Vol. 1027 No. 3
68. Deputy Sorca Clarke asked the Minister for Defence the engagement that he has had with military management and his Department regarding a report that five apprentice electrical artificers who upon completion of their block placement were offered permanent employment and their defence contracts were bought out by the company with whom they were on placement. [49359/22]
71. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Minister for Defence the plans that are in place to increase retention of Naval Service recruits, following the departure of five electrical artificers to the private sector. [49400/22]
What engagement has the Minister had with military management and the Department of Defence regarding a report that five apprentice electricians, who upon completion of their block placement, were offered permanent employment and their defence contracts were bought out by the company with whom they were on placement?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 68 and 71 together.
I am pleased to have an opportunity to put a number of points on the record. I assure the Deputies that I have ongoing engagement with civil and military management on all matters affecting the Defence Forces, including staffing matters. I attended the PDFORRA conference yesterday discussing some of these issues. The Government has previously acknowledged the recruitment and retention difficulties in the Naval Service, which present ongoing challenges. This is the case, in particular, for the specialist positions, as the current competitive jobs market is proving challenging for all sectors. The high standard of training provided by the Defence Forces makes its members ever more attractive to private sector employers. However, I am advised by the military authorities that the report referenced by the Deputies is not accurate. Three of the five artificers referred to are trainees who are in the process of discharge, and they did not comprise the entire class, as reported. The two other personnel were fully qualified personnel who have been discharged. There are currently 20 electrical artificer vacancies, with a training pipeline of 20 at various stages, including the three in the process of discharge.
In response to the challenges in the Naval Service, I approved a comprehensive Naval Service regeneration plan in 2021 which is being progressed and monitored by a high-level civil-military team. The aim of the plan is to address issues, including human resource matters, facing the Naval Service. A number of the staffing measures in the plan have been implemented. Furthermore, a new recruitment campaign specifically targeting Naval Service recruits is being progressed.
The terms and conditions for the Naval Service entry scheme were revised in 2021 to increase the age limit of technicians and to provide for flexibility in respect of the starting point of the pay scale for marine engineering officers. This flexibility is also being progressed for certain other Naval Service specialists. Other specific retention measures include the seagoing Naval Service personnel tax credit, which has been extended into next year. In addition, having spoken to many in the Naval Service, the seagoing service commitment scheme has also been extended into next year and eligibility criteria for the scheme have been revised. The Naval Service also benefits from wider Defence Forces retention measures such as improvements in pay as a result of recent pay agreements and the extension of service limits for privates and corporals. Greater visibility on the wider benefits of membership of the Defence Forces also arises through the recently announced, and ongoing, Be More recruitment campaign.
That answer sounds a bit defensive. I know that we do have real issues in the Naval Service. Many Members have raised them with me. They are far from solved, but we are doing multiple things at the moment to try to turn the tide on that. It is going to take some time. We are investing heavily in Haulbowline and in new equipment. We have made decisions, as of yesterday, on the back of agreement with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to significantly increase the pay of people in their first few years of service. In effect, we are raising pay from a starting salary of €30,000 to just under €35,000. We must also take into account the full application of the Naval Service allowance, NSA, and the removal of the requirement to mark time for the first three years. A lot of things are happening, some of which I outlined at the PDFORRA conference yesterday. It is going to take us some time to get back to where we need to be in terms of recruitment and retention in the Naval Service but it is a big priority for me.
I hear what the Minister said on the recruits. Three, as opposed to five, apprentices were training as electricians. They recently completed their block release with a multinational medical supplier, Stryker, in Cork. The company was impressed by the high standards of the training on which the apprentices had embarked, and they bought them out of their contracts at an estimated cost of €30,000. The Minister and I know that issues exist, and not just in regard to the Naval Service. Unfortunately, the loss of personnel continues to grow, despite some of the allowances and measures that have been introduced in recent years. Immediate action is needed. If the Minister looks at some of the statistics, since the illegal war in Ukraine another 100 members of the Naval Service have left, so immediate action is needed. He might outline some of the actions to which he alluded and state when they are going to be implemented.
Immediate action is needed. I am sorry. Does Deputy Gannon wish to speak?
That is no problem.
Can we group priority questions?
We were told they were grouped.
It appears they are grouped.
We can group priority questions.
It is all on the same issue. Such is the importance of the issue, we have both given it priority.
Excellent.
The Minister indicated in his response that the reports were not completely accurate and that three apprentices had left as opposed to five. What is clear though is that this year alone 270 members of the Defence Forces have left, and there is a problem with retention. Much of that comes down to pay and conditions. I believe the Minister and the State are committed to changing that. We have spoken about the issue at length.
Deputy Brady mentioned that the private sector was impressed by the high standards of the Naval Service recruits. Is that any different from what we also see in the teaching or healthcare professions? Wherever the State steps in and trains people, we do a great job, but the issue is that we cannot retain staff because of the cost of housing, the cost of living and basic pay.
Yesterday, at a committee meeting, I asked the Minister to paint a picture of what Haulbowline would look like next year and the following year and the picture he painted was very positive. Could he take a bit of time now to outline that? The best recruitment we have is word of mouth, and I want there to be a future for the Naval Service and the Defence Forces.
I thank the Deputy. For clarification, we can group priority questions, but a priority question cannot be grouped with an ordinary question.
I recognise that there is concern across the Chamber. If we are going to achieve what we need to achieve with the Defence Forces in the coming years, in simple terms, we have to take on 3,000 people in the Permanent Defence Force and 3,000 people in the Reserve Defence Force. That is a net increase of 6,000 people in six years.
Looking at the numbers today, that looks like a huge mountain to climb.
That is why the Government is going to put significant resources into this. Only yesterday, I announced the result of an agreement following a lot of conversation and negotiation with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, which means three-star or able seamen who join the Defence Forces will now, because of their marked time requirements, be removed and because they will get the full NSA, their salary will increase by €5,000. The Deputies asked what we are doing in terms of immediate measures and that is one of them. We have also extended the qualification criteria for the seagoing scheme. Previously, members had to have been in the Naval Service for three years before they could qualify, and we have reduced that to one. A lot more people will qualify, which will increase their take-home pay significantly if they go to sea.
As for what we are doing on the ground in Haulbowline, which I know very well because I am there regularly and I live only a few minutes away, we have a capital spending programme that is worth more than €70 million of investment in Haulbowline alone over the next decade or less. We opened what is probably the most high-quality residential block last month, which is a phenomenal piece of infrastructure. We have also opened a new jetty and we are going to open a gym.
More than 270 personnel have left the Defence Forces this year alone, a threefold increase on the same period last year, and that is despite all the focus, the commitments and the rhetoric the Minister has been putting forward in the context of addressing all the issues and concerns within the Defence Forces. There has been a serious and concerning escalation in the number of members leaving the Defence Forces. I welcome the capital investment, but it is meaningless unless we have the crews and personnel to use it.
In the immediacy, the lack of personnel and the haemorrhaging thereof is putting this State and its security at grave risk and under serious threat. While the measures are welcome, we need to know exactly when the announcements the Minister has made on the floor, and the one he made yesterday in regard to the €5,000, are going to be implemented. That is what the Defence Forces need to hear.
That gets to the crux of the matter. The ambition of having 6,000 new recruits in a number of years is welcome, as is the vision the Minister painted of Haulbowline. The report of the Commission on the Defence Forces is comprehensive and has done a great deal of good work but we are at the point now where our Defence Forces are down to bare bones.
At 35 years of age, I have any number of friends who used to be in the Defence Forces because they have left and gone elsewhere. We need to create conditions in which people will want to stay in the Defence Forces and believe things will get better. There is work to be done by the State to present that picture and say things will get better, but also to make them get better as quickly as possible. I do not doubt for a moment the commitment the Minister has to this, but people just do not believe it because they have been mistreated in terms of pay and conditions for so long that morale in our Defence Forces is on its knees and there is a job to be done to build that up quickly before it gets to the point of no return.
We all have a role in that. We will spend €114 million more on defence next year than we will spend this year, with the combination of the pay agreement, assuming it is supported, and the €67 million on top of that, €35 million of which comprises additional capital. Not every party in the House proposed that kind of increase in expenditure. Sinn Féin, for example, in its alternative budget, proposed a €25 million in increase in defence, including a €10 million increase in capital. If Deputies are calling for something and putting me under pressure to deliver it, which is, of course, their job, it is important we are all consistent too. Defence needs significant investment if we are to get the results we expect.
It also needs structures to deliver on the potential of the commission report. We have 38 early actions, which we are moving forward, including interventions such as facilitating associate membership of ICTU, which all the Deputies asked me for, for the representative bodies in advance of the pay talks. That was useful and it has built some trust with the representative bodies. A range of other things are happening, including a suite of measures I announced yesterday at the PDFORRA conference.
One reason we have been under so much pressure this year relates to the fact Ireland is at full employment or close to it, which means there is an aggressive search for skills. We have great people in the Defence Forces who are skilled and well trained and the private sector is looking to target them. We have to have a strong package to respond to that, which is good on pay, allowances and the other aspects on which the private sector cannot compete with us easily such as certainty, the work environment, adventure overseas and at home, healthcare cover, which I want to extend beyond officers to all ranks in the Defence Forces next year and, of course, certainty in policy for people who want to serve their country in uniform, which is very different from working for the private sector. We are at the start of a massive investment programme in defence, relative to any historical investment. In comparison with other countries, it is not massive, but from an Irish perspective, we are going to increase defence budgets significantly in the years ahead and the career opportunities that go with that will be significant.
69. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Minister for Defence if the capital provision in budget 2023 is sufficient to meet the needs of the Defence Forces in 2023; if he will outline the way in which the funds will be provided in 2024 for accommodation improvements in barracks, new ships and aircraft and other needed equipment; if there is current funding provision for pay improvements for personnel beyond the terms of the new public service pay agreement to improve retention; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [49363/22]
Building on the previous question and very much welcoming the additional capital provision provided for the Defence Forces next year, bringing the total capital pool to €176 million, what does the Minister expect to be delivered to the Defence Forces for that sum?
He touched on the pay element. Does the Government have sufficient money in next year's budget to do the two things it needs to do? It will have to honour the new pay agreement, but there are also the particular defence commitments to enhancing pay to hold on to recruitment and augment the numbers. There will be additional numbers and additional pay. Does it have sufficient money for that?
"Yes" is the straight answer to that question. In fact, we will have more money than we need for pay because we have a pay estimate on the basis of an establishment of 9,500, and we have negotiated in recent years that what we do not use on pay we can reallocate for other expenditure in defence. We have more than enough for pay.
As we increase our numbers, we will have to see other elements of the Estimate increase because we can no longer transfer money that has not been needed for pay into capital investment and so on, which is why the €35 million extra in capital this year is important. In fact, we will spend more than €35 million extra in capital next year because we will transfer some money that is unspent on pay, given our numbers are still well below the establishment. We are planning for a net increase of 400 next year. That is a big ask, but that is what we are planning for from both a military and a departmental perspective in supporting efforts at recruitment and retention.
For 2023, the total allocation for Vote 36 - defence, is €893 million, an overall increase of €57 million on 2022. The defence capital allocation has increased by €35 million to €176 million, a 25% increase on 2022 and the highest ever capital funding provided to the defence sector. The acquisition, modernisation and upgrade of Defence Forces equipment is managed through the equipment development plan, EDP, which provides a comprehensive list of planned equipment projects to be progressed over a five-year period. Among the projects across land, sea and air platforms included in the EDP for progression in 2023 are the ongoing mid-life upgrade of the Army's fleet of Mowag Piranha III armoured personnel carriers , the acquisition of body armour and helmets along with a range of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear suits, the acquisition of software defined radio, the development-----
Go raibh maith agat.
There are just a couple left if the Acting Chairman could allow me to continue.
We are over time.
Other projects include the development of a primary radar capability, the continuation of the mid-life extension programme works on LÉ Niamh, the acquisition of two inshore patrol vessels from the New Zealand Government to replace LÉ Orla and LÉ Ciara and the acquisition of two Airbus C295 maritime patrol aircraft. I will perhaps come back on that but that is the initial list.
I very much welcome that. Some of those are very expensive projects, however, such as the two new CASA aeroplanes, the acquisition of the two New Zealand vessels and most of all, the primary radar system. They are each capable of gobbling up the bulk of the total capital allocation. Are we going to be seeing these acquisitions replicated for the next three years as an ongoing process to be paid for over a number of years? What will we get for our €176 million on the capital side for next year? That is the nub of my question. What does the Minister think he will actually get?
As the Deputy will know having served as Minister in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, there are often a number of stage payments over a number of years for large military equipment like ships and aircraft and so on. These projects take years to come to full fruition in terms of the-----
We could have built the Taj Mahal in the time it takes for the CASA aircraft.
Those of us who know the pressures on the Air Corps at the moment know that we need new CASA aircraft. They are on the way, but they take time to build and deliver. They also take time to equip in terms of the technology we put on them now, which is just pretty impressive. We also, of course, have a building works programme across our barracks, some of which I mentioned regarding Haulbowline. We have equipment such as primary radar ships, aircraft upgrades - Mowag armoured personnel carriers and so on - and then we have a capital investment programme in physical infrastructure. Members have repeatedly raised with me the issue of dereliction on some of our bases, in particular the Curragh Camp. We have a €276 million capital investment plan, some of which, of course, we will invest in next year.
I thank the Minister for his answer. To focus on the pay again, He told us that he expects 400 net additional personnel to be in place by the end of next year. To what will that bring the complement of our Permanent Defence Force? Second, the pay elements of the Commission on the Defence Forces report are outside the national pay agreement. What specifically has the Minister provided for next year to pay from that?
I am sorry; what was the Deputy's first question again?
The first question was on the net numbers.
If we can add 400 net next year, that will bring the numbers back over 8,500, which is still 1,000 behind where we need to be. However, let us not throw our hands in the air here. We have got to start turning the tide.
If we can get 400 net, it will be good.
We have seen losses each year now year after year. This year will be particularly challenging. As I said, we must turn the tide on this issue. We are doing a huge amount on pay, conditions, investment, certainty for the future, improving the culture within the Defence Forces and safety of the work environment so that we can, I hope, also attract many more women into the Defence Forces. We have an independent report on that. Therefore, a huge amount is happening in that regard. There is an extraordinary effort both within the Defence Forces and in the Department to turn this around-----
How much of the additional budget is the Minister going to use to put money into defence?
-----and we will. In terms of the budget, if the pay agreement is agreed and signed off, that effectively means an extra €27 million in pay and approximately €20 million in pensions. That is, therefore, an extra €47 million to add to the €67 million, which gives a figure of approximately €114 million extra in the defence budget next year.
70. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Defence if he will initiate the recording of hours worked by members of the Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [49411/22]
Will the Minister initiate a proper and accurate process of recording the hours worked by members of the Defence Forces?
As the Deputy will be aware, the Defence Forces are currently excluded from the provisions of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997, which transposed the EU working time directive into Irish law. However, the Government has committed to amending this Act to bring both the Defence Forces and An Garda Síochána within the scope of its provisions, where appropriate.
Significant work has been undertaken by military management, which has determined that a high percentage of the normal everyday work of the Defence Forces is in compliance with the working time directive. However, it has also been determined that some activities may require an exemption or a derogation due to their specific nature.
Extensive deliberations by my officials and military management on these important matters have been informed by the interpretation of recent European case law on military service as well as the fundamental requirement to ensure that rights are afforded to serving members, while ensuring the Defence Forces can continue to fulfil their essential State functions.
As the Deputy will agree, a robust time and attendance system is also an essential element in ensuring that the provisions of the working time directive are properly afforded to serving members of the Defence Forces and this is a priority. I am advised by the military authorities that a field study was conducted in July 2021 to determine the feasibility of utilising the existing personnel management system time and attendance module to record working time in the Defence Forces. A number of units across the Defence Forces were selected to participate in this study during which they were required to record working time over a four-week period. Among its objectives, the field study aimed to inform decisions regarding future implementation of the working time directive in the Defence Forces and to identify possible further developments of the personnel management system time and attendance module to facilitate implementation of the working time directive. The field study findings continue to be examined by the military authorities with a view to ensuring a capacity to efficiently record hours worked by members of the Defence Forces. In the meantime, my officials are engaging with military management on the possibility of applying an interim enhanced time recording measure, which was piloted in 2021, without prejudice to the outcome of the ongoing process in preparing for the implementation of the working time directive within the Defence Forces. The short answer to the Deputy's question is that work is being done on this and we recognise that more work has to be done.
As the Minister will be aware, the working time directive is a major issue of concern for members of the Defence Forces and their representative bodies. It is an issue that has been consistently raised. The current shortages within the Defence Forces have put massive pressure on existing members who, in some instances, are double-jobbing and triple-jobbing. In some instances, this is also leading to mandatory selection for overseas duties. It is putting members under serious pressure.
The Minister stated that a field study was conducted in 2021, which I welcome. Will the findings of that study be made public and have they been shared with the representative bodies of members of the Defence Forces? It is an issue of serious concern and probably the fundamental issue when it comes to pay and retention within the Defence Forces. It needs to be addressed in full.
We are now, I hope, at the closing stages of finalising how we will implement the working time directive within the Defence Forces and the amending changes we have to make to the Act to reflect that. A subcommittee of the defence conciliation and arbitration council, comprised of the representative associations and military and civil management, was established to discuss matters relating to the implementation of the working time directive, where appropriate. It is having meetings now to try to conclude how we get this balance right between, on one hand, applying the working time directive, where appropriate, while, at the same time, ensuring the Defence Forces can operate efficiently as military whether it is at the Golan Heights or on the deck of a naval ship patrolling the west coast. I hope we can agree a consensus on what exceptions or derogations need to be made to the working time directive for military service, in certain circumstances, and also apply the directive to all other areas where derogations are not justified. What I want and hope to get from the subcommittee, that is, senior management in the Defence Forces, my own Department and representative bodies, is a series of recommendations on which I can sign off in the not too distant future in order that we can get on with amending the legislation and ensuring the working time directive applies, as appropriate, to the Defence Forces.
Part of that, as the Deputy knows, will be the ability to measure working time within the Defence Forces and I recognise that we have to have a credible system to do that. We will put a credible system in place and I am happy to work with the representative bodies to make sure they are happy with that as well.
I ask again about the field study that was carried out. Could the findings be made public? I would be interested in seeing them and I have no reason to doubt that the study will bear out the information members of the Defence Forces have given and that in many circumstances they are working 60 or 70 hours per week. At a meeting of the joint committee the other day, the Minister spoke about derogations and exemptions from the working time directive and he has touched on that again this morning. He stated at the committee that the representative bodies were fully supportive of the need for those exemptions and derogations. While he talks about the sub-committee, I want to talk about the consultations with the representative bodies proper with regard to those exemptions. Is the Minister saying they are fully supportive of the need for derogations and exemptions? I ask for specifics on what exemptions are being looked at.
They have not been agreed yet, so the representative bodies cannot be fully supportive of something that has not been agreed yet.
That is what the Minister said in the committee.
That is why we have a sub-committee in place. We have asked the senior management - the Chief of Staff and his team - to make recommendations on what they see as necessary in terms of exemptions and derogations from the working time directive to allow the military to function in certain circumstances. We have an ongoing process of consulting the representatives associations, which I suspect will have different perspectives on where those derogations should and should not be applied. We do not have agreement on that yet, which is why we have a process in place to try to find agreement. I have spoken to PDFORRA and the Representative Association of Commissioned Officers, RACO, about this and they understand the structure within which we are trying to work. Ultimately, I will have to make a final decision. I hope we will be able to reach a consensus between management, the Department and the representative bodies on how the working time directive will apply. If we cannot get agreement, I will have to make decisions and we will move ahead on the basis of those decisions. There is a process under way that needs to conclude first. I will get recommendations on the back of that and we will take the matter from there.
72. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Defence if he will outline the concerns he has, if any, in relation to whether Ireland has the capacity to ensure that undersea data cables passing through Irish waters are secure; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [49412/22]
What, if any, concerns does the Minister have about Ireland's vulnerability with regard to data cables that pass through Irish waters? Given the difficulties with retention of members of the Naval Service, which we discussed, are those vulnerabilities of serious concern to Government?
The Naval Service, as the State's principal seagoing agency, is tasked with a variety of defence and other roles. While the main daily task of the Naval Service is to provide a fishery protection service in accordance with our obligations as an EU member state, it also carries out a number of other non-fishery related tasks in tandem with maritime surveillance. The Air Corps maritime patrol squadron also supports this role, providing aerial assistance to the Naval Service in patrolling the Irish exclusive economic zone, using the two CASA CN 235 maritime patrol aircraft which are equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance and communications equipment.
Following an extraordinary EU energy council meeting, which took place last week to discuss the EU’s energy security in response to the attacks on Nord Stream 1 and 2, the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications sought support from my Department in relation to additional measures that could be put in place by the Defence Forces to ensure that critical offshore infrastructure, including data cables, is protected. My officials and the Defence Forces have been engaged with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, and while the Defence Forces have limited subsea capabilities, particularly in this specialist area, additional patrols and targeted surveillance of offshore infrastructure, including data cables, are being examined.
On the future development of subsea capabilities, the Commission on the Defence Forces report considers that the step up to level of ambition 2, LOA 2, should seek to deliver enhancement of subsurface capabilities to monitor subsea cables. The report states that to achieve this would mean the naval fleet should have enhanced air, surface and subsurface search capabilities, with the latter allowing the Naval Service to monitor activity in the vicinity of subsea cables. In order to achieve these desired capability effects associated with a move to LOA 2, specific recommendations made by the commission were accepted in principle by the Government when it published its high-level action plan.
We have also had meetings, not just between the two Departments but also involving Gas Networks Ireland and EirGrid. EirGrid already has a private company providing surveillance and monitoring capability for its undersea network and cables via global positioning system, GPS, tracking. There are some systems in place and we will increase patrolling, both by the Air Corps and the Naval Service, to improve that. We will continue to consult the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications on the matter.
The recent attack on the Nord Stream pipeline has clearly shown the vulnerabilities of strategically important cables that run through Irish waters. Some three quarters of all cables in the northern hemisphere pass through Irish waters and 97% of global communications, including business operations, financial transactions and Internet traffic, are carried through these cables. They are critically important and it has been suggested that we are the Achilles heel in the security of these critical data cables. I hear what the Minister is saying about our current position when it comes to providing security. I would say it is wholly inadequate, particularly when we are unable to put our ships to sea due to the current understaffing. Our ships are also currently unable to see what is happening below the surface of the water. If we get to LOA 2, we will have greatly enhanced capabilities to deliver our security needs but there is a deficit at present. What immediate actions are being taken? Are we in discussions with any other EU countries to provide the security that is needed? It is not a case of handing this over to the private sector, as was suggested. We have a serious obligation.
I did not suggest anything was handed over to the private sector; I just gave the Deputy a statement of fact on what EirGrid is doing. One of the reasons we established the Commission on the Defence Forces in the first place was that I and others in Government felt there were capacity issues that needed to be addressed. That is why we have committed to spending significantly increased amounts of money next year and in the years thereafter, right up until 2028, to get to LOA 2 and beyond. Part of reaching LOA 2 will give us more subsea capability but we will not get there if we are spending an extra €10 million on capital investment, which is what the Deputy was suggesting for the recent budget. Let us have an honest conversation; we need to spend a lot more money on defence equipment. That was not a jab at the Deputy by the way because we are all trying to get to the same place. Regardless of who is in government up to 2028, we need to make sure we have a consistent policy on increased investment in our Defence Forces in order that we have more capabilities and a greater capacity to do more in spaces like this and elsewhere. We will have a huge amount of offshore wind infrastructure that we will also have to protect over the next decade. The Naval Service and the Air Corps need significant investment and they will get it.
I fully support level of ambition 2 and increasing the capacity of the navy and its ability to put ships to sea, which is something that is currently tying our hands in providing the security that is needed for these essential data cables. There is a serious anomaly in that the responsibility in legislation falls to An Garda Síochána to provide security for such cables. There is a significant anomaly there given the Garda has no ability whatsoever to go to sea and provide security in circumstances such as this. Will the legislation be changed to ensure the necessary and appropriate body, which is the Defence Forces in this case, will take sole responsibility for the provision of security for these essential data cables?
There is ongoing work between An Garda Síochána and the Defence Forces to ensure that when the latter need to provide an aid to civil power or support for the Garda, it happens in as seamless a way as we can make it. Ireland needs to look at its broader defence and security policy, including the relationship between An Garda Síochána and the Defence Forces, whether in regard to intelligence or broader security challenges like this one. That is something the Government is considering at the moment.
