Vol. 611 No. 5
51 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Defence if he has received the interdepartmental reports of possible Irish involvement in EU battle groups; the recommendations of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38254/05]
I apologise for the absence of the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, who is in RTE at the moment on budget matters. The background to the rapid response element concept, sometimes referred to as battle groups, is that at the European Council in Helsinki in 1999, member states set themselves a headline goal that by 2003, co-operating together and voluntarily, they will be able to deploy rapidly and then sustain forces capable of the full range of Petersberg Tasks as set out in the Amsterdam treaty. In short, these are humanitarian, rescue, peacekeeping and crisis management operations, including peacemaking. This included, inter alia, a capability to provide rapid response elements available and deployable at very high readiness. The ambition of the EU to be able to respond rapidly to emerging crises has and continues to be a key objective of the development of the European security and defence policy, ESDP.
Ireland supports the development of the EU's rapid response capability in support of UN authorised missions and is positively disposed towards participation in the rapid response elements in this regard. However, it is important that the full implications of our participation are assessed and, to this end, the Minister for Defence established an interdepartmental group which includes representatives of his Department, the Defence Forces, the Taoiseach's Department, the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Attorney General's office to consider the policy, legislative and operational issues arising from participation.
The Minister received the report from the interdepartmental group last week and is reviewing it. The report deals comprehensively with a range of issues related to rapid response elements-battle groups and issues arising in the context of overseas service by the Defence Forces generally. Once the Minister has had an opportunity to consider the matter he plans to consult his colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, with a view to bringing proposals to Government as to how we then proceed. In advance of the Government having had the opportunity to consider the issue, it would be inappropriate to comment on the relevant actions which may be taken pursuant to the group's report.
It is a welcome change to have the Minister of State at the Department of Defence, Deputy Kitt, standing in for the Minister. I look forward to eliciting much more information than we are accustomed to getting from the Minister.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. However, the Minister for Defence stated earlier in the summer he hoped to bring proposals to Cabinet by the end of September and to make an announcement on the situation. It is important there is movement on Ireland's commitment to participate in EU battle groups because we will otherwise be left behind. Fine Gael supports the concept. Will the Minister of State indicate when these reports or their recommendations will be made public and what the Minister's view is on the matter?
The Minister said the report would review the involvement of personnel overseas in general. The Minister stated at the RACO conference that we may have to cut back on the number of officers serving overseas, but that would be a retrograde step. If there is a difficulty — I do not believe there is — we should consider restructuring our home commitments. It is important we maintain our overseas commitment.
I agree with the Deputy that the work being undertaken by the Minister in consultation with his colleagues is important. The Minister is anxious to report back as soon as possible, but that is all I am able to say today. He has just received it but will not delay in bringing forward his proposals to Cabinet.
The Deputy will be aware there is another parliamentary question today on the subject of RACO, which I am confident we will get to. I will be glad to share with the House my and the Minister's views on that issue. It is important we proceed as quickly as possible but that we get it right. The Minister has said in the House it is a complex issue and that he would prefer to get it right than rush headlong into it.
The interdepartmental group he established has completed the comprehensive review on all issues relating to the rapid response element-battle groups. There has been a discussion on the term "battle groups" and the consensus, with which I agree, seems to be that it is not ideal, but we all know what is involved. There are wider issues to be dealt with.
The report is detailed and will be given the consideration it deserves. The Minister will report back without delay.
52 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Defence the protocol and regulations in place for the use of Defence Forces weapons at public or publicity events; the safety guidelines that govern the use of such weapons by non-Defence Forces personnel at such events; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38253/05]
The items usually displayed by the Defence Forces at public or publicity events such as charity events, recruitment drives etc. include vehicles, armoured vehicles or aircraft, technical equipment such as radios and engineering equipment, and clothing or personal kit items. Defence Forces weapons are not displayed at public or publicity events.
From time to time events arise which are organised, controlled and secured by Defence Forces personnel, such as visits by VIPs, where non-Defence Forces personnel are permitted to handle weapons. These types of events are normally conducted within the confines of military establishments and all weapons are handled under the supervision of suitably qualified Defence Forces personnel and are, of course, not loaded.
I recognise the Minister did not mean to cause offence by posing for these photographs but does the Minister of State accept that the portrayal of him handling weapons in this manner sends an inappropriate message to the public? Does he agree that the playful style of the image can glamorise the use of weapons at a time when we were in the midst of gangland killings involving illegally held weapons?
I accept what Deputy Sherlock is saying. I will repeat what my colleague, the Minister for Defence, said. He visited the Defence Forces training centre in the Curragh on 16 November to attend a display by the Army Ranger Wing to mark its 25th anniversary and to open a new stores facility at the ARW headquarters. The display consisted of a number of training exercises and simulated rescues, including two practical demonstrations of static room assaults and fast rope hostage extraction, and static demonstrations of weapons, equipment and vehicles. He was invited to inspect the weapons on display and this was done under constant military supervision. It was an open media event with those present being given the maximum access possible subject to safety and security considerations.
The Minister has asked me to reiterate his deep regret if people's sensitivities were offended by the pictures of him widely published in the media handling the weapons on display. The photographs used were selected by the media, not by the Minister. He has made it clear that he regrets what happened and has apologised to those who were offended by it.
Can the Minister of State assure us that the Minister will not take part in such events in the future?
I can say that most definitely on behalf of my colleague. The Minister also regrets if an impression was given in the media that his participation at the event was an attempt to glamorise gun crime. He would not wish that to be the case. His intention on the day was to highlight the professionalism of the ARW, the excellence of its training and the sophistication of the equipment provided to it. I recall when I was Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development visiting the Army in Liberia where I saw at first hand the quality of its equipment and professionalism of its personnel. The Minister was anxious to portray that and I assure the House it will not happen again.
53 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the concerns expressed by RACO about his proposal for officer reductions abroad; his views on these concerns; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38458/05]
Ireland subscribes to the United Nations stand-by arrangements system, UNSAS, under which the State offers to provide up to 850 personnel on overseas service at any given time. Ireland's commitment under the UNSAS represents 10% of the total Army strength. This is the maximum sustainable commitment that Ireland can make to overseas peacekeeping operations. This overall commitment is not being reviewed.
Ireland's peacekeeping activity has now grown to the point where more than 140 officers are serving overseas. While this is a laudable contribution on the international stage, the Minister has stated that the long-term sustainability of such a level of commitment is open to question. The Minister, in addressing the conference, indicated that the proportion of officers within the overall UNSAS commitment of 850 would be reviewed to ensure that we balance our obligations to Ireland's foreign policy with our obligation to the other roles of a well-managed Defence Forces.
I assure the Deputy that any re-balancing of ranks within the overall 850 will not reduce the effectiveness of the Defence Forces' contribution to Ireland's foreign policy or international peacekeeping.
The Minister of State has repeated what the Minister said at the conference instead of answering my question. Why is the number of officers serving overseas in various missions not sustainable? Where has the Minister found a shortfall in our Defence Forces? Where does he want these officers to serve? Are they needed to serve in various EU military committees or for duties in Ireland, as Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Jim Sreenan, seemed to indicate at the RACO conference? He said that Ireland must remain vigilant against possible terrorist attacks. Would these potential terrorist attacks mean we need more officers at home? Will the Minister of State spell out in detail why we need to re-balance the number of officers and where they are supposed to go?
I mentioned earlier that I was privileged to serve as Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development. When I met Army personnel abroad, I have always been proud of their work and, having visited Liberia twice, I am aware of their commitment.
The involvement of 850 personnel in overseas missions will not be changed. The issue under discussion relates solely to the number of officers. The Minister has simply outlined the need to look at that officer involvement. The Deputy rightly described the role of the Defence Forces as multifaceted. They defend the State against armed aggression, aid the civil power, participate in multinational peace support, provide a fishery protection service in accordance with State obligations as a member of the EU and carry out such other duties as may be assigned to them. The key point, however, is that the Minister is simply reviewing the involvement of officers in this approach. It is the normal thing to do and Deputies will hear from the Minister when the review has been carried out. The involvement of Irish Army personnel abroad will be maintained.
The general secretary of RACO has expressed concern about what the Minister said. When this review is being carried out, I assume discussions will take place with RACO to see if it is appropriate to reduce the number of officers serving abroad because that seems to be at odds with what the Defences Forces want.
I am aware of the views of RACO on this issue and those views will be taken on board by the Minister. The Chief of Staff agrees that the high number of officers serving overseas may adversely impact on commitments at home. This issue arises in the context of the Liberian mission coming to an end. That mission has been extended but the Defence Forces require a rest period of several months to re-organise, bring equipment up to scratch and alleviate the pressure on personnel. These comments are being made in a timely way when our involvement in Liberia, in particular, is on such a large scale. I take on board the comments made by Deputy Gormley.
54 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Defence the discussions he has had with the Chief of Staff with respect to the Defence Forces involvement in the proposed humanitarian assistance groups as announced; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38255/05]
In the course of a speech on 18 November 2005 at the Royal Irish Academy, at an event to mark 50 years of UN participation, my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, outlined his plans to set up a volunteer corps unit within his Department to harness the strong volunteer spirit in the country. The Department of Defence and the Defence Forces will provide advice, as required, to this unit. Also, in the course of the speech, the Minister for Foreign Affairs mentioned his intention to pre-position humanitarian supplies, including tents and ready-to-eat meals, deployable at short notice, which will contribute to the immediate saving of lives.
Prior to this event, the Department of Foreign Affairs sought assistance from the Minister of Defence on the development of this concept and a meeting to discuss these issues took place between civil and military personnel from the Department of Defence and officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs on 11 November 2005. Arising from that meeting, an interdepartmental committee, which will include representation from the Defence Forces, is being established to proceed with this task. The first meeting of this committee will take place on 16 December 2005 and the Minister has instructed that every support possible should be provided for this initiative.
I support this initiative. We have been calling for it since the start of the year. When did the Minister for Foreign Affairs first discuss the issue with Minister for Defence? Which Department will control this body? If it is under the control of the Department of Defence, why did the Minister for Defence not outline what would happen? Will the Minister of State elaborate on the composition of the body?
There will be ongoing discussions between both Ministers on such initiatives. I was involved as Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development in pushing the voluntarism agenda. I warmly welcome the Deputy's interest in this area and his support for this initiative. Communication is ongoing between both Ministers. The Department of Foreign Affairs was anxious to push this. The Minister for Foreign Affairs announced the initiative, which relates to the establishment of an Irish rapid response roster. It is intended this will comprise individuals with relevant and specialist skills and experience in niche areas who will be available to travel at short notice to areas of great need. The initiative also provides for the establishment of a volunteer corps unit within the Department of Foreign Affairs to harness the strong volunteer spirit that exists throughout the State.
With regard to the first element, there is a need for strong co-operation between both Departments. On many occasions, members of the Defence Forces were seconded to non-governmental organisations and I recall this happened in Rwanda. Concern and GOAL often call on the Government to deploy Army personnel on a voluntary basis to carry out important humanitarian work. Close co-ordination between both Departments is needed but the initiative is very much with the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Will the Department of Foreign Affairs control this body?
Yes, that is my understanding. A Department must lead in this area and my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, will lead the initiative. His officials and my officials will meet on 11 December to progress this issue.
The Department of Defence should be the lead Department in this regard. It has the expertise and, while the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Government may have a policy, it should be implemented by the Department of Defence.
Will this humanitarian body address internal humanitarian crises? I hope that would be the case. Will the funding of overseas missions come from the overseas development aid budget or will additional funding be provided?
If I need to come back to the Deputy on this, I will. Voluntarism should embrace needs at home and abroad. As we witnessed when the Special Olympics were held in Dublin, there is a desire among the population for us to give leadership on voluntarism. This initiative should be co-ordinated with the push on voluntarism in local communities. It would be wise to develop this concept along those lines but that is primarily a matter for the Department of Foreign Affairs. I presume it will develop that way. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and my Department are keen to pursue the humanitarian need abroad.
The overseas development aid budget will be the primary source of funding for the volunteer corps. The people would be happy for the ODA budget, which, thankfully, was increased substantially in the Estimates, to be used to provide funding for voluntarism. I will convey the Deputy's views to the Minister.
55 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Defence the application or recruitment procedure for the training courses delivered to foreign soldiers at the Defence Forces training centre, Curragh Camp, County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the criteria taken into consideration when deciding whether to include soldiers from the countries in question in this training. [38432/05]
A prospectus of courses is prepared each year in a brochure format that is distributed to embassies. Candidates are then considered on the basis of applications received through the respective embassies. To date, it has been possible to accept all applications from foreign states for places on the courses for which they applied. The extensive body of experience gained by the Permanent Defence Force during its involvement in various United Nations peacekeeping operations over many years is well reflected in the training courses provided by constituent colleges of the Defence Forces training centre, namely, the military college, the combat support college and the combat service support college. The United Nations Training School Ireland, UNTSI, is itself a constituent school of the military college. The courses of training reflect the latest international military standards and doctrine. The quality of training programmes devised and provided by the Defence Forces is clearly evidenced by international interest shown as regards participation.
The Minister for Defence does not like answering my questions. He is hiding to avoid discussing the political and moral——
The Minister is in RTE.
He is definitely hiding. Is the Minister of State aware that more than 460 foreign soldiers have received military training in the Curragh over the past ten years? I presume the majority were trained within the parameters of our neutrality and at the behest of the UN, which is laudable. However, the list the Department supplied in response to a number of valid parliamentary questions highlighted that the countries of origin of these soldiers include Israel, Russia and many NATO countries. Outwardly, it appears no safeguards are in place to ensure complicity in human rights abuses or to prevent breaches of neutrality. Are safeguards in place? If so, what are they? Is the Minister aware UN resolutions are regularly ignored by Israel and Russia and their forces have been involved in arbitrary detention, torture, disappearance and extrajudicial execution? For example, the Russian federal forces were responsible for approximately 450 abductions last year in Chechnya.
Even if the numbers from these countries who are trained is low, does the Minister of State agree any part played by this State in these atrocities is too big a part? Does he further agree that instead of lending these countries legitimacy or meeting their needs, we should boycott their military organisations, particularly those of Israel and Russia?
All the countries involved have diplomatic relations with Ireland and they are all members of the UN. The participation of the members of the military forces of other nations has the marked advantage of building useful international links as regards the potential interoperability and familiarity between our Defence Forces and the military of other states with which they may well undertake international peacekeeping duties in future. It involves technical and academic military training arranged on an ad hoc basis and it has no implications for our policy of military neutrality.
Taking a different perspective, this gives us an opportunity to get know to military people in other countries. I met, for example, a member of the Zambian army who had been trained in the Curragh during my tenure in the Department of Foreign Affairs. He very much appreciated the quality of training he received. That training stayed with him and he brought it back to his own country to help build capacity there. It is a normal procedure. We interact with military personnel from other countries with whom we could undertake joint international peacekeeping operations. It is nothing more complicated than that.
Much of the training is laudable and welcome and it probably falls within the parameters of neutrality. However, will the Minister of State offer a guarantee that no country whose military is involved in breaches of international law will receive training in the Curragh Camp or elsewhere in this jurisdiction? Does he agree the participation of NATO members in training at the Curragh compromises our neutrality? The list mainly comprises NATO countries but the military of Zambia and other non-NATO countries have received training, which is welcome. However, I do not see us partaking in peacekeeping missions with Israel in the near future until it addresses its human rights record and its abuse of the Palestinian people.
Obviously, we have a very strong position on protecting human rights and these issues have been raised in the House in recent days in regard to Shannon, etc. We have accepted all applications from foreign states for places on the courses actually applied for. It involves military training arranged on an ad hoc basis, so it is not that rigidly structured. Suffice it to say, I will ask the Minister to take on board the Deputy’s views on torture, human rights, and so on.
