Skip to main content
Normal View

SELECT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN’S RIGHTS debate -
Wednesday, 26 Mar 2003

Vol. 1 No. 12

Estimates for Public Services 2003.

Vote 36 - Defence.

Vote 37 - Army Pensions.

I welcome the Minister for Defence, Deputy Michael Smith, and his officials. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the Estimates falling within the remit of the Department of Defence, namely, Vote 36 - Defence and Vote 37 - Army Pensions.

We have a proposed timetable which will allow time for the Minister's opening statement and for the Opposition spokespersons to speak. We will follow that with an open discussion on the individual subheads by way of a question and answer session. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I am pleased to appear before the committee to put forward for consideration the Defence and Army pensions Estimates for 2003. The combined Estimates amount to a net figure of over €870 million which is a substantial amount of Exchequer funds.

There has been an unprecedented level of investment in equipment and facilities for the Defence Forces in recent years. This has taken place in the context of a modernisation process which was mapped out in the first ever White Paper on Defence, published in 2000. The White Paper set out the Government's medium term strategy for the period up to 2010 based on the evolving national and international security environment. One of the key goals of the White Paper development programme was to provide significant additional resources for equipment and infrastructure to enable the Defence Forces to carry out the tasks, both at home and abroad, required of them by Government. These additional resources were put in place as a consequence of the Government's decision that 100% of the pay savings arising from the re-organisation of the Defence Forces set out in the White Paper, together with 100% of the net proceeds from the sale of surplus properties, would be re-allocated for investment in modern equipment and facilities.

From 1997 to the end of 2002 more than €150 million has been expended on the capital investment programme for the upgrade of barracks accommodation and facilities. During the same period expenditure on non-capital maintenance works amounted to some €50 million. The results of this expenditure are now to be seen in many parts of the country. In particular, the Defence Forces training centre at the Curragh Camp, has benefited to the tune of more than €60 million expended on new works. This year's defence Estimate includes a further sum of €23.6 million for capital works and almost €10 million for maintenance works.

For the committee's information, major projects completed in 2002 at the Curragh were: a new combat support college, €6.9 million; new vehicle garaging, €4.6 million and an NCOs' mess, €4.35 million. At Casement Aerodrome projects completed were an upgrade of runways, €6.3 million and a new 3rd support wing headquarters, €3 million. At Collins Barracks, Cork, a new gym costing €2.7 million was completed.

Projects currently in progress and due for completion this year include: Curragh, combined vehicle workshops, €9 million; Coolmoney Camp, accommodation, €1.2 million; Athlone, new armoury, €1.9 million; Dún Uí Mhaolíosa, Galway, new cookhouse/dining complex, €3.6 million; Cathal Brugha Barracks, upgrade of accommodation, €1.9 million; and McKee Barracks, upgrade of accommodation, €2 million.

Projects due to commence this year include: Curragh, special storage buildings, €3.5 million; naval base, new technical stores, €2.5 million; naval base, upgrade accommodation, €1.2 million; Sarsfield Barracks, Limerick, upgrade cookhouse and men's club, €1.8 million; Custume Barracks, Athlone, new NCOs' mess, €1.3 million.

It is Government policy that the Defence Forces should be fully equipped to undertake the roles assigned to them. For many years, the imbalance between the pay and non-pay allocation of resources led to a deficiency in the required levels of modern equipment. The re-balancing of this pay to non-pay expenditure ratio, which took place on foot of the White Paper, freed up resources for the acquisition of necessary equipment in recent years for the Army, the Air Corps, the Naval Service and the Reserve Defence Force.

A major acquisition for the Army has been the purchase of 40 Piranha armoured personnel carriers from Mowag of Switzerland. Deliveries commenced in 2001 and were completed in March 2002. The total value of that contract was about €51 million with payment spread over five years, including a final stage payment of €5 million in January of this year. Six of these APCs have been deployed with the contingent serving with the UN mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea. I am pleased to report that the APCs have performed exceptionally well in that role in what is a very challenging working environment for the vehicle. With their mobility and protection characteristics, the APCs provide an important additional security element for our personnel.

The original contract contained an option for the supply of up to 40 additional APCs by Mowag. This option has now been exercised, albeit for a reduced number, because of the changed financial situation. I signed a contract on 9 December 2002 for an additional 25 APCs consisting of 20 standard APCs, four command variants and one ambulance. The contract value is in the region of €33 million including VAT.

Deliveries will commence in March 2004 and are scheduled to be completed by September 2004. Payments under the contract extend from December 2002 to September 2005 due to the budgetary situation. On delivery, the Defence Forces will have a total of 65 Mowag APCs which meet their requirements in this regard. There has been significant investment in new vehicles for the Defence Forces, including specialist transport cargo vehicles and troop carrying vehicles. Ongoing programmes include the acquisition of additional night vision equipment and nuclear biological chemical equipment.

Substantial investment has been made in the Naval Service in recent years. The LE Niamh, which is a sister ship of the LE Róisín, was commissioned in September 2001. Like its sister ship, the new vessel cost over €25 million. Both ships have proved to be a tremendous asset to the Naval Service in carrying out its day to day roles.

The main priority for the Air Corps has been the purchase of fixed wing training aircraft. In that regard, I was delighted to sign a contract on 16 January 2003 for the supply of eight turbo propeller aircraft to replace the Siai Marchetti aircraft in the pilot training role. These aircraft will allow for the continued training of young cadets to the highest standard and are a very realistic response to the needs of the Air Corps at this time. The new aircraft is the Pilatus PC-9M, manufactured by Pilatus Aircraft Limited, Switzerland. The cost of the eight aircraft is approximately €60 million. Delivery of all the aircraft will take place during 2004. While these aircraft are being obtained primarily for pilot training, they will be capable of being armed and as such will have a limited defensive capability.

As the members will be aware, the tender competition for the acquisition of medium lift helicopters for the Air Corps was cancelled in July 2002 due to budgetary constraints. Any decision to acquire medium lift helicopters for the Air Corps in the future can only be taken as the financial resources permit. The decision to cancel the tender competition was extremely difficult. I regarded the acquisition of the helicopters as a priority. When the decision was made, I asked my officials to initiate a review of the provision of helicopter services, in conjunction with the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, to determine how best to meet the State's obligations in search and rescue, while taking account of the current financial position.

An interdepartmental working group was established to seek alternative solutions to the funding issue, such as public private partnerships or leasing arrangements, with a view to providing helicopters for the Air Corps by other means. The PPP unit in the Department of Finance is also involved in assessing possible solutions. I expect the group to report in the coming weeks.

I am committed to maintaining the Air Corps role in the provision of search and rescue services and in this regard a Sikorsky S61 helicopter has been acquired for the Air Corps to operate in the north west region as a replacement for the Dauphin helicopter. The S61 helicopter has been leased by the Irish Coast Guard from Canadian Helicopters Corporation Ireland, CHCI, pursuant to existing search and rescue contracts, and has been assigned by the Irish Coast Guard to the Air Corps. The Air Corps will provide the flight crews and the aircraft will be maintained by CHCI. The S61 will operate out of Sligo Airport.

Pilot training on the S61, which is being provided by CHCI, is ongoing. It was anticipated that the helicopter would become operational in early 2003 but, due to a delay in securing appropriate training personnel, it is now expected that the S61 will commence on-site training at Sligo Airport next month, with operations commencing in June 2003.

While much has been done to improve Defence Forces equipment and infrastructure, I am conscious that we cannot rest on our laurels because more needs to be done. Expenditure programmes will now have to be prioritised due to the changed financial situation but I am intent on ensuring that a substantive investment programme will continue so as to enhance the efficiency, professionalism and safety of the Defence Forces.

A significant amount of the funding allocated in recent years for the investment programmes in new buildings and equipment represents moneys provided by the Government in anticipation of property sales, the net proceeds from which go directly to the Exchequer as they are realised. In that regard, Fitzgerald Camp, Fermoy, Devoy Barracks, Naas, and the military post at Castleblayney have been disposed of for a total of €11million. In the case of Murphy Barracks, Ballincollig, sales have been agreed and contracts signed in respect of an area of about 97 acres. An offer has been accepted for the sale of Clancy Barracks, Dublin, and a contract for sale is due to be signed shortly. The sales of Murphy Barracks and Clancy Barracks will realise a total of over €67 million. Magee Barracks, Kildare, is still providing accommodation for asylum seekers while about one acre has been made available to Kildare County Council for a temporary halting site. Agreements have also been reached for the sale of other properties, including married quarters, for a total of approximately €7.6 million.

We have made progress on the development of a new Army organisation structure, based on the revised strength figure provided for in the White Paper, and we are putting a renewed effort into the development of an integrated personnel management system, or IPMS, for the Defence Forces. Following consideration at the civil-military strategic management committee, the Army organisation proposals submitted by the Chief of Staff are now being implemented as the next stage of the reorganisation. There will be a further review of the new organisation next year.

As we put the new Permanent Defence Force organisation in place, it is equally important that the new structures for the Army, the Naval Service and the Air Corps offer rewarding and challenging careers to Defence Forces personnel. The IPMS will address this issue and the whole range of human resources management and development issues. To this end, proposals prepared by the military authorities are now being considered by the strategic management committee in the light of the requirements set out in the White Paper.

The White Paper envisages that the IPMS will address issues such as manpower policy and planning, equality of opportunity and treatment, terms of enlistment, training, education and development, physical and medical fitness, career guidance management and promotion. Within that broad context, it is intended that there would be a career development plan for military personnel designed to give them the right skills and training to carry out their tasks and to compete for promotion. There would be an updated performance management system and performance appraisal and feedback that would include an appropriate element of career guidance and management. Before any final decisions are taken, it is my intention that the Defence Forces representative associations will be fully consulted in a spirit of partnership in accordance with the system of representation. I hope to see the IPMS finalised later this year.

On 15 January 2003 I approved in principle the report of the Reserve Defence Forces review implementation board. This board was established to formulate a plan for the implementation of the recommendations of the special steering group which carried out a study on the reserve. The Permanent Defence Force is now organised in a three-brigade structure and a Defence Forces training centre. The Reserve Defence Force will be similarly reorganised and restructured and it is envisaged that the implementation of these changes will take place over a period of approximately six years.

The full organisational and establishment details of the new Reserve Defence Force will be determined in the course of the ongoing detailed implementation process. Plans are currently being prepared by each general officer commanding a brigade for the amalgamation of FCA units in line with the proposals outlined in the steering group report. The objective of this process is to ensure that better training and other facilities will be provided to members of the Reserve Defence Force. No decisions have yet been taken on the location of the proposed newly amalgamated units, but the military authorities have advised me that all proposed amalgamations will provide an optimal environment for personnel in the relevant areas to participate in the new enhanced reserve.

The blueprint for the new reserve will involve replacing An Fórsa Cosanta Áitiúil with an Army reserve consisting of two elements. One element will provide personnel who will integrate with Permanent Defence Force units to bring them up to full operational strength in a contingency situation. Personnel who opt for a period of integrated service will be provided with enhanced military training. The larger element will provide the overall Army reserve, organised into three reserve brigades. Members of the FCA are already seeing the benefits in terms of better clothing and improved equipment and more and better quality training. As the process develops, we will see additional benefits in terms of a clearer role for the reserve, a better overall organisation structure and opportunities for suitably qualified reserve personnel to serve overseas.

I emphasise that I am very mindful of the need to preserve and to retain the many traditional and well established strengths of the current reserve system, not least the admirable spirit of individual voluntary commitment, close social links with local communities and a good depth and scope as regards nationwide geographical spread. The amount provided for full-time reserve training has been increased in each of the past few years and this year's Estimate continues that trend with provision for approximately 116,000 training days. The corresponding figure for 1999 was 64,000 man days. The aim, over time, is to achieve standardisation and inter-operability between the Permanent Defence Force and the Reserve Defence Force in respect of both dress and personnel equipment.

Members will all be aware of the huge contribution made by Civil Defence volunteers in supporting their communities at local and national levels. Civil Defence assistance with flooding relief measures in Dublin and other counties on a number of occasions in 2002 received national recognition and deservedly so. However, I would also like to salute members for their commitment in volunteering to give their time to assisting their local communities and the major emergency services on a daily basis in all weathers in areas such as search and rescue missions and first aid cover and in particular their dedication to training to respond to major emergencies.

A major milestone in the development of Civil Defence in 2002 was the passing of the Civil Defence Act 2002. By virtue of this Act, in June 2002 I appointed the inaugural Civil Defence board which comprises representatives of all the major stakeholders involved in the wider civil defence community and which will be charged with the management and development of Civil Defence at national level. I expect to be in a position in the near future to sign the necessary order to grant the board its full remit under the new Act. I have full confidence in the board to consolidate the strengths of the organisation and to develop an exciting future for Civil Defence in line with the objectives set out by the Government in the White Paper.

A further milestone for Civil Defence arising from the White Paper is the Government decision to decentralise the Civil Defence branch of my Department to Roscrea and, as I announced recently, I expect to have the new Civil Defence headquarters in Roscrea operational later this year.

The office of emergency planning was set up in my Department in October 2001 following the awful events of the preceding month in the United States of America. The remit of the office is to assist with emergency planning across all Departments and to exercise an oversight role of the emergency planning process generally. The office is staffed by civil servants and military personnel and has worked extremely well.

I chair the Government taskforce on emergency planning which co-ordinates the work of all the Departments with lead responsibilities for the various Government emergency plans and those with supporting inputs. It has met on 23 occasions to progress emergency planning issues and to facilitate the improvements which have taken place in emergency planning and response arrangements in the last 18 months. I can report that the advice available to me continues to be that there is no current credible threat to this State from international terrorist activity.

There are at present more than 440 members of the Permanent Defence Force serving overseas under the auspices of the United Nations, the EU and the OSCE. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to all those members of the Defence Forces who have served and who continue to serve on peacekeeping missions abroad. Through their commitment and professionalism they bring great honour on Ireland and on the Defence Forces. The past year has represented a period of major change for the Defence Forces in terms of overseas commitments. From having one main contingent deployed in one mission for so many years, namely UNIFIL, at one stage last year we had significant contingents deployed in Kosovo, Bosnia - Herzegovina, Eritrea and East Timor. We also had a small number of personnel serving with the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, together with small numbers in observer and HQ planning, administration and liaison roles in a range of other missions. This year we are completing our final tours of duty with UNMEE in Eritrea and UNMISET in East Timor. Also we are currently completing a restructuring of our commitment in the Balkans where we have withdrawn the military police contingent from SFOR in Bosnia-Herzegovina. As part of this restructuring, we are also withdrawing the transport company from KFOR in Kosovo and are replacing it with an APC mounted infantry company group of approximately 250 personnel.

The question of participation in overseas missions is examined on a case by case basis. As members will be aware, participation by the Defence Forces in an overseas mission requires UN authorisation, a specific Government decision and the approval of Dáil Éireann - the so-called "triple lock". These are the underlying principles for our national decision making procedures.

The Government is committed to the maintenance of international peace and security through its contribution at the United Nations, and in a very practical way, through the ongoing participation of Defence Forces personnel in overseas peace support operations.

We should not forget the high price that has been paid by personnel of the Defence Forces on active service with the UN. Some 84 members of the Defence Forces have lost their lives while on overseas service, including 45 personnel who died while on duty in Lebanon.

In regard to defence and security developments within the EU, the Union has been developing its common foreign and security policy as a means of playing a greater role for peace, stability and security in Europe. The Helsinki European Council in December 1999 agreed on a voluntary target for establishing capabilities for Petersberg Tasks. This target, known as a headline goal, which member states aim to meet by the end of 2003 involves the ability to deploy up to 60,000 personnel within 60 days and to sustain that deployment for one year.

Ireland's commitment of up to 850 members of the Defence Forces to the headline goal was authorised from within our existing commitment of 850 personnel to the United Nations standby arrangements system. The largest element of the commitment involves a light infantry battalion of up to 750 personnel, along with an Army Ranger Wing platoon of 40, in addition to small numbers in national support, headquarters and observer elements which make up the remainder.

The recent breakthrough on an overall EU-NATO agreement at the Copenhagen European Council on 12 and 13 December 2002 has given significant impetus to the development of a European security and defence policy. The agreement on permanent arrangements between the EU and NATO has opened the way for an EU takeover of the current NATO-led mission in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. It is anticipated that the EU-led mission will be similar in size to the current allied harmony mission, approximately 300 to 350 personnel.

Ireland joined Partnership for Peace on 1 December 1999. Participation in PfP is entirely voluntary and is based on the principle of self-differentiation, that is, a state selects for itself the nature and scope of its participation in PfP activities. On the basis of its presentation document, Ireland has developed to date, in consultation with the NATO Secretariat, three individual partnership programmes for the years 2001, 2002 and 2003, which set out the level and extent of proposed participation in such areas as co-operation in peacekeeping principles, doctrine, training and exercises, and inter-operability in peacekeeping operations.

In common with other neutral EU member states that are members of PfP and who also participate in the planning and review process, Ireland views PARP as a mechanism for planning in relation to the EU headline goal. The aim is to create the conditions in which different national contingents can work together efficiently and effectively in a multinational environment. Ireland wishes to contribute its UN peacekeeping experience by playing an active part in humanitarian, rescue, peacekeeping and crisis management tasks - the Petersberg Tasks - in support of the European Union's common foreign and security policy.

I would like to update the committee in regard to compensation claims for hearing loss. By 28 February 2003 a total of 16,571 claims had been received from current and former members of the Defence Forces in respect of loss of hearing allegedly caused during their military service. Some 14,176 claims have been disposed of, mainly through settlements. That leaves a total of 2,395 claims outstanding at the end of last month. New claims are continuing to be received at an average rate of nine per week.

The early settlement scheme has continued to operate successfully and by the end of February, more than 5,000 claims had been resolved by direct negotiations with plaintiffs' solicitors. However, last July I announced the cessation of the early settlement scheme for claims received after that date. I had come to the view that as the issue had been in the public domain for more than ten years it was time to bring it to a conclusion. New claims will be contested in court on the grounds that they are now statute barred. Claims initiated on or before that date are still eligible for settlement under the scheme.

To date a total of €262 million has been paid in respect of hearing loss claims including almost €86 million in plaintiffs' legal costs. The average settlement figure has decreased from €38,000 in 1996 to a current level of about €10,000. When plaintiffs' legal costs are included, the cost of settling the outstanding claims currently in hand is estimated at about €50 million.

Details of individual subheads for both the defence and Army pension Estimates have been circulated to the committee. Accordingly, I do not propose to comment any further on individual subheads at this stage. I will, of course, be pleased to answer any queries from committee members and to assist in any way I can.

I thank the Minister for his very comprehensive overview.

I congratulate the Minister for his thorough appraisal. I congratulate the Defence Forces for the tremendous work they have done over a long number of years in various locations throughout the world, for the great sacrifices they have made and for continuing to proceed without fear or favour and without quibble to many locations throughout the world putting their lives at risks and in many cases losing their lives. We should record our appreciation to members of the Defence Forces and their families for the sacrifices they have made over many years.

It serves us well to review the Defence Forces, their requirements and the responsibilities that are likely to be imposed on them in the future. Times have changed and are changing rapidly. A few years ago, there was a proposal to have a slimmer, leaner, meaner, younger Army. Numbers and premises were shed in pursuit of that objective. I wonder, however, if we have made it too slim and whether the Defence Forces have sufficient numbers to meet their responsibilities in the rapidly changing circumstances that mark the modern age. It is truly a new era. In a spirit of constructive criticism, I suggest that this may be brought home to us quite suddenly, not necessarily abroad but in our own country. Modern terrorism and consequent defence requirements seem to arise regularly and without warning.

As I and Fine Gael colleagues stated previously in the Dáil, this may well impose certain new pressures on our Defence Forces. In the current situation, our security forces in general are likely to be stretched to a greater extent than ever before because of the necessity to provide protection and security at various sensitive locations, including sites at which utility services are provided. We should spend some time considering that issue now - it is too late to do so after an event. Even if we plan ahead - I know the Minister will say we are already doing so - I am not sure we fully recognise the magnitude of the task. In the current unstable international climate, we have commitments to Europe and the PfP that were made in light of the prevailing circumstances a few years ago. I hope the arrangements made then are sufficient to enable the Irish Defence Forces to discharge their responsibilities, both at home and outside this jurisdiction.

The matter of a leaner, meaner, younger Army is a matter for the Minister and the Army authorities to consider and to bring to our attention, as and when necessary, having regard to changing circumstances and needs. The Minister referred to CFSP and the areas in which our security forces have an involvement. As he is aware, I have always maintained a steady flow of parliamentary questions to his Department. At one stage - as Deputy Ó Fearghaíl will recall - I also represented the southern half of County Kildare and I am familiar with the traditionally healthy interest in military affairs in that area. I have been particularly preoccupied by the need to upgrade military equipment and training in line with requirements. It is no longer acceptable to expect the Defence Forces to rely on obsolete, antique equipment and materials which indicate a weakness in the system and demoralise those who have to use them.

In the current context, I hope the Defence Forces have adequate supplies of, for example, gas masks and other ancillary equipment that is regarded as essential. I refer here to the particular international environment in which we now live. I hope the Minister will be in a position to inform us as to the extent to which the Defence Forces have been equipped in that regard.

I welcome the Minister's comments in respect of An Slua Muirí and the Air Corps. In the past, there was sometimes a tendency to neglect one element or another of our Defence Forces. Because the Minister does not come from a maritime county - although it may have some harbours - he may, perhaps, be more conscious of air and sea aspects.

The Deputy from Kildare may be treading on dangerous ground.

There are many harbours in Kildare - canal harbours.

Floating harbours.

In fact, there are more harbours in Kildare than in some maritime counties.

Perhaps the Deputy is harbouring ideas.

No, I am referring to genuine, water-filled harbours. Upgrading of equipment is not an issue to be dealt with on an on-off basis, as funds become available. I realise that all Departments have to make what are now called revisions, though I refer to them as cuts. That is not good for the development of any service. It has a debilitating effect on the morale of those involved.

During past bus and rail strikes, we relied on the Defence Forces to fill the void by maintaining essential services, as they did admirably. In this new millennium, we must realise that more time and effort will have to be devoted to training, updating, upgrading and re-equipping the Defence Forces. If that is not done, we may be caught unprepared for some contingency.

While I do not wish to over-emphasise the point, in the current climate, a neutral country - as Ireland professes to be - is more vulnerable than a country with integrated defence systems and involvement in NATO. It may become more obvious that if countries such as Ireland require assistance, perhaps in the not too distant future, they may have to give serious consideration to where they should turn for such assistance. International terrorism has no boundaries and does not recognise concepts such as neutrality. It behoves us all to examine that issue and make the necessary decisions in good time.

The Minister may recall a situation some time ago when great expectations were generated in respect of iodine tablets. It was only when the inadequacy of the logistical arrangements were highlighted that it dawned on people that better provision should be made well in advance of any contingency. Without wishing to score a hit in that regard, I remind the Minister——

The Deputy should be careful in case I might take him out of the sky.

That is unlikely, unless the Minister has a Patriot up his sleeve. My point is that we should not leave it until after the event to discover that the Defence Forces are short of gas masks. Such matters must be provided for well in advance. As an island nation and a neutral country, we are vulnerable and cannot take risks. It cannot be assumed that our neutrality will be respected, per se. In the past, countries which were successfully neutral, so to speak, had other factors working in their favour. I also want to mention the air-sea rescue service to which the Minister referred. Improvements are proposed and will be welcome although I am not certain that they will meet the requirements. As time passes, the need for medical rescue helicopters is growing and I know that this service has been provided in the past. As long as there is a reasonably equipped Army with reasonable training, we are at least going through the motions.

We have managed so far. I hope that the provisions the Minister referred to in his speech are adequate to ensure that we can manage in the future. The fact that we managed in the past is no guarantee that we can continue to get by in the future.

There is a necessity, with regard to places such as County Kildare, for the Minister to liaise with his colleague, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government with a view to solving the accommodation issue. It could easily be resolved and I know that some attempts have been made to do that. I am not satisfied because this has been an issue for over 30 years.

I would not presume to be as fluent as Deputy Durkan who has a great knowledge of this subject but I will also try to make some relevant points. One relevant matter arising from the statement made by the Minister is whether the budgetary situation will have an effect on recruitment of Permanent Defence Force members and civilian employees attached to military units and on the expected reduction in the number of personnel serving overseas. All of these matters would seem to be affected by the budgetary situation.

I am a great supporter of the Defence Forces. I believe the 12 year enlistment period is too short a time for those in the Defence Forces, although I stand to be corrected on that. There is also the question of fisheries protection, etc. The Minister in his statement referred to the tender competition for the acquisition of medium lift helicopters for the Air Corps which was cancelled in July last. I was very disappointed to hear that. Throughout June 2002, the Minister had substantial proceeds from the sale of surplus property in Fermoy, Ballincollig and other areas. I want to know whether these proceeds were included in the appropriation of funding for the Defence Forces. Was that taken into account when budgeting for the helicopters?

In my area of north County Cork, there is a very strong Civil Defence unit. I will conclude with those remarks but may have some questions to ask later.

I welcome the Minister and his officials. I want to make a brief comment on the Civil Defence branch which will be decentralised to Roscrea later in the year. I congratulate the Minister and the Government on the decision to do that. The Minister might take the opportunity to inform us what stage those plans are at.

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive overview of the situation which does not require many further comments from committee members. Living as I do in County Kildare close to the Curragh, I have been very conscious of the issue of Army morale over the past decades. We have often heard of low morale in the Defence Forces. However, since 1997, the significant investment in infrastructure and equipment has turned around the morale deficit. In response to Deputy Durkan's comment, there is certainly now a slimmer, trimmer and more enthusiastic force than several years ago. Long may that be the case.

I presume, Chairman, we will be able to ask questions as we go through the subheads.

Absolutely. It is my intention that we would go through the subheads individually and, as we do, the Minister might respond to some of the questions asked. The Minister will also have an opportunity to wind up at the end of the meeting, as will members generally. We move to subhead A1 dealing with salaries, wages and allowances. I ask Members to stick specifically to the item under discussion.

Does the increase in this regard represent a requirement which will entail increased membership of the Defence Forces or is it only to allow for inflation and increases in wage agreements?

This sub-head deals with the Civil Service. It covers the current wage agreements and similar matters.

Increases of between 4% and 10.7% were recommended for enlisted personal in the permanent Defence Forces, and it was recommended that increases in other allowances would be settled by normal custom and practice. Has provision been made for that?

It is a different sub-head but I will answer in a general sense. Everything we know or can anticipate will happen is covered although one can never be certain of everything that could possibly happen. Negotiations are always ongoing on different aspects. None of these matters involves large amounts of money, as I understand it. The main allocation provided covers everything that we can imagine in regard to full pay and allowances for all of those within our responsibility for this year.

There is a generosity of spirit on the part of Minister. The next item is subhead A2 regarding travel and subsistence. Is that noted? Members should also note subheads A3 on incidental expenses, A4 on postal and communication expenses and A5 on office machinery and other supplies.

Will the Minister indicate the updating and upgrading that has taken place with regard to computer equipment?

The Vote provides €500,000 for IT expenditure on the management information framework project. Deputy Durkan is probably aware that we have received many compliments and awards for the management's organisation, computerisation and technological advances. Provision is being made to continually invest in IT. One must keep up with technology as much as possible as it changes.

Is subhead A5 noted?

We can move on to subhead A6 which deals with expenses for office premises. The increase in this subhead relates mainly to the decentralisation of the Civil Defence to Roscrea. Is it noted?

Yes. I note that this subhead provides for the maintenance, heating and furnishing of departmental offices - it must be chilly there. Does the central heating not work too well? I appreciate that there is an explanation for the substantial increase, apart from the cold weather.

Given that about €60 million is being spent in the Curragh, I am sure the Deputy will not object to spending €500,000 in Roscrea.

That is true, but this subhead provides for the heating and furnishing of departmental offices. Is there a chill in the offices?

We have to meet the normal increases in electricity, oil and other bills. Perhaps I can respond to Deputy Hoctor's query about the decentralisation of the Civil Defence to Roscrea in this context. Four proposals have been received as a result of the advertisements for submissions of interest. We expect that the Civil Defence offices will be fully operational in Roscrea before the end of the year. I would be extremely happy if the transfer could be achieved a little earlier, particularly as families may have to make arrangements in relation to schools. We are doing everything we can to expedite the process. Members will be aware that difficulties were encountered in relation to the acquisition of the appropriate accommodation, but we are trying to hammer it out as best we can. The process will be completed in 2003.

I hope my question, which relates to single Defence Forces personnel, is appropriate under this heading. Such people are required to live in barracks, whereas married personnel are allowed to live elsewhere. Different provisions are made for single and married personnel.

We will come to that matter shortly, but the committee can discuss departmental offices only under this subhead. Defence Forces matters can be discussed under a later subhead.

Deputy Sherlock asked about single and married people in the Defence Forces, not in the Civil Defence.

That is right.

I am not sure that the question I asked about furniture and fittings was answered. This year's Estimate shows a considerable increase on the 2002 outturn in that regard. I would like some clarification on the matter.

Would the Minister like to reiterate the need for the increase?

The Civil Defence is being moved to Roscrea. This involves the provision of accommodation that is as good and modern as that in Dublin or Kildare - nothing more, nothing less.

I accept that.

We are transferring 30 people.

I appreciate that. I missed the Minister's initial reply.

No, the Deputy did not.

I was just checking.

Is subhead A7, which relates to consultancy services, noted? Noted. We are now moving on to subhead B, which relates to Permanent Defence Force members' pay. Does anybody have any queries about the numbers?

I want to inquire about the numbers in the Permanent Defence Force. Has any provision been made for extra numbers? Has adequate provision been made, in relation to those retiring due to age, to meet the increase in numbers that may be needed?

Does Deputy Sherlock have a question on subhead B?

I would like to ask again about the difference in provision made for single and married members of the Defence Forces. An allowance is paid to married people for accommodation, but no such provision is made for single personnel.

Single Defence Forces personnel are provided with full board and accommodation while they are training. It is a unique provision, when one considers that students of other disciplines do not enjoy similar advantages. Married Defence Forces personnel are provided with permanent accommodation if it is required, but such a provision is made for single people while they are training only. It is considered that single people are able to acquire accommodation elsewhere. As unlimited accommodation is not available, priority is given to married people, although it is not something I wish to promote. The vast majority of Defence Forces personnel are anxious to have their own homes and I am anxious to facilitate that. Deputy Durkan is aware that some married quarters have been sold in Magee Barracks and in the Curragh. The Department provides limited married accommodation and full board and accommodation for those in training.

I could not have more knowledge than the Minister in this regard, but is he claiming that single personnel are required to live in Defence Forces accommodation only while they are in training?

My understanding is that that is not the case, but I accept the Minister's statement.

I have outlined the position as I understand it. I thank Deputy Durkan, the Chairman and others for the nice comments they have made about the Defence Forces. The number of Defence Forces personnel appropriate to meet needs at home and overseas was set out in the White Paper and this Estimate provides for it in full. It also provides for recruitment to bring the number of Defence Forces personnel to 10,500, with another 250 in training. Our numbers are slightly over 10,600 at present. There has been an emphasis, for the first time ever, on recruiting on a constant basis. We have recruited young people in each of the past five or six years. We have avoided the humps and hollows that were evident in the past when a major recruitment drive would be followed by no recruitment for four or five years.

Training, equipment, accommodation and personnel have been combined. It is desirable to have a better-equipped, younger, better-trained and fitter Defence Forces. Huge improvements have been made in the fitness programme. The average age has been reduced and we are approaching European levels in that regard.

Deputy Sherlock asked about the 12 year enlistment period. One's ability to move to the next stage is assessed after one is recruited. One must meet the criteria set by the Defence Forces in relation to how long one can serve. Substantial numbers of people are retained in the Defence Forces and enjoy a successful career at officer or non-enlisted level. There was a great deal of movement in recent years, but that seems to have slowed down. I have not heard any complaints about the system, which is working fairly well. Huge numbers of young people are needed in the Defence Forces. It is a job for young men and women in the main, as youth and energy are essential, although experience is also needed.

I presume that 12 years' service is the limit for a person who is recruited to the Defence Forces.

It is not the limit.

I note the Estimate provides for staff of 39 in the Army nursing service. Would that be a full complement? What are the issues involved in the recruitment of Army nurses? In the general medical services, hospitals are experiencing major recruitment problems.

The problem with general medical services for the Defence Forces is not created by our inability to recruit a satisfactory number of nursing personnel. Our problem relates to the recruitment of doctors. We have had a number of competitions, but we have been unable to recruit a sufficient complement to meet our needs. We have tried to come up with imaginative ideas such as greater linkage with existing health services and we have further work to do in that regard. We must have field officers and medical personnel to support Defence Forces personnel, particularly during overseas service, and we need to train people to understand our systems. The exercise is ongoing, but we are having some difficulty recruiting in the current climate. We will keep trying.

Is subhead B noted? Noted. Is subhead C, Permanent Defence Forces allowances, noted? Noted. Is subhead D, Reserve Defence Force - An Fórsa Cosanta Áitiúil, noted? Noted. Is subhead E, chaplains and officiating clergymen - pay and allowances, noted? Noted. Is subhead F, civilians attached to units - pay etc., noted? Noted. We now turn to subhead G, defensive equipment.

My earlier remarks referred to equipment and ammunition which I hope is readily available. I would not like to see a similar situation developing as that which pertained in regard to iodine tablets. If I keep thinking about iodine tablets, it is no reflection on the Army.

The Deputy strikes me as a fellow who is after taking them.

If the Army has to wait as long for ammunition as people had to wait for iodine tablets, a very serious problem will develop. In the context of the outturn comparison with the 2003 Estimates, I am aware of the counterbalancing factors involved. There is no need to purchase certain equipment and materials this year, but I would like reassurance from the Minister with regard to the budget.

We have run a significant equipment acquisitions programme and the Deputy is correct to assume that the bulk of it is completed. Most of our armoured personnel carriers have been paid for which allows us to reduce this year's budget, while account had to be taken of budgetary constraints. Questions on ammunition are always of interest to politicians given how much of it they use on each other, although it may not be the same sort as the Army employs.

The question was highlighted for me in case I missed it.

We have budgeted €11 million for ammunition. The Deputy asked if we had masks and nuclear, biological and chemical suits and I can tell him that we have 6,900, a number we are continually increasing. We are purchasing biological agent detectors and decontamination kits. We spend about €1.5 million per year on the acquisition of equipment of this sort to protect our soldiers should they become engaged in a threat of the sort suggested by the Deputy. I cannot understand why it is the policy of Fine Gael to discuss serious threats and doom and gloom. I am reminded of an interesting exercise carried out some 30 years ago - one man looked out his window when it was raining and said it would be fine in an hour, while another looked out when the sun shone and said it would be raining in an hour's time. I prefer the former prediction.

Perhaps the Minister will tell the committee what the 4,000 men and women who do not have this equipment should do. Will masks be allocated on a first come, first served basis or will there be a free-for-all?

Deputy Durkan and I should perhaps adopt a more serious approach - the fault might lie more with me than it does with him. The threat in this instance is to members of the Defence Forces who are serving overseas. We have had a peak number of up to 800 personnel serving overseas and the figure at the moment is 450. We have thousands more suits and masks than are normally required. To answer the Deputy's question, we continually acquire more equipment as we realise we must guard against threats of the kind which unfortunately exist today. Any Defence Forces member one meets will tell one that equipment and accommodation have dramatically improved in recent years and that will continue.

Is subhead G noted? Noted. Subhead H refers to the equipment and expenses of the Air Corps.

I see a reference to support services for ministerial air transport. I am aware that the EU Presidency is being taken very seriously but what is the exact nature of the support services involved here?

The Estimate refers to airport charges.

Are airport charges expected to be so costly?

Fuel costs and the normal charges involved in running aircraft are provided for.

Aviation fuel and lubricants are referred to separately. There is a single Estimate for a ministerial air transport support service.

Fuel must be purchased when one travels abroad. We have to get people home once we have taken them out of the country.

Is the provision for overseas charges only? I would not like to see Ministers stranded overseas.

Does the 2002 figure of €1.55 million cover fuel purchased abroad, landing charges and other expenses?

That is correct.

Is subhead H noted? Noted. Is subhead I, military transport, noted? Noted. Is subhead J, Naval Service - equipment and expenses, noted? Noted. Is subhead K, barracks expenses and engineering equipment, noted? Noted. Is subhead L, buildings, noted?

Other members of the committee have already expressed an interest in this matter. The subhead provides for new building works and the maintenance of existing buildings of the Defence Forces. To what extent have designated units been disposed of and how many are outstanding? I am familiar with some, but I would appreciate an update on the matter.

I will answer Deputy Sherlock's earlier question on this matter with the permission of the Chairman. I secured the permission of the Department of Finance to spend in advance moneys I would derive from the sale of surplus property. There was never a question of cancelling the helicopter contract as I had received moneys from sales. The moneys were given to me by the Department of Finance in anticipation that it would immediately receive the moneys generated from the disposal of barracks. Although I am still in debt to the Department, progress is being made.

On Deputy Durkan's question, to date we have received approximately €20 million from sales. We have €67 million in the kitty in the sense that we are at the final stages of contract for Murphy, Ballincollig and Clancy Barracks. As Members will be aware, I still have to dispose of Magee Barracks. My original forecast that I would receive more than €100 million will, in the final analysis, be realised.

Subhead L is noted. Is subhead M noted? Noted. We move on to subhead N, communications and information technology.

I presume the investment allocated under this subhead is adequate to meet requirements.

I am proud that information and communications technology have advanced right across the Defence Forces, so much so that in Kosovo a couple of years ago, members of other national battalions came to look at our systems. We are among the best in this important area.

Will the Minister explain the nature of the management information framework we discussed earlier? Is it for use in the Department or the Defence Forces?

It extends right across the Defence Forces.

Is it a command and control type of system?

It is a financial management system.

It is in administration.

I welcome the fact that so many females have joined the Defence Forces and taken their place among their male counterparts in recent years. I understand members of the Defence Forces are required to maintain a certain level of fitness and fitness tests are structured in such a way that females do not have to meet the same stringent fitness requirements as their male counterparts. Why is this the case?

The question is related to subhead O, military training. Do members have other questions on this subhead?

It is a natural phenomenon that more rigorous training would be applied differently among certain personnel in the Defence Forces. While I do not have sufficient experience in this area to outline the precise nature of these differences, I am certain the same training regimes apply for men and women in many areas. I presume, however, that for obvious reasons some aspects of training are different or are applied slightly more rigorously to men. I will seek further details on the matter for the Deputy. I assume he is seeking information, rather than advocating change.

I am questioning this approach on the basis that different measures should not apply for males or females recruited to the Defence Forces.

Let us approach the matter from another angle. Has the Deputy received representations from female or male members of the Defence Forces in this regard?

I am making a general comment. Is it the case that there are such differences?

I would like to carry out a more thorough examination of this issue before replying. I am strongly advised, however, that training is the same for all members of the Defence Forces. I was under the impression that there were differences in some areas. I will seek further details and return to the Deputy on the matter.

On a related matter, are men and women engaged in the same combat roles at the coal face?

That may not always appear to be the case as there are only approximately 400 females in the Defence Forces compared to more than 8,000 serving male soldiers. In my experience overseas, females were involved in all levels of activity and this is also the case here.

On subhead O, training and education, the allocation appears modest relative to the overall Department budget when compared with other bodies of similar size. What is the Minister's view on this? In terms of the expertise we have built up in a host of areas, not least in the United Nations college in the Curragh, do we have capacity to generate income for the Department through the provision of training and education services to other defence forces?

This subhead principally refers to courses undertaken by members of the Defence Forces. It does not include the day-to-day military training of the Army, the cost of which is incorporated in other areas.

Firearms etc.

I am very interested in this issue. When abroad, I constantly advocate greater use of the United Nations college. On some occasions the training courses available at the college, particularly those in which we address the experiences we have gained in United Nations activity, have been attended by participants from nine or ten nationalities. We constantly invite members of other defence forces to come and see our approach.

While we are not unique, we have acquired and are in a position to impart more than 40 years of experience in United Nations activities on every continent. In the future, inter-operability and working together will be major features of our approach to these tasks. Already, a number of soldiers of various nationalities have attended courses in the United Nations college in the Curragh. I will continue to support and advocate this development.

I ask the Minister to return to the committee with the response he promised Deputy Sherlock.

I will do that.

Is the subhead noted? Agreed. We turn to subhead P, travel and freight services. In relation to travel for military personnel, does the United Nations reimburse the travel expenses incurred in sending soldiers on missions?

It depends entirely on the mission. The UNIFIL mission in Lebanon was covered and UNMEE, the mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea, is covered. UNMEE is the only current mission designated a United Nations mission in the context of potential refunds to us for our activities.

The mission must be overseen by the United Nations for costs to be refunded.

It depends on the mission.

The subhead is noted. Is subhead Q, medical expenses, noted? Noted. Is subhead R, lands, noted? Noted. We move to subhead S on equitation. I congratulate the Army on its achievements in this area in 2002. It was a great achievement to have 25 international wins, including the grand prix at Gijon in Spain. It is great for the horse breeding industry here and the horse industry in general. It sets a standard. The armed forces throughout the world must look upon the Irish equitation team in awe. Long may its success continue.

I thank the Chairman for those comments. I will convey them to Gerry Mullins and his team. We currently have the youngest ever group of riders in major competitions. We also made additional investment in the acquisition and leasing of good horses. It is a great advertisement for Ireland. We get coverage in the international media from which we gain a great sense of pride.

The subhead is noted. Subhead T relates to compensation. The Minister mentioned this in his opening address. Is that noted?

We should pay tribute to the Minister and his officials for the way in which they managed the hearing loss situation. Having said that, if I correctly understood the Minister's opening remarks, some €50 million worth of claims are currently outstanding. Does the sum of €48 million in this subhead relate to this or what portion of it would be for other likely claims that might arise?

How does the operation of the Defence Forces compare internationally in regard to training and the level of accidents and so on? Are we at the cutting edge and are we managing risks well?

This provision deals with the bulk of the remaining hearing claims but it also includes claims other than those.

We compare unfavourably in terms of the amount of claims made. We also compare unfavourably in terms of the level of compensation that is sometimes expected from those claims, particularly when they are decided in court.

The Defence Forces have made a number of significant changes in terms of health and safety. An elaborate communication system has been installed and we have tried to reduce the potential for accidents. There are some rigorous aspects to the training programme and it is appropriate that any legitimate accidents that arise are subject to adequate compensation. I will endeavour to get the details for the Deputy in regard to how we compare internationally in regard to accidents. It is hard to make direct comparisons but I will do my best to respond to that.

Is the Minister saying that because of the large number of hearing loss claims made, that some changes have been introduced which would limit the potential for such claims in future? What has been introduced to change the circumstances which pertained in the past?

A very strict regime was introduced in 1987. I am open to correction, but as far as I can recall, we have not had more than a handful of claims - maybe even fewer - from soldiers who have participated and were involved in the new and much more stringent exercise. It appears that this exercise has been a success. None of these recent claims was successful.

Subhead T is noted. Subhead U relating to miscellaneous expenses is also noted, as is subhead V relating to Civil Defence.

I have an inquiry in regard to subhead V. I presume that this allocation is sufficient to meet the requirements which changing circumstances might bring about.

Is the Deputy referring to subhead V - Civil Defence?

What does Deputy Durkan have in mind?

The national emergency plan, for instance. The Civil Defence will have a role to play in that regard. I notice that the subhead also provides for recoupment to local authorities of 70% of the expenditure. I am not being paranoid but it is important to recognise that as an element of the system; there will be more responsibility on the Civil Defence and, later, on the Red Cross as well.

Over the past number of years we improved the equipment of the Civil Defence. We purchased a huge number of ambulances and general equipment. We also have more extensive exercises. The provision here covers all the needs of the Civil Defence, in so far as we can foresee them. In cases of emergency, the situation will be dealt with as it arises. Resources are always provided by whatever Administration is in power. There would never be any hold on the additional needs that might be required. Civil Defence would not be front-line; it is a reserve force for use in certain dangerous contexts.

I had hoped that the full amount would be refunded to local authorities but I see the intention is only to reimburse 70% of the cost.

I am told that there is good financial discipline locally and I am quite happy to accept that.

It is only 70%.

It is important to record appreciation for the work done by Civil Defence.

Yes. That was covered earlier.

It is recorded. Subhead W relating to the Irish Red Cross is noted.

In regard to the Red Cross, one never knows when one will have to call on it for assistance. The Red Cross is called on in emergencies and we should record our appreciation for its work. Are adequate resources available to it to meet its current and future requirements?

We provide funding to assist the Red Cross in its administration. It has considerable additional resources from fund-raising activities. Our allocation is strictly for administration purposes. I thank the Deputy for his comments about the Red Cross.

I concur with those comments.

As does the committee generally. We commend the Red Cross for its work.

As the Chairman is aware, the Red Cross successfully ran the compensation scheme following flooding episodes on a number of occasions.

That is correct. The subhead on Coiste an Asgard is noted. Subhead Y relates to appropriations-in-aid; this is the money that is received or receivable.

I wish to allude to something to which the Minister and Deputy Durkan referred earlier, which is No. 9 in regard to lands and premises. The Minister is familiar with the situation at Magee Barracks in Kildare. Am I to understand from the figures before us which refer to an anticipated income from sales of €146,000, that it is not envisaged this property would be disposed of in the current year? I am disappointed the local authority in Kildare has not honoured the commitments it entered into with the Department to provide vacant possession of the part of the barracks it currently occupies. It is a significant local issue and the people of mid-Kildare desire that the barracks be disposed of, that the moneys obtained be invested in the Defence Forces and that the site be utilised to the benefit of Kildare town and the mid-Kildare area. I implore the Minister to expedite the sale of the property to allow Kildare to develop and the aforementioned objectives to be realised.

The figure pertaining to receipts from banks in respect of cash escort services is exactly the same as that for 2002. How often is that figure reviewed? To what extent has the value of the merchandise being conveyed increased in the intervening period?

I shall answer the last question first. The value has not increased for some years. The matter is handled by the Department of Finance and we do not deal with it directly. I have no objections to seeing the value increased. It covers our day-to-day operational costs, including costs associated with the transport of moneys. However, I am happy to discuss the matter with the Minister for Finance with a view to securing additional funds if possible.

The sum of €146,000 is for minor sales and has nothing to do with major sales. In respect of the question on Magee Barracks, there were two installations which I regarded as having immense potential for their respective towns - Ballincollig and Kildare - when I became Minister for Defence. The potential of the land is enormous but the housing of asylum seekers in the barracks and the provision for the local authority have curtailed my ability to realise it. I am beginning to lose patience and I never wanted to contemplate disposing of the site with these limitations on it, as I have indicated to the Deputy and his colleagues both publicly and privately. However, I may now have to consider it reluctantly. I would like the Department of Defence to have the freedom to dispose of the site in open market conditions.

I would like to discuss the issue not just with elected representatives but with the local community interests and the local authority because, in many areas, local authorities and State agencies, including the Industrial Development Authority and health boards, have purchased such lands. The lands obviously have tremendous housing potential as well as commercial potential. The problem with Magee Barracks is not of my making but perhaps I can partially, if not fully, remedy it.

I mentioned fisheries protection earlier. There is a very substantial increase in the relevant Estimate. To what is that attributed?

It pertains to EU refunds for a new computerised system.

Subhead Y is noted. I do not think there is much to say about Army pensions. Subheads A, B, C, D, E1, E2, F, G and H are noted.

With what are we dealing now?

I am just going through the Army pensions subheads.

The Chairman is flying low over the Estimates.

I am working on the basis that there is no great disharmony in relation to this subject. Subheads I, J, K and L are noted.

Due to the exigencies under which we must operate, I do not wish to go through those subheads one by one. However, is there anything which is not obvious that the Minister feels should be brought to our attention?

Even if there were, I would be very reluctant to do so.

It was in anticipation of the Minister's shy disposition that I raised the question in the first place.

The Deputy was being mischievous, as usual. As he knows, pensions are sacrosanct and the people concerned are at an age where they need whatever help they can be given. We have made a few adjustments from time to time in respect of old IRA veterans and widows, but nothing stands out in my mind.

The Minister will be aware that the UN ex-servicemen have been running a campaign on the issue of military service allowance for some pensioners who are not covered under that particular category. Is there any prospect of that campaign being successful and of the limited and declining number of members of the Defence Forces who cannot benefit from the allowance being able to do so in the future?

If a person retires prematurely from the Defence Forces because of some health problem, do problems arise in respect of pensions? That is a very general question and I have a good reason to ask it. I know of some personnel who may have retired prematurely due to a health problem which may or may not be attributable to their involvement with the Army.

Is the Deputy referring to compensation as well as pension entitlements?

Such people can contact the Army Pensions Board and there is a system in place whereby people can obtain gratuities or other provisions. If the Deputy is referring to an individual case, he might bring it to my attention and I will see if everything possible has been done and, if not, I will see if we can do anything further.

The matter Deputy Ó Fearghaíl raised is one of long standing. Successive Administrations have not ceded the military service allowance to retired members prior to 1990. The Government established the Pensions Commission, which did not recommend any action in this area. It is not something which is peculiar to the Defence Forces. It probably has a wider application in other areas with comparable circumstances. On the basis of what I know now, there is no evidence to show that much can be done about the matter.

Deputy Durkan had to leave but has asked me to express his thanks to the Minister for his elucidation on the Estimates. Are there any other comments in relation to the Estimates?

This has been a good exercise. The matter has been well debated.

I did not get to react to Deputy Durkan's query regarding the over-holders. I have met representatives of the over-holders at the Curragh. My officials have interviewed all of them individually and we are dealing with them on a case by case basis. None of the older people in that area has any fears that they will be asked to vacate their premises. We are trying to work with the local authority on a number of fronts, including social housing, to solve the problems for the remaining tenants. We will be understanding, sensitive and compassionate, but we need to find solutions to long-standing problems.

I thank the Chairman and his staff for facilitating us and it looks like we have ended on time. There were some nice, favourable comments about the Defence Forces and the Department, which I appreciate. We have done a lot but there is more to do. We will continue to try to ensure that the equipment, personnel, accommodation and other requirements of the Defence Forces are as good as we can make them. We appreciate the opportunity to come before the committee to openly discuss how we do things. Like Deputy Sherlock, I too have learned from this exercise.

I thank all the members of the committee, Deputies Sherlock and Durkan and the Minister and his officials for a stimulating discussion on the Estimates. We are now all more knowledgeable about the Defence Forces.

Top
Share