Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 16 Jun 2004

Vol. 587 No. 3

Priority Questions.

Defence Forces Investigation.

Dinny McGinley

Question:

57 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Defence if a board of military officers has reviewed the events of September 1961 at Jadotville; if the board has made a recommendation regarding further action that should be taken; the full progress to date in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18027/04]

Denis Naughten

Question:

110 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Defence further to Parliamentary Question No. 38 of 11 May 2004, the position regarding the completion of the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18022/04]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 57 and 110 together.

As I previously outlined, the Chief of Staff has received a submission from a retired Army officer who served at Jadotville seeking a review of the events of September 1961. The Chief of Staff arranged for the submission to be examined by a board of military officers. I have been informed by the Chief of Staff that he has recently received a report from the board of officers. Having examined the report, he has requested clarification on a number of matters. This clarification, which involves research of archival material, has been requested by 1 July 2004. Pending the outcome of the examination, it would not be appropriate for me to comment. I will carefully consider any recommendations that the Chief of Staff may make on the issue.

I am pleased to hear there has been some progress, hopefully significant progress, on this matter since it was last mentioned here four or five weeks ago. At that time the Minister gave an undertaking that there would be no undue delay and that it would be processed as soon as possible. Has the board of military officers charged with this matter interviewed or contacted any of the survivors who participated in the event at Jadotville 43 years ago or has any of them made submissions? The last time the Minister replied that a former serving officer in the Congo at the time made a submission? Has anybody else made a submission and, if so, has it been considered? If submissions were to be made would they be considered by the board?

As I indicated to Deputy McGinley on the last occasion, I was anxious that this matter proceed as expeditiously as possible. That has happened and the board has been established. It would not be the practice for a Minister to get involved directly in either requesting that former or retired members are met. The board is independent and will make its own independent assessment. If the board judges it necessary to meet and interview anybody it is its sole discretion to do that without let or hindrance from me.

Obviously the Chief of Staff, having seen the report, was anxious that some matters be clarified. Given that the event took place many years ago, a number of issues have to be checked and archival material has to be looked at. I have indicated to him that I am anxious to have the matter processed quickly and that the information requested should be made available to him by 1 July 2004. I should see it shortly thereafter after which I will be in direct contact with the Deputy.

I thank the Minister.

Air Accident Investigations.

Joe Sherlock

Question:

58 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Defence if an inquiry has been held into the crash of an Air Corps aircraft on 6 May 2004 in which a person (details supplied) lost his life; if the cause of the accident has been established; if a review of safety procedures is planned in view of the crash; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17934/04]

I take this opportunity to again extend my deepest sympathy to the family of Second Lieutenant Raymond Heery who was tragically killed in this accident involving an Air Corps Cessna aircraft at Clonbullogue, County Offaly, on 6 May 2004. On learning of the accident the GOC Air Corps immediately instituted an air safety investigation. The investigation team members are drawn from the Air Corps flight safety section and the Military Airworthiness Authority. The purpose of this investigation is to establish all facts pertinent to the accident, to analyse these facts and to produce safety recommendations to prevent future similar accidents. This investigation is ongoing and upon conclusion, a report will be furnished to GOC Air Corps. In addition to the aforementioned investigation, the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces is currently convening a military court of inquiry in accordance with Defence Forces regulation A5. The report of the GOC Air Corps air safety investigation, will be one of the items of evidence considered by the military court of inquiry. The Deputy will appreciate it would not be appropriate to speculate on the cause of this tragic accident until these detailed inquiries have been completed.

I join the Minister in expressing my sympathy to the family of Second Lieutenant Heery. I am sure the Minister will agree it is important that the cause of the crash be established. How long will the inquiry take? Have there been preliminary findings from the investigation? Is there an indication as to whether the cause of the crash was mechanical failure or human or other error?

At this stage it would be premature to speculate on the cause of the tragic accident. We have to allow the military court of inquiry and the air investigation to proceed. I can understand why Deputy Sherlock is anxious for me to put a time limit on it. Clearly, since it is done away from the auspices of any Minister or anybody else, I cannot put a time limit on it. I hope it will not take more than a few weeks, but I cannot be certain about that.

Has there been a review of the remainder of the Cessna aircraft? Will the Minister confirm if there is video footage of the crash and, if so, has it been made available to the investigators?

I confirm that video footage is available. It will be a matter for the military court of inquiry and the air investigation whether to utilise it. I presume all available information, video footage or otherwise, will be fully utilised to determine the true cause of the accident.

Defence Forces Equipment.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Question:

59 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Defence the circumstances under which it is envisioned that the ranger unit promised to the European Rapid Reaction Force will require the use of the four new armed helicopters that are to be purchased to boost the State’s anti-terrorist capabilities. [17933/04]

I am pleased to report to the House that the planned procurement of modern light utility and utility helicopters will provide a significant boost to the Air Corps in terms of available flying hours at reduced maintenance costs compared to the existing aircraft in the Air Corps helicopter wing. It will also provide increased capability in the roles currently undertaken by the existing Air Corps light utility helicopters.

The procurement process for the acquisition of new helicopters for the Air Corps has commenced. Following discussions between senior officials in my Department and the military authorities, it has been decided that up to six helicopters will be acquired, two light utility helicopters primarily for pilot training, instructor training and instrument flight training and four larger utility helicopters, with the option of two additional such helicopters, for general purpose military operational and training roles which will include training and operations with special forces, security and aid to the civil power, military exercises, infantry interoperability training and limited troop transport. The helicopters will also be required to perform air ambulance, aid to the civil community and VIP transport tasks.

The tender competition for the helicopters was advertised in the Official Journal of the European Communities on 29 May 2004. The closing date for the receipt of tenders is Friday, 23 July 2004. The usage of the helicopters will cover a wide spectrum of the Defence Forces' requirements and will not be dedicated for use by any particular element of the Defence Forces, including the Army ranger wing. The helicopters are not being purchased for circumstances envisioned in the Deputy's question. Ireland's commitment to the headline goal consists of an offer of up to 850 members of the Defence Forces from within our existing commitment of 850 personnel to the United Nations stand-by arrangements system. This represents 10% of our Army, a not inconsiderable undertaking by any standard.

In the context of the production of the White Paper on Defence of February 2000, the issue of deploying the Air Corps and Naval Service on peace support operations was considered and it was decided that, given the domestic demands on both services' resources, it would not be reasonable for them to participate beyond the domestic environment. There is no commitment of Air Corps or Naval Service resources in Ireland's declaration under the EU Helsinki headline goal or the United Nations stand-by arrangements system. National sovereignty and voluntarism are the fundamental underlying principles of participation in the European Security and Defence Policy. Ireland will approach each proposed peace support operation on a case-by-case basis and will participate only in operations authorised by the United Nations with the approval of the Government and, where appropriate in accordance with the Defence Acts, the approval of this House.

I hope I heard the Minister right, and he might wish to re-confirm that these helicopters will not be used in overseas operations but are primarily for training and other such operations at home. Will these helicopters be available to the Irish Coastguard in its search and rescue work which was transferred to it in the past year, considering the debacle on the west coast and the need for all the helicopters on this island to be available for emergencies at sea?

The arrangements to be made by the Irish Coastguard in terms of the search and rescue service for the islands, seafarers and the coastal community will ultimately be provided by CHCI. However, the type of helicopter being purchased and to be commissioned is a considerable advance on anything we have at the moment. Whatever call is made by any community, whether seafaring, air ambulance, training or transport, the Air Corps has traditionally met that requirement fully. I envisage that circumstances will arise whereby the Air Corps will be asked to supplement from time to time any other available services. These helicopters are specially designed for a wide range of roles. The Deputy's query will be met on some future occasion.

What armaments are included in the tender specification and are they of the NATO standard or are they specific armaments?

The tender document requests tenderers to provide a mounting for a general purpose machine gun of 7.62 mm calibre on both sides of the fuselage. The mounting will be a removable part and will not remain on the aircraft at all times. Tenderers are also asked to provide options on the capability of the helicopters to provide limited fire support covering a broad spectrum of basic weapons.

Decentralisation Programme.

Dinny McGinley

Question:

60 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Defence the timescale for the decentralisation of the Civil Defence Board; the position with regard to the chairpersonship and board membership of the Civil Defence Board; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18028/04]

In the context of the White Paper on Defence, the Government decided to decentralise the Civil Defence branch of my Department to Roscrea, County Tipperary. I expect that the move will take place later this year. On 4 May 2004, I wrote to the Chairman of the Civil Defence Board regarding his position. A response has been received within the past few days. I will consider the response at the earliest opportunity but pending such consideration it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the issues involved at this stage.

A month ago the Minister indicated in the Dáil that he was involved in a course of action regarding the position of the Chairman of the Civil Defence Board and that he had strong reasons for adopting such a course and hoped to bring the matter to a conclusion within the next two weeks, which would have been a fortnight ago. The Minister has now received a response from the chairman or his legal representatives. When does the Minister expect to bring this matter to a conclusion, as he intended doing a month ago, when he expected it would be settled by now? Has he run into further difficulties not envisaged a month ago?

I have not run into difficulties and I have no reason to change my mind except that the chairman told me that he would be unable to answer my questions as he was taking two weeks holidays. I gave him a further week to enable him to reply to the questions. It seemed fair that I should take account of his holidays and give him some extra time. That time expired a few days ago and the reply has just reached my Department.

The Minister adopted a course of action regarding the chairman, does he want his resignation?

I indicated to the chairman why I felt it necessary to ask him to terminate his office. He has an opportunity to answer the various queries which have been raised and that process is under way.

To seek the resignation of the chairman of any board, particularly one appointed by the Minister, is a very serious matter. I can recall it happening only once or twice in my 20 odd years in the Dáil. Will the Minister elaborate to the House, which is entitled to know, what grievous omissions or activities of the chairman have led to this request for his resignation? He is by all accounts a highly qualified man, he had close associations with the Minister and, without being political, with his party. The House should be told the reasons these drastic steps are being taken.

I do not have a close association with the chairman. I do my job without fear or favour. I have grave reasons for taking this action and all that information will ultimately be available to the House. However, the process of fair play for the individual concerned should give him the fullest possible opportunity to answer the queries I have raised, and that should be done privately before the matter is debated in public. When the Deputy considers his question he will agree that were he here he would do the same. Asking anyone to tender his or her resignation is a serious matter which I would not undertake lightly.

Ministerial Transport.

Joe Sherlock

Question:

61 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Defence the estimated cost of sending the Learjet from Baldonnel to Geneva airport to collect the Minister for Health and Children and his party on 19 May 2004; the number and members of the ministerial party; the number of flying hours; the crew numbers involved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17935/04]

The ministerial air transport section of my Department receives requests on a daily basis regarding the use of the MATS service. Such flights are processed, dependent on the approval of the Taoiseach and the availability of aircraft.

On 19 May, 2004 a request was received from the Department of Health and Children regarding a flight from Geneva. The passengers were the Minister for Health and Children and four officials. There were three crew on the flight, the duration of which was approximately four hours.

To determine an accurate hourly flying cost for an aircraft, it needs to be in operation for a lengthy period of up to one year. As a result, definitive direct costs for the operation of the Learjet are not yet available. However, the manufacturer's estimated direct flying cost for the Learjet is approximately €1,000 per hour.

Does the Minister accept that this incident represents a gross waste of public money and the limited resources of the Air Corps? Does he believe it appropriate that the Government jet should be sent to collect the Minister for Health and Children and his party who, apparently, could not get to the airport on time to catch their scheduled flight? Are there any statistics available regarding the number of occasions on which Air Corps aircraft have been sent to collect Ministers who missed their flights?

One of the reasons the ministerial air transport service was established was to create as flexible an arrangement as possible to enable the Government to manage the work in which it must engage across Europe, particularly during the Presidency. Most people accept the wisdom of having a facility of that kind in place. From time to time, because of delays in meetings or other unforeseen circumstances, a ministerial group can be stranded and the service is generally provided in order to ensure that a Minister is able to get home on time to attend other meetings, deal with other business demands, etc. It is an excellent, flexible and accountable service and most people would agree that it is operated on a very strict basis by the Taoiseach.

I understand, from figures I have received, that the cost of this flight was approximately €10,000. Was the permission of the Taoiseach's office sought and received in the normal way before the flight took off? Does the Minister envisage any changes in the procedures for the use of Air Corps aircraft by Ministers in light of this farcical waste of public money? In my area, €10,000 could be well spent on dealing with many matters.

One can always make one's case when one makes such farcical deductions about costs. The Learjet is regarded as excellent value for money. The purchase price of the aircraft was provided from savings I made last year. The Learjet has flown on 69 occasions since it was bought on foot of heavy demands from the Taoiseach and Ministers. If there is any complaint to be made about the Taoiseach in terms of his responsibility in this regard, most Ministers would say that he is rather too strict.

Was the permission of the Taoiseach's office sought and granted in this case?

The Deputy can take that for granted. As I indicated in my initial reply, flights on the Learjet or the Gulfstream IV are not made without the permission of the Taoiseach.

Top
Share