment and building programmes will still go ahead to enhance the efficiency, professionalism and safety of the Defence Forces. For example, discussions are commencing with Mowag of Switzerland this week on the acquisition of a further 25 armoured personnel carriers. In addition, the tender competition for the acquisition of trainer aircraft for the Air Corps is progressing well and the Minister hopes to be in a position to make a substantive announcement on the award of a contract before the end of the year.
With regard to infrastructural improvements, significant contracts are ongoing in various barracks, particularly in the Curragh Camp and Collins Barracks, Cork.
The Minister has ensured that there has been a policy of continuous recruitment to the Defence Forces in recent years and this policy will continue. Training of personnel has always been top of the Minister's agenda. Training will continue to be regarded as a priority and training programmes will not be curtailed in any respect because of the changed financial situation.
On this question and a number of other questions, the issue of public private partnerships has been mooted. Will the Minister of State explain precisely the role of PPPs in the Defence Forces? To what extent will they be used to assist in the provision of the services the Defence Forces are expected to provide? What are the precedents for the use of PPP in defence and security generally? In view of the current crisis, with potential threats from international terrorism coming ever increasingly into focus, does the Minister for Defence recognise the need to ensure the Permanent Defence Forces are adequately equipped and up to date in terms of all aspects of training and equipment?
Public private partnerships are being considered only in relation to the medium lift helicopters at present. A working group from the Departments of Defence and Communications, Marine and Natural Resources is examining PPPs and other options, particularly in that regard, but at present there is no proposal to move that forward. As the Deputy will be aware, PPP is being developed in other areas also.
The aim of the Minister and of the Department is to ensure our Defence Forces are fully trained and equipped to deal with all eventualities and that is why that investment is still going ahead and why we are getting the new equipment. Other new equipment has to do with specialised transport cargo vehicles, new troop carrying vehicles, new tactical VHF radios and so on. It is our continued aim to ensure that not only the facilities and the training but also the equipment of the Defence Forces is kept up to date.
Has there been any change in training in the Defence Forces since 11 September 2001? Have the cutbacks to which the Minister of State referred had any effect in the area of training in preparation for participation in the Rapid Reaction Force? Is that training taking place and, if so, what stage has it reached? Is the required equipment being purchased or is all of this being held up due to the cutbacks?
That is the subject of Question No. 63. Should I wait until we reach it?
Yes.
It has been suggested by the Minister of State, Deputy Hanafin, that the dropping of the Sikorsky contract does not particularly affect the degree to which services can be provided by the Defence Forces. In that event, what was the purpose of the contract in the first place? It would appear that by leasing aircraft, other than fixed-wing aircraft, it would be possible to continue as before. If at first it was thought the Sikorsky helicopters were necessary for the degree of service envisaged at the time they were ordered, I am at a loss to know why they do not affect the delivery of service.
As I mentioned earlier, the helicopter lease will be a three year contract. Obviously it was the intention when we went to tender to have equipment of our own for the longer term.
On the cutbacks and the Sikorsky deal, the last time the Minister answered questions in the Dáil he vigorously defended that deal even though many of us were of the opinion that it was suspect from the very beginning. There were legal proceedings initiated by Eurocopter, to name but one, which felt aggrieved at how this contract was given out. Does the Minister of State agree this cutback or re-adjustment has been a diplomatic loophole for the Minister to get out of that suspect deal?
A strategic withdrawal.
A strategic withdrawal, to put it in military terms, yes.
The Minister would not agree.
That is even worse.
On Question No. 82, the effect of such cutbacks and adjustments will have serious implications for the development of the Defence Forces? The Minister of State answered clearly but I did not get the message. I request her to repeat that part.
At the outset I stated where the savings have been made. The savings on hearing loss compensation are due because they would not be paid before the end of the year. In no way are the Defence Forces going to suffer as a result of that.
The Air Corps is affected only as a result of not going ahead with the contract for the helicopter but, as I stated earlier, there will be a leased helicopter and therefore it will not affect them. Their training, numbers and so on will continue as heretofore. The savings on pay and allowances – the other €13 million – are due to the rate of recruitment being less than anticipated. There are, however, still 10,606 members. We do not envisage that the current number and regular recruitment will be affected.
We have been dealing with income and expenditure in the Department and, until now, mostly with expenditure. What has happened to the income that accrued from the sale of Defence Forces properties to date? Is a brochure of extra property to be disposed of prepared or being prepared in the Department?
All the money gained from the sale of properties has been re-invested in full in the Department of Defence and in the Defence Forces. No such brochure is planned. It is not our intention to sell any further barracks.
