Vol. 699 No. 2
69 Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Defence the number of promotions by rank and appointment that have occurred within the Defence Forces since he announced on 24 November 2009 that he had received sanction for 50 promotions within the Defence Forces; if all 50 promotions have taken place; if not, the reason; the date by which the promotions will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2295/10]
Resulting from the Government decision regarding the reduction in public service numbers and the reduced budgetary provision available for 2009, recruitment, promotions and acting up appointments in the Permanent Defence Forces were suspended. I made a submission to my colleague, the Minister for Finance, in June 2009 regarding the implications of the measures for the Permanent Defence Force. My focus is on maintaining the ongoing operational capability of the Defence Forces and, therefore, the question of limited exceptions to the application of the measures arises in this regard. I outlined the need for limited recruitment, promotions and acting appointments for the Defence Forces in my submission to the Minister.
As I announced on the 24 November, an allocation of 50 promotions was approved for the Permanent Defence Force by the Minister for Finance. These promotions were approved to address priority operational and command requirements of the Permanent Defence Force. These promotions, therefore, must be allocated in a manner that gives protection to the operational capacity of the Defence Forces. In addition, the allocation must be balanced across both officer and enlisted ranks having regard to the operational requirements of the Defence Forces. Military management has been reviewing existing vacancies in all ranks across the organisation as a whole to prioritise those to be filled from the approved promotions. Following the military review, a number of priority posts have been identified and I am pleased to confirm that nine officer promotions and 27 enlisted promotions have been progressed. Some have been completed and the remainder will be completed in the coming days. A number of senior technical officer vacancies also have to be filled and competitions are being organised to fill these posts. The residual approved promotions will be used to fill priority posts arising in the next few months. In addition, approximately 30 vacancies will be filled through acting up appointments in the coming weeks.
My officials are continuing to engage with the military authorities regarding the review of structures and posts required to meet the operational requirements of the Defence Forces in light of the Government decision to maintain a complement of 10,000 personnel. I am glad that, while these are challenging times, the Defence Forces have risen to the challenge and are organised, equipped and staffed in a manner which will ensure they can continue to deliver the services required of them by Government.
I read the Minister's reply earlier in the Irish Independent and it demeans the House that he made this information available to that newspaper before announcing it in the House. Does this imply that if I had not tabled the question today, he would not have made this decision? He announced 50 promotions at the RACO conference in Cavan three months ago. The members involved were listed and are awaiting promotion. Why did it take three months to make this announcement? The Minister announced only 40 promotions. What is the timeframe for the remaining ten promotions? He indicated that will depend on urgency and priority. How long will this take? Acting up is not the same as being promoted, as it is only a temporary measure. Will the Minister confirm when the remaining ten promotions will be made? Why did it take three months for these appointments to be announced since the individuals had been identified, approved and were ready? Why did we have to read this announcement in today’s newspaper prior to the Minister replying to this question in the House? Surely he could have waited until he replied in the House to tell the newspaper.
The Deputy is wrong on a number of points as usual.
What about the article in today's newspaper? It is very accurate. Everything the Minister said in his reply is reported verbatim.
I had no conversation with the Irish Independent.
Deputy Deenihan should allow the Minister to reply without interruption.
The Minister is in a corner. He has shown total disrespect to the House by making an announcement in a newspaper before making it in the House.
The Deputy must allow the Minister to contribute.
I have not spoken to the Irish Independent for several days.
The Minister should then order an inquiry in this Department. Who is speaking to the newspaper?
I have more to be doing in my Department than ordering inquiries. I announced this two months ago.
It was three months ago.
There is a slight difference.
I was present in Cavan.
I am sorry the Deputy is unable to count because that was two months ago. I do not know how well aware the Deputy is of the issues but the military authorities have been reallocating and reorganising their position to take account of the moratorium.
I am more aware of what is happening in the Army than the Minister.
Allow the Minister to continue without interruption
He has made an accusation. I am more aware of what is happening than him.
The Army authorities could not allocate these posts until they knew how many posts they would have to allocate. They are now ready to do this.
There are several vacancies
Yes, but some must be filled immediately while others must not.
Members have been listed for the vacancies.
The remaining ten promotions will be made in the coming months. It is always the practice in such a scenario to hold back a number of people for contingencies that may arise and those affected will be appointed in the next few months.
The Minister's defence is to attack. I raised a pertinent question about this reply being published in a newspaper. When I met the journalist who wrote this article at the RACO conference, I congratulated him. I told him that we would read what he reported in the newspaper and we could table questions to the Minister on the basis of his articles because he is given all the information before us. This does nothing for the House.
The article states there will be 30 acting up vacancies and this will be a temporary measure. Could the number of vacancies be increased? There are many structural problems in the Army. The Defence Forces are based on chain of command and these vacancies create a health and safety issue, according to responsible members of the force with whom I have been in contact. I keep in constant contact with RACO, PDFORRA and RDFRA and I know what is happening in the Defence Forces and the Minister cannot say I do not. However, I refer to the command structure within the Defence Forces and vacant positions being filled by people of a lesser rank. Surely this raises a health and safety issue. Has the Minister examined this? Has he also examined the issue of officers and others leaving the Defence Forces before their time is up, which is also a health and safety issue?
If the Deputy tells me he keeps in touch with the representative organisations, I accept that but that makes it all the more surprising he gets so much wrong.
I get nothing wrong.
The number of promotions could be increased from 30. I appreciate the need to extend the acting up provisions and that is why I am in contact with the Department of Finance in this regard. I also accept that 50 promotions are not adequate but this is the first instalment and I expect further news on this shortly.
With regard to the health and safety issues, the military authorities say the Army is fit for purpose. Certainly there are vacancies and gaps caused by the moratorium because the army is an institution with a high rate of turnover and naturally that will have an impact. We have made some progress and received some exemptions from the moratorium. I am utterly confident that we will receive more.
70 Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Defence his views on whether there is a case for a Defence Forces role in promoting physical activity fitness and supporting the delivery of physical education in schools here as proposed in a recent paper (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2293/10]
Promoting physical fitness and supporting the delivery of physical education in schools is a matter for my colleague the Minister for Education and Science.
All physical education instructors within the Defence Forces are fully engaged in the training process. Furthermore, the robust physical fitness training programme applied to Defence Forces training is not comparable or suitable for application in a school environment. I understand from my colleague the Minister for Education and Science that the pre-service training of all primary teachers is designed to equip them to teach all aspects of the curriculum, including physical education. At second level, PE is provided by specialist physical education teachers who have been trained to promote the physical, mental, emotional and social development of young people in an age-appropriate way through the medium of physical activity. My colleague also advises me that continuing support is also available on an ongoing basis for practising teachers through the curriculum support services at primary and second level and that it is not considered necessary therefore to seek the input of the Defence Forces to supplement the work of schools in this area.
The role of physical education instructors within the Defence Forces is to ensure that Defence Forces personnel attain the level of fitness required of them in the context of filling the roles are assigned to them, here and on overseas missions. As the Defence Forces are required to maintain a state of readiness to attend to any task that may be assigned, there is an onus to maintain an appropriate level of physical fitness at all times.
Physical fitness contributes significantly to the effectiveness and general health of individuals in the Defence Forces. Personnel who are unfit reduce operational effectiveness, put themselves at greater risk of injury and detract from the overall performance of the Defence Forces.
Physical education and physical fitness have a key role to play in the context of the Defence Forces as they contribute to fitness, teamwork, leadership, self-discipline, determination, co-ordination, courage, competitive spirit and military ethos. They play a role in recruitment and retention and in many instances provide excellent positive public visibility of the Defence Forces.
In this context it is worth noting that 19 different sporting disciplines are played at unit and brigade level within the Defence Forces.
In addition to confidence and adventure, training in the Defence Forces makes an important contribution to the spirit, morale, personal development and ultimately, operational effectiveness of the individual.
I find the Minister's response disappointing against the background of a strong military tradition of involvement in the delivery and shaping of physical education since the foundation of the State. I do not think this involvement can be disputed. There are also excellent models of best practice from other countries of supporting physical education and promoting physical activity and fitness in schools and the wider community. If everything is as good as the Minister outlined, having conferred with his colleague the Minister for Education and Science, why do we have rising obesity levels in children, inadequate physical activity levels among children and gaps in the provision of physical education in schools?
As was suggested to us by Mr. Michael McDonough, a retired Army captain, at a committee meeting, will the Minister consider having a small number of pilot projects to examine whether something can be moved forward? Another issue which arose at the meeting was that the Reserve Defence Force does not attract the number of recruits that we would like. This may be an area in which the Reserve Defence Force could get involved and attract more people. I was very impressed with the presentation made at the committee meeting last week. The submissions made deserve more examination and scrutiny and a positive approach rather than being dismissed out of hand in the way the Minister has done.
I do not want to be disrespectful to the Deputy in my reply and he should not draw the conclusion that I am being disrespectful to him. He mentioned a strong tradition of military involvement in physical fitness but quite honestly I do not know of what he is speaking. He mentioned other countries——
I referred the paper to the Minister and it is all laid out within it.
I have a precis of it.
He does not know everything.
The Deputy referred to other countries.
The passage clearly lays out what that involvement in physical education delivery and shaping by the military has been.
In Canada it involves the military going to a school for a few days in the year. In no country in the world does the military step in to assist in the work of PE teachers or to replace them. That is a fact.
That is not being suggested. It is supporting.
The paper refers to the Defence Forces having a plethora of qualified personnel and a vast resource of equipment. We do not have a plethora of qualified personnel. I assure the Deputy that my advice and experience is that all of those providing physical fitness training in the army are fully taken up with the work they are supposed to do. It is misleading to state that there is "X" amount of qualified people because some of them have moved on to other things. For example, as far as I know the Chief of Staff is a qualified physical fitness instructor but he cannot engage in that type of work.
He is a qualified physical education teacher. I know that much as we went to the same college.
Deputy Deenihan should not be so sensitive.
It is the Minister who is being sensitive.
I am told that all of those involved in this activity in the Army are working flat out and that all their time is taken up. With regard to making facilities such as gyms and PE halls available, this is done on a local basis. It is up to the local barracks that has the facilities. People make their own arrangements at local level and sometimes they tell us about them and sometimes they do not. That is fine with us. I reiterate that this is a matter primarily for the Minister for Education and Science. However, if the Minister approaches me and wants to establish a multi-agency approach to this we will certainly have an input into it.
The two people who made presentations to the committee are former Army officers so I suspect they have some knowledge of the Army structure. Would the Minister be prepared to meet them or have senior departmental officials meet them so they can make their case with a view to bringing this issue forward?
They are two former Army officers and therefore they know the structure of the Army.
One of them is the trainer of the Kilkenny hurling team.
As Minister for Defence I hope I also know the structure. At a minimum I will ask my officials to meet them and hear what they have to say. If Deputy O'Shea requests me to do this I am prepared to do it.
71 Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Defence the initiation procedures under which members of the Defence Forces were deployed to deal with the weather crisis in December 2009 and January 2010; if he intends to change the methods by which deployment will be initiated; if he will be more proactive in the use of the Defence Forces in any subsequent use in the maintenance of essential services; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2296/10]
Emergency planning is developed on the "lead Department" principle. This means that each Department is responsible for planning for emergencies that fall within its area of responsibility. The framework for major emergency management sets out the structure enabling the principal response agencies, namely, the Garda Síochána, the Health Service Executive and local authorities, to prepare for, and make a co-ordinated response to, major emergencies resulting from events such as severe weather.
In accordance with the framework, the Defence Forces act as a support to locally based services. All requests for the assistance of the Defence Forces are processed through the local authorities, the HSE and the Garda Síochána. This ensures that there is an efficient, effective and co-ordinated response in accordance with prioritised local requirements.
Standing arrangements are in place for the civil authorities to request the assistance of the Defence Forces. Requests for aid to the civil power are normally made by a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of inspector. Requests for assistance to local authorities are normally processed through local authority managers. Requests for assistance from the HSE are normally received from chief emergency management officers.
All assets, resources and capabilities of the Defence Forces throughout the country were made available to assist the civil authorities where and when called upon. Defence liaison officers were appointed to all local emergency relief centres to co-ordinate Defence Forces assistance. The Defence Forces provided assistance to a range of local authorities and to the HSE, utilising their 4x4 vehicles and trucks, while the Air Corps was also active in providing an air ambulance service and support for other emergency services. The type of assistance provided by the Defence Forces includes gritting operations on roads and key junctions in many counties; the transportation of health care personnel to and from hospital, clinics and to patients in outlying areas; the transportation of patients to hospitals and clinics; the distribution of food and supplies in a number of areas; the delivery of water supplies in a number of local authority areas; the provision of transport for the Garda Síochána in Cork; and the provision of a number of air ambulance missions across the country. An Air Corps helicopter was utilised to transport RTE engineers to repair a transmitter at Kippure Mountain in County Wicklow. The Air Corps provided assistance to farmers with cattle on islands in Lough Ree to move fodder to their stock, at request of the Garda Síochána.
The Defence Forces responded to all official requests for assistance received from the civil authorities during the severe weather period.
I called for the involvement of the Defence Forces before the Minister was even aware that they should be out there. I compliment them on what they achieved when they were used. However, we were well into the big freeze before they were used, and people suffered as a result. When he was asked on RTE about the involvement of the Defence Forces following my call for this to take place, the Minister's response was totally inadequate. He said that we were not out there because we were not asked. That surely was not an adequate response when we were in the middle of a major emergency crisis in this country.
One of the principal roles of the Defence Forces is to aid the civil power and to ensure that essential services are maintained at all times.
When they are asked.
Yes. We had a flooding crisis before Christmas and a big freeze before and after Christmas. The Defence Forces should have been ready without even being asked to go out there. As the person in charge of the Office of Emergency Planning, the Minister for Defence sat on his hands while this whole crisis dragged on. His response was reactive in the end, rather than proactive.
There is a commitment on the website of the Office of Emergency Planning that a framework would be drawn up for weather emergencies to ensure that all existing local severe weather plans are appropriately co-ordinated and linked. I asked the Minister on a radio programme one evening if this was in place. He did not know the answer that evening, and I can accept that. Can he confirm today that this framework is now place? If we have a recurrence of severe weather conditions in 2010, can the Minister confirm that there will be a different response than that which we recently experienced?
In 2008, I brought a document to the Government which outlined what happens in the event of various emergencies, including a weather situation like that which we have just experienced. That document identified the lead Department in all cases. For example, if there was an oil spillage off the coast, the Department of the Marine would lead. If there was a terrorist attack, the Garda Síochána would lead. In weather crises such as that which we recently experienced, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is the lead Department. That Department summons the emergency response committee during the crisis appropriate to its area of responsibility. That is the position.
The framework for the local situation is in place. I am told that there is a framework plan for each——
What about a national plan that co-ordinated all the local plans? Is that national framework there?
The national framework is there. There is a framework for a local response. At any time, the local committee can get together and request the assistance of the Army or anybody else. Many such committees did not do so for reasons I do not know. It is ludicrous to talk about the Army being ready because they were involved in the flood crisis. The Army is an aid or back up when somebody asks it for help. If groups ask the Army for help, they must ask for help in a specific way and at a specific place. They might request the Air Corps to airlift fodder to cattle at a farm in Listowel because the owner is stuck. They might request that somebody be taken to hospital in County Waterford due to an emergency. In these cases, the Defence Forces get a specific task. It is ludicrous to think of the Army wandering around the country without being requested to do anything, like latter day Don Quixotes, seeking out damsels in distress, riding MOWAGs instead of horses, and deciding to vanquish dragons whenever they happen to meet them.
The Minister is trivialising the whole thing now. That is not what is being asked.
This is ludicrous. The Army has to be asked. It acts in response to a request. During the crisis, the HSE was not slow in asking the Army for help. It asked the Army for help from the first day of the frost to carry out air ambulance missions over and above what it had ordinarily been doing. The HSE approached the Army to transport palliative care nurses in south Galway. The HSE approached the Army with a request to do various things in the midlands, and the Army obliged. However, the local authorities, which neither my party nor the Deputy's party controls, were very slow in asking for any assistance. They did not appear to appreciate that the crisis was a local crisis to be dealt with at local level.
Let us blame the local authorities.
As this weather spell went on longer than anybody would have anticipated, contrary to the forecasts, the local crisis involved more than just accessibility of roads and other issues came into play which made it appropriate for the national emergency response committee to convene a meeting. The committee met when it became appropriate to do so, and the Army was involved very heavily at that stage.
The Army was available at all times. It is ridiculous to talk about mobilising the Army and putting it on stand-by. We are not talking about a part-time Army. We have a full-time standing Army in this country that is mobilised and ready at all times. It can be requested on foot of a local plan or national plan at any time at all. The local authorities did not request the Army during the early stages of the crisis. Apart from the fact that some of them were asleep, I suspect that the local authorities did not request the Army in many cases due to a lack of material, rather than a lack of personnel to put down the material. The authorities had enough personnel to grit the roads and did not need any extra help.
There was no national framework co-ordinating local plans. The Minister claims that we were not ready for this. The Met Office can accurately forecast eight days ahead, and it even forecasted ten days beforehand that there would be a crisis. Nonetheless, the Cabinet did not meet until 7 January. There was a crisis for ten or 12 days before that. We were snowed in on Christmas Day in Kerry, as were people in other parts of Ireland. It was well signalled, yet the Minister and his colleagues sat on their hands.
The Minister spoke about local authorities not acting. They did not act because they were not directed.
They had been directed.
Will the Minister confirm that a national framework for a response to severe weather emergencies is being developed to ensure that all existing local severe weather plans are appropriately co-ordinated and linked? That is where the Minister's role comes in. Can he provide me with that national framework?
The Deputy can get it now. It is on the website.
I did not see it on the website. I will look for it on the website, but if I do not find it, I will be back to the Minister for it.
We need to move on to the next question.
I would like to respond to that briefly. Every county and city manager in this country has been informed about the framework for emergency planning. Every county and city manager knows a mechanism is in place for establishing a local plan. They also know that one must respond to circumstances such as those described without being directed, as the Deputy suggests, without anyone declaring a national emergency and without an emergency committee meeting taking place in Dublin. The bottom line is that local authorities have responsibility for the accessibility of local roads.
As regards any plan or documentation in the Department, I will make everything available to Deputy Deenihan. There is nothing secret about this matter. It is not like the third secret of Fatima.
Why was there no one in the co-ordinating office for three weeks over the Christmas period?
The primary requirement was to have a local response. As the situation evolved, however, a national response became appropriate.
Surely people should be feeding in to the process from all directions.
If roads in Limerick, Kerry or Waterford freeze up, it is not necessary in the first couple of days to have someone sitting in the national co-ordination office. It is a matter for the local authority in the first instance.
After the major freeze, we have a major fudge.
The issue has been given a good airing. We will move on.
72 Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Defence if he has received the copy of the internal governance reform review of the Irish Red Cross Society; the action he proposes to take arising from the recommendations in this review; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2294/10]
73 Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Defence the remedial steps he intends to take to deal with the urgent staffing and funding issues in the Irish Red Cross Society following the resignation of its chief executive; and if he will make a statement on the matter [2297/10]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 72 and 73 together.
The Irish Red Cross Society is an autonomous body established by the Irish Red Cross Society Order 1939 pursuant to the Red Cross Act 1938 and is an independent, self-governing charitable institution. By resolution passed by its council of delegates in November 2007, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, IFRC, urged all national societies, as requested by action 3 of the strategy for the movement, to examine and update their statutes, that is, the rules of the national societies, and related legal texts by 2010 in accordance with the "Guidance for National Society Statutes" and relevant international conference resolutions. This task is being undertaken by many Red Cross and Red Crescent societies around the world.
In February 2008 the executive committee of the Irish Red Cross Society decided to establish a temporary working group on governance. This group, in the course of its deliberations, also sought advice from the IFRC. The chairman of the temporary working group made a presentation of its findings at the most recent meeting of the central council of the Irish Red Cross Society held at the end of November 2009. The central council, which is the plenary body of the national society, agreed in principle to the changes proposed subject to interdepartmental and inter-agency consultations.
The Department of Foreign Affairs which engages on an ongoing basis with the various components of the International Red Cross Movement and the Irish Red Cross Society in its overseas aid work will be invited to participate in these discussions. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies has been and is supportive of the review process which was undertaken by the Irish Red Cross Society. I am assured that the formal report of the working group will be delivered to my Department in the next few days. The report will be discussed with relevant Departments and agencies and then brought before Government to give effect to any changes in legislation deemed necessary.
The Irish Red Cross Society is partly funded by a grant-in-aid from the Vote of the Department of Defence and I bring before Government such matters as are required by statute to be dealt with by Government. I have no responsibility for the day-to-day running of the organisation. However, as we are all aware, many organisations are currently faced with difficult financial constraints and it is incumbent on all of them to manage their affairs to minimise the effects of the recession. As is the case in many organisations, the society must take whatever steps it deems necessary to ensure its financial viability. The grant-in-aid to be provided by my Department for 2010 will be in the sum of €951,000 which is unchanged from the amount provided for in 2009.
I am aware that the former Secretary General who was on secondment from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has now returned to that Department. I acknowledge with thanks his role in pursuing the issue of governance. The position of Secretary General is being filled in an acting capacity pending the recruitment of a full-time Secretary General.
It is extraordinary that a report approved in principle by the central committee of the Irish Red Cross Society on 28 November 2009 has still not been submitted to the Department. There are urgent reasons for the changes that are necessary. In the event that the review does not address certain areas which the Minister, on the basis of advice and his own analysis, considers to be necessary, will he add to the recommendations made in the report?
Will legislation be required to implement the recommendations of the review? Will the Minister give an undertaking to address the matter expeditiously? Press coverage of the Irish Red Cross Society is not of the type we would like to see surrounding this important national organisation which has done much good nationally and internationally.
We cannot afford to waste time. When the Minister receives the report he should deal with it expeditiously. I ask him to give an undertaking that he will do so. While Deputies will be aware of speculation concerning the contents of the report, we do not know precisely what is in it. If the Minister decides the report does not go far enough, will he be disposed to go further? It appears that governance issues in the Irish Red Cross Society must be addressed effectively and clearly to strengthen the image of the organisation against the background of the current flow of negative press coverage.
I concur with the Deputy that the bad press is extremely regrettable. I am in a difficult position as Minister because, under the terms of the Geneva Convention, the Government is obliged by law to ensure the independence of the Red Cross. Although the Government provides the Irish Red Cross Society with a grant-in-aid of almost €1 million per annum and supplies a building owned by the Office of Public Works free of charge, I am, nevertheless, precluded from becoming involved in the internal day-to-day running of the organisation. Under the 1938 Act, this function is to be exercised by the central council and executive committee of the Irish Red Cross Society.
Notwithstanding the adverse publicity which has surrounded the Irish Red Cross Society for some time, I did not initiate the board's recommendations because I am not involved in the day-to-day running of the society. The recommendations were prompted by a suggestion made by the international body in 2007 that Red Cross organisations in different countries should examine their governance.
While I do not know the reason the report has not been formally submitted to me, I am aware of 90% of its contents, having received an account of what it is in the document. In my opinion, legislation will be required to implement the terms of the report. That is not, however, a statement of fact.
I assure Deputy O'Shea that the issue of legislation will not cause undue delay. A delay may arise from inter-agency consultation as checks are made to determine precisely what legislative changes are needed. I will do my best to expedite the process. I agree with the Deputy on that matter.
On the Deputy's question as to whether I will make further recommendations and add to the report, with the best will in the world, I am not legally entitled to do so. In light of the provisions of the relevant legislation and the requirement on the Government to maintain the independence of the Irish Red Cross Society under the Geneva Convention, it appears that it is a matter for those who have been elected to run the Red Cross to make the changes themselves. However, if I can do anything, within the law, to assist the Irish Red Cross Society in putting an end to recent bad publicity and establishing a better governance structure, I will be pleased to do so.
The Minister has been rather passive in this matter. Given that the Department is providing almost €1 million to the Irish Red Cross Society, surely the Minister has some responsibility to ensure the society is run properly. If the Minister is in a position to introduce legislation, he must surely have an input in the organisation.
Does the Minister agree that it is extraordinary that both the chairman and chief executive of the Irish Red Cross Society have resigned? I understand this is not the first time a chief executive of the organisation has resigned. This indicates there must be something wrong in the governance of the organisation. The Minister stated that the report, about which he knows a great deal, was drafted in November but has not yet been published officially. Surely that smacks of irresponsibility in another way and a lack of accountability and transparency. There is a problem in the Red Cross in Ireland. Otherwise, a distinguished former Member of this House would not step down and a former executive of the Irish Government, who was highly respected and who we all know, would not have stepped down. The Minister says he can do nothing about this but I do not accept it when he provides almost €1 million of Government funding. At this stage, can the Minister authorise a senior ranking official in his Department to draw up a report for him? The proposed legislation will require some involvement by his Department. Can the Minister authorise that simple investigation into why this happened? Our reputation abroad has been somewhat tarnished by the debacle in the Red Cross. I know this from feedback I received.
Recently the Red Cross collected money for flood relief. It has not yet been distributed. Does the Minister have an indication of how much was collected or is that not his responsibility? When will it be disbursed?
Regarding the final question, it is not my responsibility. The Red Cross is statutorily independent but I will find out for Deputy Deenihan how much it collected and when it will be distributed. I wish to correct the record of the House. Deputy Deenihan quoted me as saying I can do absolutely nothing. Anyone who has been in the House for the past two or three minutes knows that is not what I said.
That is what the Minister said at the beginning.
I said I cannot get involved in the internal running of the Red Cross. It is not Irish law that prohibits me but a commitment——
That is exactly what the Minister said and what I repeated.
That does not mean I cannot do anything. That does not mean I cannot introduce legislation to allow necessary changes in governance. That is different to doing nothing.
Can the Minister carry out his own investigation?
My Department has a member on the executive council who regularly reports to the Department. I have a fair idea of the situation without commissioning separate investigations. The board appointed a committee to carry out an investigation and has made recommendations. My job is to make legislative changes to enable the board to make those changes. It is not rocket science. Surely Deputy Deenihan can understand this.
Then the Minister has a role.
As regards getting involved in investigations and making changes, under the Geneva Convention Ireland is committed to maintaining an independent Red Cross. An independent Red Cross means an autonomous organisation that runs its own show, whose executive council deals with governance matters and matters that have come out in the media in recent times. That is the law and that is what we signed up to as a nation. With the best will in the world, even if I provided €951 million rather than €951,000, I could do not do anything about that.
Will Minister have a role in the proposed new legislation?
Radical proposals have been made to change the governance structures of the Red Cross, which are the subject of much controversy as referred to by Deputy O'Shea. My role is to examine the recommendations, see which ones require legislative change and provide and pass the appropriate legislation in the House.
I agree with the Minister that the organisation should be independent. There is some question as to whether the Minister should appoint the chairman or the members. Can the Minister clarify that matter for me? There has been speculation in the press. Is there a recommendation that the Minister will no longer appoint the chair?
I understand that the president appoints the chair, not the Minister. Should that responsibility be removed from the President?
I do not agree with any responsibility being taken from the President.
To clarify, the Minister nominates and the President appoints.
I do not want to get into specific recommendations. Much has been made of the chairman's resignation. Some time ago, the chairman told me he wanted to wait until the report recommending reform of the Red Cross had gone through the system and that he would then offer up his position. That is precisely what happened. The Secretary General wanted to return to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. We are now in the process of recruiting a new Secretary General. There is no great mystery.
