Billy Timmins
Question:1 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Defence if he has had any request to send troops to the Sudan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12521/05]
Priority Questions.
Overseas Missions.
Joe Sherlock
Question:5 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Defence if Irish troops are to be deployed to the Sudan as part of a multinational peacekeeping force established to police the recent peace accord; if a formal request has been received from the UN’s department of peacekeeping operations; the number of Irish troops that are likely to be deployed; the types of activities they will be involved in; the timeframe for the deployment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12525/05]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 5 together.
The United Nations department of peacekeeping operations has invited Ireland to contribute a small number of Defence Forces personnel to act as UN military observers with the recently established United Nations mission in the Sudan. The request to participate in the peacekeeping operation in the Sudan is being given the careful consideration all such requests from the UN receive. The mission is aimed to support the comprehensive peace agreement for southern Sudan which was signed by the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Army in Nairobi on 9 January 2005.
Ireland has been strongly supportive of the peace process in the Sudan generally and in the troubled region of Darfur in particular. We have provided financial support to the African Union mission, to which we have also seconded an Army officer. Ireland has also contributed considerable aid support to the Sudan. Last week the Government announced that it would provide €15 million for the recovery and reconstruction of the Sudan during the period 2005-07.
Assessment of the UN request must to take into account the numbers of Permanent Defence Force personnel available for overseas service. Currently, 750 Irish soldiers serve abroad from a total of 850 soldiers maintained under the UN stand-by arrangements system. The number of soldiers can fluctuate and stood at approximately 770 some months ago. Members of the Permanent Defence Force serve currently in eight overseas UN missions, including those in Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Western Sahara, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cyprus, Lebanon and the Middle East. Personnel have also been assigned to the multinational forces authorized by the Security Council in Kosovo, Bosnia Herzegovina and Afghanistan.
Does the Minister intend to supply soldiers to the Sudan mission? He did not make it clear whether he would, but said the matter was under consideration. Does he agree that the UN mandate in Darfur is ineffective? Observers from the African Union are helpless to address the atrocities which are taking place, but there are plenty of them to tell the western world what is happening. The UN mandate is ineffective because of the lack of resolve of the permanent members of the Security Council. The difficulty inherent in the Government's position on the triple lock is inherent in the requirement to wait for an organisation as ineffectively organised as the UN at Security Council level before any problem can be tackled. As the resolve does not exist in the Security Council to address this matter, I urge the Minister to make a point by refusing to supply soldiers and outlining the reasons I have stated for not doing so.
The request is the result of UN Resolution 1590 of 24 March 2005. A small number of military personnel at officer level have been requested to act as observers to the mission in southern Sudan rather than in Darfur. The Chief of Staff of the Army has circulated the Defence Forces seeking volunteers and this process will conclude on 28 April. Currently, 134 officers serve abroad. If more than 12 officers come forward, Dáil approval will have to be sought to send them overseas. The Government will have to decide, whatever number of officers volunteer, whether to send them to the Sudan and it will take a number of criteria into account. The process will involve asking how useful the mission will be to the overall situation in the Sudan and how it accords with Irish foreign policy. The most significant issue to take into account will be the level of risk associated with the mission. A risk assessment is being carried out.
While the Minister may have answered some of the following, I restate the questions as supplementaries. Has a formal request been received from the United Nations for soldiers for the Sudan? Has the Minister consulted with the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Conor Lenihan, who has visited the Sudan? What is the current level of troop commitment to UN duty abroad and how many soldiers are likely to be required? Will the mission involve peacekeeping or peace enforcement?
A formal request has been received for soldiers from the United Nations. I have consulted the Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, who has recently been to the Sudan and who has spoken to me about it in some detail. Our current commitment to UN missions abroad is 750 soldiers. According to the terms of the request we received, the mission will be a peacekeeping operation. A peace treaty has been signed and forces are necessary to maintain it.
Does the Minister agree that the UN observer mission is relatively ineffective?
The Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, has discussed the matter with me and expressed the view that there are serious problems with the current UN operation. It does not appear to be achieving the results we would all like to see. I agree, therefore, it is relatively ineffective. The UN has informed the Minister of State that it is attempting to take the appropriate steps to bolster the mission to make it effective.
I would like it to be made very clear whether the mission is one of peacekeeping or peace enforcement. The Minister is aware of the instability in the Darfur region of the Sudan. Has an assessment been carried out of the security situation? Will the Minister provide an assurance that a full security assessment will be carried out before any Irish soldiers are committed?
I am very happy to reassure Deputy Sherlock on the last point. We must carry out a security assessment before troops are committed to any mission. As we speak, a risk assessment operation is under way.
The Deputy asked about peacekeeping and peace enforcement, and a great deal depends on how one interprets either term. According to the data which accompanied the UN request for soldiers, it appears the mission in southern Sudan is a peacekeeping operation. Others might interpret it differently. I will ask my officials to send Deputy Sherlock the information which accompanied the request. That should be possible and it would allow the Deputy to judge the matter for himself.
Is the Minister of the opinion that the force should engage in peacekeeping or peace enforcement? Is there not a significant difference between peacekeeping and peace enforcement?
While there is a significant difference, the Deputy will be aware that the Petersberg Tasks have been expanded to encompass peace enforcement as well as peacekeeping. I understand a comprehensive peace agreement for southern Sudan was signed by the Government of Sudan and the organisation calling itself The People's Liberation Army in Nairobi on 9 January 2005. As a result of the treaty, refugees will return voluntarily and human rights will fall to be protected as people are entitled to live in peace. It is to facilitate this process that UN help has been sought. That looks like a peacekeeping operation, but whether it is peacekeeping or peace enforcement, both categories are covered under the Petersberg Tasks.
Security Escorts.
Joe Sherlock
Question:2 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Defence the annual cost to his Department of providing military escorts for cash in transit transfers; the total amount of the cost, in cash and percentage terms contributed by banks for these military escorts; if he has asked banks (details supplied) to contribute more money to his Department for the military escorts given to security firms; if he has received any response from the banks to this request; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12524/05]
To aid the civil power, meaning in practice to assist, when requested, the Garda Síochána which has the primary responsibility for law and order, including the protection of the internal security of the State, is among the roles assigned to the Defence Forces. In this regard, the Defence Forces assist the Garda as required in duties which include escorting cash deliveries to banks, post offices and other institutions.
An annual contribution of €2.86 million is paid by the banks in respect of Army escorts. This figure was set by the Department of Finance in the 1995 budget and has not been altered since. The contribution from the banks was designed to part-cover the total costs to the State of providing cash escorts. At that time, the contribution covered approximately 72% of the total cost arising to the Defence Forces, which includes pay and allowances. Based on annual costings by my Department, the relative level of the contribution has fallen in real terms over the years to the situation where it now only covers 43% of total costs.
Since taking over as Minister for Defence, I have had a number of discussions with the Irish Bankers Federation on this matter, with a view to increasing the level of contribution by the banks in respect of the costs incurred by my Department in the provision of cash escorts. While the ongoing discussions are difficult and the banks put their position robustly, the banks and the IBF have been positive and constructive in their dealings with me and I welcome this.
My most recent meeting with them was on Wednesday last, 13 April, and we continue to make progress. The Irish Bankers Federation will shortly revert to my Department following further discussions with its members. It is my hope that my officials and officials of the IBF will then be in a position to complete a draft memorandum of understanding between the Department of Defence and the IBF in regard to the financial aspects of the Defence Forces' involvement in cash escorts.
The total cost in respect of the provision by the Defence Forces of assistance to the Garda Síochána in protecting movements of cash in 2003, the latest year for which figures have been finalised, was in excess of €6.6 million, including pay, allowances, transport and aerial surveillance. This related to 2,335 escorts, approximately 80% of which covered deliveries to banks.
For the first nine months of 2004, approximately 1,825 escorts took place. In any given month, approximately 1,592 Army man-days are expended on these escorts.
The Minister has answered the last part of my question which related to the number of troops involved on an annual basis in escorting cash consignments. Does he consider it acceptable that financial institutions which make annual profits of billions of euro each year — last year AIB made profits of €1.4 billion — should effectively ask taxpayers to subsidise the provision of escorts for them? Does the Minister believe that the financial institutions should pay for the escorts?
Deputy Sherlock always asks his questions plainly and I will try to answer as plainly as I can. I do not consider it acceptable. If I thought it were acceptable I would not be negotiating for an increase. I would not have called in the institutions and said that I want an increased contribution from them.
The initiative whereby the Garda Síochána, subsequently with back-up from the Army, began to escort these cash transit operations commenced in 1978 as a result of a spectacular robbery in my adjoining constituency in west Limerick, at Barna Gap where a large amount of cash was seized. There was paramilitary involvement in that robbery and it was considered at the time that the State had an interest in not letting large consignments of cash fall into the hands of paramilitaries or other criminal elements. Obviously the paramilitary threat has receded somewhat but there is ample evidence that the people involved in cash transit robberies at present are highly organised criminal gangs who are looking for money to invest, largely in the drug trade.
I do not think it is acceptable that only 43% of our costs are being covered. I want that increased and I have engaged in extensive negotiations that are nearing completion.
Is it not the case that there has never been a successful robbery of a cash consignment under Army escort? Given that, is it not reasonable that financial institutions would pay the full price for the provision of such escorts? When does the Minister hope his talks with the financial institutions will conclude and what prospects does he have for a successful conclusion for the State?
I agree it is not acceptable that only 43% of the costs of security escorts are being met at present. That is why I have been endeavouring to increase the contribution. I am not asking the banks for the full cost of the cash escorts because all the activity does not relate to banks. Some 20% covers post offices and a small amount relates to other financial institutions such as the Central Bank and so on. In effect, I am asking the banks to pay for what they are getting.
They have made various points to me such as that they are contributing a great deal in taxes to the Revenue. They also make the point that there is an extra cost entailed when the Army is involved in cash escorts, such as subsistence allowances, security duty allowances, the cost of transport etc. They further stated that even today the amount they are paying covers that extra cost and that we would be meeting the basic wages anyway. That is the substance of their argument. I have put counter arguments but I am sure the House is not interested in the detailed negotiations.
To answer the latter part of the Deputy's question, I have told the banks that I want this matter finalised and concluded within the next fortnight.
Common Foreign and Security Policy.
John Gormley
Question:3 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Defence the reason Ireland’s membership of the European Defence Agency was not brought before Dáil Éireann for consideration; the terms of Ireland’s membership of the agency; if membership will require an increase in defence spending; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12589/05]
A decision to establish an intergovernmental agency in the field of defence capabilities development, research, acquisition and armaments, known as the European Defence Agency, was formally adopted at the General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting on 12 July 2004. Following an initial start-up phase during 2004, the agency is now operational, with its senior management in place and a budget and work programme for 2005 approved by defence Ministers of the participating member states.
The overall aim of the agency is to assist member states in their efforts to improve European defence capabilities in support of European Security and Defence Policy. To achieve this, the agency has been ascribed four functions relating to, defence capabilities development, armaments co-operation, the European defence technological and industrial base and defence equipment market and research and technology.
The agency will be an important forum by which the EU can seek to improve competitiveness and efficiency in the defence equipment sector which has been notable for fragmentation and duplication. While Ireland is not a major consumer of defence equipment, we should encourage developments which improve market efficiencies or which may yield some economies of scale for equipment procurement for the Defence Forces.
Against this background, at its meeting on 6 July 2004 the Government agreed that Ireland would participate in the framework of the agency. There is no requirement for Dáil approval for participation in the agency, which is an intergovernmental agency within the framework of ESDP. Participation in the framework of the agency does not impose any specific obligations or commitments on Ireland other than a contribution to the budget of the agency. Participation in individual projects of the agency will be a matter for national decision on a case-by-case basis.
National contributions to the budget of the agency are calculated on the basis of the gross national income scale in accordance with Article 28(3) of the Treaty on the European Union. Ireland has paid a contribution of €21,733.07 towards the agency's initial general budget of €2.4 million for 2004. The budget for 2005, estimated at €25 million, includes once-off capital provisions for accommodation and infrastructure items, and means that Ireland's contribution towards the running of the agency will therefore be of the order of €315,000.
As the Minister knows, the EU constitution has not yet been approved and yet the European Defence Agency is up and running. Will the Minister indicate on what legal basis it is running or is it in a legal limbo? He says this was an intergovernmental decision. Is it not extraordinary that a move of such significance was not debated in this House? Is this considered to be so unpalatable for many Irish people that it was decided to try to hide it away until such time as the Green Party tried to expose it?
On the question of spending, as the Minister probably knows, I was on the defence working group of the Convention on the Future of Europe. It was clear there that the idea behind this was not just to co-ordinate or spend better, but also to spend more. Will the Minister agree that as a consequence we will have to increase spending? That is precisely the idea, to make Europe more significant militarily on the international stage.
I will answer Deputy Gormley's questions in sequence. The Government took a decision on 6 July 2004, to participate in this agency. Every other government in Europe is participating with the exception of Denmark, according to my information. I presume the Attorney General attended that meeting, although it was before my time in Government. I presume he would have advised the Government if it was doing anything illegal.
As regards the debate in the House, there is a number of things an Administration can do, without the requirement for a debate in the House. Sometimes matters which do not warrant debate may be decided by the Government if there is not sufficient time. The Deputy can appreciate the pressure of time in the House. I respectfully suggest to him that if he wants a debate Private Members' time is an obvious mechanism to use.
We do not get too much of it.
Deputy Gormley will also be aware that there is severe pressure on Government time. Every morning on the Order of Business we are asked the whereabouts of this, that or the other Bill. Time is not limitless. However, I would not agree that the objective of this agency is to spend more. It seems to me from what I have read about it, that the whole focus is on better spending and that is why——
Better and more.
As far as I can see "better" is the primary focus. I do not believe there is anything particularly sinister about this. Every country in Europe, with the exception of Denmark, has agreed to participate. At the moment, we have just agreed to be involved in the framework. No particular project has been undertaken yet. For example, a procurement project has not been undertaken and nobody has yet done anything in this regard. As a sovereign State, Ireland has the right to decide on whether to get involved in any project initiated by the agency, on a case by case basis. All we have done so far is to agree to participate in the framework of the agency, in co-operation with our European partners.
Hospital Accommodation.
Billy Timmins
Question:4 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Defence the position with respect to the availability of St. Bricin’s Military Hospital to the Minister for Health and Children; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12613/05]
As the House will be aware, earlier this week I stated my desire to make the use of facilities at St. Bricin's Military Hospital available to the public health service. This offer includes the three specific areas for the treatment of civilian patients identified back in 2001, but also includes any possible options that the Health Service Executive might wish to put to the Department of Defence for the use of medical and health care facilities at St. Bricin's.
On Monday last, 18 April, representatives from the Health Service Executive visited St. Bricin's hospital to inspect the facilities there. I inspected the hospital facility earlier this week. Further detailed examinations and surveys are now in process. The three possible areas identified in 2001 for treatment of civilian patients in St. Bricin's were acute day case surgery; the provision of step down inpatient services from acute hospital care, such as intensive nursing of the chronically ill, convalescent services for the hospitalised elderly etc.; and the use of the St. Bricin's complex for general community-based health care and social care services.
When the question of the potential use of St. Bricin's hospital for treatment of civilian patients was last looked at in 2000-2001, a detailed feasibility study was carried out into the first of the three identified possible uses, acute day case ophthalmic surgery, as a pilot project. That feasibility study indicated that this project would not have been cost effective for the Northern Area Health Board. In the event, the Northern Area Health Board secured access to suitable facilities elsewhere in Dublin.
Since that time St. Bricin's hospital has undergone a refurbishment programme, including fire safety works and rewiring, largely focused on meeting health and safety criteria. Inpatient capacity at St. Bricin's Hospital has fluctuated over recent years due to refurbishment works and the use of some wards for medical storage. In reply to a parliamentary question in April last year, my predecessor indicated that the then functional capacity was 48, with an inpatient occupancy rate of 20% of capacity. It should be borne in mind that the Army medical corps itself does not have the staffing resources to operate a public health service. The possibility that the provision of treatment for civilian patients at St. Bricin's might raise some legal questions will also need to be examined.
St. Bricin's Military Hospital is the logistics base facility of the medical corps.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Its functions are to provide a primary care facility for the Dublin garrisons, an occupational medical service base for the Defence Forces, a limited inpatient capability for the Defence Forces both in Ireland and in support of overseas deployment and a medical logistics base for the provision of medical equipment, pharmaceutical supplies and strategic medical supplies for the Defence Forces. The St. Bricin's complex also provides accommodation for the Army pensions board.
I am now awaiting receipt of the considered opinion of the Health Service Executive arising from its inspections of St. Bricin's Hospital. I will positively consider its proposals for all possible public health care use of St. Bricin's facilities, and my Department is available to do everything possible to co-operate with it.
I understand the Minister may have won an award earlier in the week. It is a gimmick of the year award and I am sure it was based on the suggestion—
That does not arise in Question Time.
I congratulate the Minister on this gimmick of the year award and——
It is not appropriate to congratulate the Minister. The Deputy should just ask the question.
I suggest he gets a CD into his ministerial Mercedes and listens to music on the way to Limerick, rather than coming up with these ideas.
Did the Minister for Health and Children put the suggestion to him or did he come up with it, himself? If it was put to him or when he came up with the idea, did he not think of asking the director of the medical corps if it was actually possible to use St. Bricin's? If he did not, why not? If he did, would he agree that the director, Colonel Collins, would have told him what he said in his article in the Irish Medical Times, dated 7 March 2005, to the effect that it simply could not be used as a civilian facility in its current condition? He said a working group had investigated the possibility but found it was not feasible.
I do not know what Deputy Timmins is talking about. As regards gimmick of the year award, I understand I was granted heckler of the year award, which is a sufficiently dubious distinction in itself.
This is not a gimmick. I have been inundated with requests and people talking to me about St. Bricin's in view of the accident and emergency departments crisis. We all agree there is a crisis. St. Bricin's is a fine facility within easy distance of the Mater hospital and people believe it should be made available. I have had requests literally from the day I came into the Department. I have spoken to a number of people, including the Minister for Health and Children. She spoke to me about it two months ago. Various people from all sides of the political divide have asked me if it could be made available. I have always made it clear that it is my job and my decision whether to make it available. If the Department of Health and Children wants to use it in any capacity it is up to the Department to spend money on it. How much use it gets out of it will depend on how much money is spent.
Deputy Timmins is right. There was a feasibility study in 2001, but that was only in relation to one particular use. The study group found that it was not cost effective, because it would have cost €3 million at the time, for a limited throughput of patients. Since then about €2 million has been spent on rewiring etc., which was a substantial part of the problem identified at the time. As regards Colonel Collins, I have no dispute with what he said. He said in the Irish Medical Times that it could not be used without expenditure being incurred. That is precisely what I have said all the time. It is up to the Department of Health and Children. The Department is examining it as we speak. I understand architects are there from the Department of Health and Children. They will decide to what extent it can be used or how much they want to spend or can afford, and whether it is cost effective. I am only making it available on the basis that the Department of Health and Children spends money on it. The use it will get from the facility depends on how much it is prepared to spend.
Earlier in the week I was shown around St. Bricin's by several people, including Colonel Collins. He, as the expert in the area, referred to various figures for putting the ward into public use. The air-conditioning in the operating theatre has to be adjusted to ensure it can be used. Our engineering section reckons this will cost X amount. The figures are relative modest when placed in the context of the total health services budget and the moneys spent on acquiring private nursing homes for step-down facilities. During the week I read a newspaper report that claimed that it had been decided the facilities could not be used, but that is rubbish. The Department of Health and Children has not yet come back to me on the proposal. I believe the facilities there can be used and I am confident they will be.
Did the Minister consult the medical director before he made the announcement? How much will it cost to get the 20 beds in operation? In a bid to save funds, will he tell the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children that there are 13 beds in a ward in Loughlinstown Hospital that are not used?
Approximately 100 beds could be used in St. Bricin's as there are only four patients there. Deputy Timmins may be concerned about the military holding what it has and the interests of the Defence Forces being served. However, PDFORRA, which represents enlisted troops, issued a statement welcoming the opening up of St. Bricin's for accident and emergency facilities.
As does the Fine Gael Party, if it is practicable.
Yes, along the lines I suggested. All Ministers can hold on to the empires in their Departments. However, if one is lying on a hospital trolley, different considerations apply. If beds are available, they must be used. I encourage the Department of Health and Children to take up the use of St. Bricin's facilities. It will be more cost effective than the measures being taken to resolve the crisis in accident and emergency facilities.
What will it cost?
The last costing I received was for €3 million.
For 200 beds.
No, 25 beds and the operating theatre. That will be 25 more free beds in the Mater.
Question No. 5 answered with QuestionNo. 1.