Skip to main content
Normal View

SELECT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS debate -
Wednesday, 18 Feb 2009

Overseas Missions: Motion.

The purpose of the meeting is to consider a motion on placing the contingent of the Permanent Defence Force serving in Chad with the UN authorised EU-led forces, known as EUFOR TCHAD/RCA, under the authority of the UN mission in the Central African Republic and Chad, known as MINURCAT. I welcome the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, and his officials who are attending to assist in our consideration of the motion. Before the Minister begins, I advise everyone that we will hear a short presentation which will be followed by a question and answer session.

This is a very important matter. I thank the committee for agreeing to take the motion at very short notice. Members will recall that the deployment of Defence Forces personnel with the current UN mandated EU-led force in Chad was the subject of a lengthy debate in the Dáil in November 2007. The mandate for the EU-led mission will expire on 15 March. The Government has decided, on foot of a new UN Security Council resolution establishing a new "blue hat" force in Chad and the Central African Republic, to rehat our contingent in Chad and seek the approval of the Dáil for such a move. I propose to introduce the motion and provide some brief information on the reason the Government decided to respond positively to the UN request to Ireland to consider placing the Irish troops currently deployed in Chad under the command of the United Nations after 15 March.

Pursuant to the Government decision on 10 February, authorising arrangements for the transfer of command of the Irish contingent to the United Nations mission in the Central African Republic and Chad, known as MINURCAT, the following motion has been placed on the Dáil Order Paper:

That Dáil Éireann approves:

(i) the placing of the contingent of the Permanent Defence Force serving in Chad with the UN-authorised EU-led force, known as EUFOR TCHAD/RCA, under the authority of the United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad

(MINURCAT), established under the authority of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1861 of 14 January 2009;

(ii) the despatch, pursuant to section 2 of the Defence (Amendment)(No. 2) Act 1960, as applied by the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006, of a contingent of the Permanent Defence Force for service with the United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad (MINURCAT), established under the authority of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1861 of 14 January 2009;

(iii) the continued deployment of personnel with EUFOR TCHAD/RCA during the handover period and pending the completion of the withdrawal of EUFOR TCHAD/RCA.

In commending the motion I would like to outline the background to MINURCAT and the reason the Government decided to respond positively to the UN request. The EU operation in the Republic of Chad and the Central African Republic was established under the authority of UN Security Council Resolution 1778 of 25 September 2007. Following approval by the Government and the Dáil, a contingent of 400 Defence Forces personnel was deployed with the EU force in Chad. Following a formal request from the United Nations in October 2008, the Government approved, in principle, participation by the Defence Forces in the UN follow-on mission, known as MINURCAT, with a contingent similar in size and nature to its existing contribution to EUFOR.

On 14 January 2009 the Security Council unanimously adopted Security Council Resolution 1861, authorising the deployment of a military component of MINURCAT to follow on from the EUFOR mission at the end of its mandate. The Council decided that MINURCAT should include a maximum of 300 police officers, 25 military liaison officers, 5,200 military personnel and an appropriate number of civilian personnel to carry out its tasks. On 10 February 2009 the Government formally approved placing the Irish contingent of the Permanent Defence Force currently serving with EUFOR in Chad under the authority of MINURCAT. This approval was granted on the basis of the recently passed UN Security Council resolution, the ongoing commitment of a number of EU member states and confirmation that France planned to continue to provide the necessary logistical support for the UN mission.

The Defence Forces currently deploy a mechanised infantry battalion of approximately 400 personnel in Goz Beida, consisting of two mechanised manoeuvre companies, a battalion support group, as well as a battalion headquarters, a national support element and a national intelligence cell. An additional 23 personnel serve in the force headquarters in Abéché and N'Djamena and 18 personnel in the operational headquarters in Paris. Ireland is the second largest contributor to the mission. The Irish battalion's duties include short and long range patrolling, situational awareness and providing an overall security and deterrent presence within its area of operations.

The Defence Forces has made a key contribution to the European Union's largest multinational deployment under the European Security and Defence Policy, a major bridging operation. Invaluable experience has been gained by them in the past 18 months in areas such as planning and execution ahead of the imminent handover to the United Nations. Major logistical and operational challenges have been met in deploying to and operating in the heart of Africa. The current Chad deployment has validated the effectiveness of the planning processes and procurement procedures of the civil and military defence organisations. Equipment, including armoured personnel carriers and weapons systems, and field accommodation have been procured in recent times. They have been tested and their value has been proved. They are acting as key enablers in contributing to the ongoing success of the participation of the Defence Forces in this mission.

The Defence Forces, through their performance in the EU-led mission, have enhanced their reputation as a professional and impartial military force. They are preparing to redeploy to MINURCAT, a Chapter VII UN mission. If deployment to MINURCAT is approved, it is anticipated that the Defence Forces will deploy similar numbers of personnel in the camp in Goz Beida and the headquarters elements in Abéché and N'Djamena. Certain personnel will continue to serve in EUFOR during the period of the handover to MINURCAT and completion of EUFOR's withdrawal. Thereafter, the EUFOR operational headquarters in Paris will be closed and the personnel withdrawn. Discussions with Finland on the deployment of Finnish forces with the Irish battalion in Goz Beida are at an advanced stage. It is hoped the Finnish forces will replace the Netherlands armed scout platoon that will withdraw from theatre on 15 March. The proposed commitment to MINURCAT will be for an initial period of one year. Subject to the renewal of the mandate, a satisfactory review of the mission, available resources and Government approval, I propose to extend the Defence Forces participation on a year-to-year basis thereafter. Contingent personnel will be rotated on a four-monthly basis, similar to current EUFOR deployments. The expected contributors to the military component of MINURCAT include Albania, Austria, Croatia, Finland, France, Ghana, Ireland, Italy, Nepal, Norway, Poland, Russia, Togo and Uruguay. The United Nations has appointed an Irish officer, Brigadier General Gerald Aherne, as the deputy force commander. He will take up his appointment later this month. Ireland will also take up the post of chief operations officer.

The EUFOR mission has progressed satisfactorily. Despite the challenges the mission has faced, a solid foundation has been laid to help to prepare for future success. In recent updates EUFOR's operations commander, Lieutenant General Pat Nash, has stated the EUFOR mission is having a positive effect on the creation of a safe and secure environment for refugees, displaced people and the wider population. Having said this, the main threat to the local population being encountered by the Defence Forces arises from criminality, banditry and lawlessness. There was a noticeable decline in incidents of banditry in the Irish-led battalion's area of operations — multinational battalion south — in January 2009 compared to December 2008. A significant redeployment of Chadian forces in the general area has added to security in the area and facilitated a reduction in banditry against the local population. The three international and non-governmental organisations which withdrew from the area in October 2008 restored their permanent presence in the last week of January.

MINURCAT is expected to have a wider deployment than EUFOR in eastern Chad. When the UN force is fully deployed and able to provide the intended level of security, it is expected the security situation at local level will improve, particularly from the perspective of criminality and banditry. The UN follow-on force will act under Chapter VII of the UN Charter which authorises the force to take all necessary measures within its capabilities and area of operations in eastern Chad to fulfil its mandate. Ireland pays its own costs arising from its participation in EUFOR. It also pays a contribution to the common costs of the mission. As the proposed follow-on force will be a UN-led operation, the United Nations will meet some of the costs of Ireland's participation in the mission. It is estimated that UN reimbursement to the Exchequer will be approximately €8.5 million per annum. The related cost to the Defence Vote will be €16.2 million. The expected reimbursement in 2009 will be €3.7 million.

It is clear that the humanitarian and security situation in eastern Chad will continue to warrant an international presence beyond March 2009. The commitment of the troops currently deployed to EUFOR to the UN follow-on force is critical to avoid a security vacuum and ensure civilians and UN personnel at risk continue to be protected. MINURCAT is crucial to the overall effort to bring stability and hope to the region. Having made a significant investment in providing safety, security and reassurance for the local population under the EU-led mission and given our strong support for the United Nations, we have an obligation to ensure the success of the United Nations' efforts. A positive response to the UN request would be consistent with Ireland's commitment to UN peacekeeping, particularly in Africa. Therefore, I commend the motion to the committee.

I welcome the Minister and his officials. This mission has presented a real challenge to the operations commander of the mission, Lieutenant General Pat Nash, and the troops on the ground. I am sure all members of the committee will join me in recognising their achievements. Questions were asked and concerns raised about the mission, but it is important to make it clear that it has continued without too many problems to date, generally speaking, as a consequence of the skill and leadership of Lieutenant General Pat Nash and the calibre of the troops deployed. The mission posed major challenges for a variety of reasons. Chad is in the middle of Africa. It is approximately 2,000 km from the nearest port, Douala, in Cameroon. If heavy equipment and personnel could not be transported by air, they had to be brought by sea to Douala and then over land to Chad. We should all be very proud that our forces measured up to the major challenge of working with a shortage of water in conditions of 40° Celsius. The first Irish troops to go to Chad were a small group of Irish Army Rangers who successfully set up camp. The good training and high level of fitness enjoyed by the rangers were helpful and major advantages for them. It is clear they can compare with any other ground forces in the world. As the Minister said, the mission which involves 26 European states is the largest and most multinational EU operation ever to take place in Africa. We should be proud of this country's involvement and how well the Army has executed its duties.

I would like to ask the Minister a few questions. We have to pay all the costs we incur under EUFOR, but I understand we will be reimbursed to a figure of 50% for the costs we incur under MINURCAT. I understand we will be reimbursed in respect of each soldier involved in the force and the equipment soldiers use. I understand some of the Mowags being used have come under pressure and may need to be repaired, as a result of the terrain being encountered in central Africa. Their condition will have to be examined when financial support is being provided for equipment.

In terms of the Irish expenditure, the Minister mentioned a figure of €8.5 million per annum. Does he envisage that as being the total cost? I understand this amount must be paid and it can then be claimed back from the United Nations. In the past I have noticed the UN pay eventually but not immediately. In any event, provision is made in the Estimates to cover the cost for this year.

The Minister mentioned that the Government has given a commitment for one year, which will be subject to review. Has the United Nations given a commitment that its forces will continue after one year? I understand it too will review the mission after one year. Because of the success of the mission to date from a humanitarian point of view alone, I would favour the mission being extended until such time as the Chadians and the Sudanese come to some arrangement whereby they will rehabilitate displaced persons and, if possible, there will be peace.

I have some other concerns. I understand there is a freeze on recruitment. In light of the challenges the Defence Forces might now have to face in terms of aid to the civil power if strikes or protests are held and if they have additional commitments to make to the Navy, is the Minister confident he has a sufficient number of personnel to support this mission? I refer in particular to the specialist posts because I understand there may be a shortage of specialists. For example, demountable rack off-load and pick-up system, DROPS, driving is an important speciality, as is Mowag driving, medics and doctors. We are all aware that a problem has arisen with the number of doctors available to the Defence Forces, which is currently 23, and we are awaiting a consultant's report.

We have had three rotations already and we will now have the fourth. Does the Minister intend asking personnel who are in Chad to return there? Will it be mandatory in some cases? It is important that an Army brings in new blood, so to speak, and if it does not do that it will put pressure on the current personnel. The Minister might refer to that when replying.

I understand the EU force, MINURCAT, missions involve two six months rotation. They work on a six monthly basis whereas we were working on a four monthly basis. If this is a six months mission it is obvious that leave will have to be granted but that will pose difficulties. I suggest we stick to the four months rotation because if personnel take leave when in Chad, where do they go? If they have to return home it will be very difficult logistically. The Minister might clarify if it will be a four month or a six month rotation. I understand the UN missions are generally six months rotation. That is an important consideration.

I want to raise another issue about Chad. As we know, the mission was very well organised and it went very well. It was demanding logistically but it succeeded. The Minister was asked some prescient questions at another forum about the capability of getting the force to Chad and so on but the Defence Forces have proved the point that they could do it. It is only right, however, that we should ask questions about the problem that arose with two medevac helicopters that were leased at a cost of more than €3 million. It transpired subsequently that those helicopters were not licensed to transport personnel. I recall reading a long article in a newspaper, I believe by Tom Brady, the headline of which stated: "Minister to Investigate the Leasing of Helicopters". Did the Minister get a report on that investigation? Who investigated it? Why were helicopters leased for a considerable amount of money that could not be used to move personnel? The Minister might refer to that when replying.

Does the Deputy have many more questions?

I have some more to ask. We do not get too many chances to ask questions of the Minister. We are happy to accommodate the Minister but we would also like to ask him some questions.

The Deputy has taken longer time than the Minister.

We should ask questions. It diminishes the purpose of these committees if a member who takes his position seriously comes in here——

I accept that, Deputy.

——to ask questions and get answers to them but is then told to conclude.

I am not telling the Deputy to conclude. I am asking him to try to——

I accept that.

There was a stand-off in Chad when the Irish troops refused to protect the headquarters after the French had moved out; I believe that was the context. That was done because of the protocols under which the Irish troops operated. Will the protocols be different for a UN mission than for a EUFOR mission? Will the rules of engagement be different? What are the legal implications for the change in this mission from a EUFOR to a MINURCAT? I have no doubt Deputy Ó Snodaigh will have other questions for the Minister.

I join Deputy Deenihan in congratulating Lieutenant General Pat Nash and the troops, including the rangers, for the success they have achieved to date.

On the amount to be reimbursed, I have given the figures for the current year. The gross cost to the State will be approximately €16.2 million of which we expect to get back approximately €8.5 million. The percentage operates in or around that figure.

On Deputy Deenihan's question about reimbursement by the United Nations, I am informed that reimbursement to member states in respect of troops takes approximately three months. Reimbursement in respect of equipment is approximately six months in arrears, which is not too bad.

Deputy Deenihan asked me about the duration but this mission is only for one year. We are asking for the consent of the Oireachtas to go to Chad for one year from 15 March. We will review the position a year from now and at that time various considerations will have to be taken into account, for example, the availability of personnel, the position of resources and what other countries are doing. I envisage we will renew the mission in a year's time for a further year but I do not envisage that we will be there longer than three years in total.

As regards the United Nations, it will also review it on a yearly basis. Judging by the security reports and so on that we have on the humanitarian position in Chad I envisage those troops will be in place much longer than that.

Concerning the freeze on recruitment, I am advised it will not have any effect on the capacity of the Defence Forces to do their job abroad. However, that may change, although I cannot project too far into the future. Having said that, I do not anticipate that the situation will have changed by this time next year.

Deputy Deenihan will be aware that up to now all deployments have been on a voluntary basis. The only personnel who have been deployed mandatorily are technicians. The advice I have received is that deployment will continue for the foreseeable future and will, by and large, be voluntary. I agree with the Deputy that personnel should be rotated and that fresh blood is needed. The more the picture can be varied the better. The more Army personnel exposed to such difficult conditions the more enhanced the operational capability of the Army will be.

The Deputy is right to say on the MINURCAT modus operandi that there will be a six-month rotation. However, we intend to stick to a four-month rotation. The answer to the Deputy’s question, therefore, is “Yes”.

Concerning the two Medivac helicopters, I have a note which I shall read as it summarises the position:

Yes, the matter was investigated. I have received the report of the Chief of Staff. I understand that the internal audit report requested by the Secretary General has just been completed and is being submitted to him today in his role as accounting officer. I expect to receive a copy of that report probably later this evening. The report has also been forwarded to the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Chief of Staff's report which we have identifies a number of shortcomings in the process followed by the Defence Forces when they were placing the contract. I have accepted an apology from the Chief of Staff for what has happened. The Secretary General has advised me that the procedures in relation to procurement tenders and contracts will be updated in the context of the internal audit report in any recommendations or findings in that report.

The Deputy made a final point concerning which there appears to be confusion. There was no stand-off as such. As I understand it, the Irish troops were invited to supply a contingent to force headquarters, as all other countries are invited to do on a rotational basis. Some issues were outstanding that delayed the deployment but it took place. To the best of my knowledge, no major issue is involved.

The Deputy asked about the rules of engagement. For the MINURCAT operation they will be broadly the same as those that applied to the EUFOR operation. The protocols will be similar.

I welcome the Minister and his officials. I also compliment Lieutenant General Pat Nash on his success at EUFOR operational headquarters in Paris and the success of the mission. I visited Chad in January and although I did not have an opportunity to visit the Irish contingent in Goz Beida, I visited other areas such as Abéché where the Irish troops have their headquarters. At a time when there are not many good stories to relate about the country, this is one. It is difficult to overstate how successful our personnel are on such missions. They are very good at their job, highly respected and make a great contribution. The first thing that struck me about the personnel I met from the Irish contingent in Chad was their enthusiasm and how they understood their job in such depth.

There is, however, one matter to be queried, although it has nothing to do with the performance of our personnel. My understanding is that unless there are major political changes in Sudan, for example, the mission will continue for a long time. When the Minister talked in terms of a withdrawal after the third year, was this based on an optimistic view that there might be no further need for our troops, or does he believe the Irish troops, the second largest contingent in Chad, should move on at that stage and let somebody else take over? He might clarify the matter for me.

There must be political change. We visited the area near one of the refugee camps and although we did not go into the camp, we met representatives from it. From a height we were able to look down on the camp. My impression was that the people in it would be there for a long time because it offered better conditions than those to which they would return, given the political climate they would face in their home country. That is a general observation which is not germane to the issue of whether our troops will remain in Chad but to how long they may stay.

When the Secretary General reported on the strategy statement of the Department last week, he told the committee that the mission to Chad mission was the best equipped ever. My impression was that the Irish troops were the best equipped of the contingents based there, although I do not have a great deal of evidence to prove that is the case.

An Irish officer will take up the post of chief operations officer, while the Paris headquarters is to close. Are future EUFOR operations envisaged? Where will the chief operations officer be located? Will it be in Chad or is there to be an operations headquarters outside the country, or Paris, to replace the current arrangement?

The situation has improved a great deal but is still volatile. The terrain of the country is very barren and the heat can be oppressive. The camps are built in inhospitable surroundings. While we were there in January, the United Nations compound was under construction and work was advancing well. I look forward to Ireland continuing to make a major contribution in Chad and the Central African Republic.

I am somewhat confused about the figures given. My recollection was that the initial cost of the mission to Chad under EUFOR was of the order of €39 million. However, it does not seem as if any such sum will be returned to us. Obviously, some of the money may have been spent in transporting equipment and these costs will not be repeated. However, the figures we have been given do not seem to stack up with the previous figure. Therefore, I seek clarification of the matter.

Those are the major issues of concern to me. It is good to be dealing with a good news story in which our troops overseas compare with the best anywhere.

I join Deputy O'Shea in congratulating our officers and troops. I also agree with him with regard to major political changes which are a long way off. My information is that the elections scheduled to take place in 2010 are likely to be postponed for another year, delaying matters further. This has been a very difficult, extremely costly and onerous mission for us. As Deputy Deenihan acknowledged, it has been severe on our equipment. My inclination is that we will not be in the region for as long as we were in Lebanon, for example. The period involved will be limited to a number of years. A review of the mission at the end of each year will examine a range of issues, for example, the resources available to us, the availability of troops and specialists such as doctors, Mowag drivers, etc., and the position adopted by other countries. The Deputy is correct, however, that the United Nations will be in Chad for a much longer period than three years. It will not be in a position to leave the country in three years.

The EUFOR operation was a bridging operation until the United Nations assumed responsibility. There will be other EUFOR operations in future. Paris was chosen as the headquarters for the Chad operation because it is a French led mission and France is the largest contributor to it. Other countries, for example, Germany or Britain, could be the lead countries in future EUFOR operations. In such circumstances it is likely the force headquarters of the mission would be located in the lead country. When the office in Paris closes, the headquarters will effectively be the United Nations in New York. However, the chief operations officer will be based in force headquarters in Abéché.

The initial overall cost of the mission is in the order of €57 million. As this cost was incurred, by and large, under the aegis of EUFOR, it will not be reimbursed and we will lose this money. The figure of €16.2 million I provided for the costs to date refers to the costs of maintaining our troops in Chad. The bulk of the €57 million cost arose from transporting equipment to Chad and building the camp. The running costs will be approximately €16.2 million per annum. We expect to be approximately €8.5 million of this figure to be reimbursed by the United Nations.

I join Deputies Deenihan and O'Shea in congratulating everyone involved in the mission in Chad led by Lieutenant General Pat Nash and compliment them on the professional and efficient manner in which they went about their business. I wish them well in the future. I also extend my best wishes to Brigadier General Gerald Aherne, who is deputy force commander.

Ireland is the second largest contributor to the force in Chad. Is it envisaged that the number of troops will be reduced after two or three years? Is it likely that Ireland will have a long-term presence in Chad. I noted operations under MINURCAT will result in deployment over a wider area. Will the Minister confirm that the United Nations will provide helicopters for the Irish contingent at Goz Beida. This will be important for our forces, especially as deployment may be on a wider scale.

On a highly pertinent issue, will the overseas peace support allowance be subject to the current pension levy? If so, what will be the impact on our troops? I would appreciate answers to these questions.

Once again I congratulate everyone involved in this mission, including the Minister. They have done the country proud during a difficult period.

We will suspend for a division in the House. The Minister will respond to Deputy Connick when we return.

Sitting suspended at 4.45 p.m. and resumed at 5.05 p.m.

We will resume. I was waiting to see whether Deputy Connick would return. I will take Deputy Ó Snodaigh's questions first, after which the Minister can reply to both Deputies.

Like other Deputies, I welcome the news that an Irish brigadier general, Gerald Aherne, has been appointed deputy force commander and also that an Irish officer is to take up the post of chief operations officer. I do not know if this officer has yet been appointed. The appointments are a sign of the esteem in which the Irish are held and the size of the force being committed to this blue hat operation. I welcome that this marks a return to such operations, which is significant. It is welcome in terms of the substantial savings for the Exchequer.

The Minister has stated the expected reimbursement figure in 2009 is €3.7 million, bearing in mind that the annual figure will be €8.5 million. Is this because of the delay in reimbursement? The Minister has stated there is a possibility that Ireland will be involved in the mission in three years time. Why think of limiting our role in this area considering the initial cost of building the base in Chad? Is there any indication at this stage that the remit will be changed? The remit encompasses Chad only. Are there discussions to extend the remit of the force such that it will apply beyond the boundaries of Chad?

With regard to the difficulty in obtaining volunteers, the Minister has stated he is happy that he will recruit the required number. There were difficulties in recruiting a full contingent to travel to Chad in the first instance. How many rotations will be involved? It was suggested earlier it would be two a year. If the operation goes on after three years, will there be enough of an uptake to ensure rotating tours of duties? Is it intended to send members of the Garda Síochána on the mission?

Was it in Chad that the two surveillance drones went missing? Will other drones be bought and from where will they be sourced?

The Defence Forces made a presentation to the committee on the mission and the terrain it would be facing. In future, I suggest the committee invites the Defence Forces back to update it on progress made.

I join with Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Connick on congratulating the troops and officers on their mission. There are no plans to extend the remit of the mission. There will be three rotations per annum, of four-months' duration. I noted no evidence to suggest there were difficulties in getting personnel to go to Chad. There was a delay in commissioning the troops because of the lack of logistical support from elsewhere but there were no difficulties in getting 400 troops to go out there.

The essential component of the MINURCAT mission will be 300 police but so far Ireland has no intention of sending any gardaí. One surveillance drone was lost in Chad.

Regarding helicopter and air asset support, we have two helicopters available to the Defence Forces in Goz Beida. It is essential to our continued participation in the mission that we continue to have helicopters available to us, particularly during the rainy season. I expect the UN to provide these assets or take over the helicopters we have deployed. I understand the UN is amenable to the plans to keep the helicopters in Goz Beida and to pay for them. This is to be finalised in negotiations on a memorandum of understanding with the UN. If that were not the case, then it would raise serious questions regarding our continued participation in the mission.

I am happy to inform the committee the public sector pension levy will not apply to the peace support allowance. The allowance, which is very important to the troops, will be exempt from the levy on the basis that it does not constitute remuneration under the legislation. Remuneration is defined as an item liable for income tax. The peace support allowance is not liable for income tax.

I would like to wish Lieutenant Colonel Gerald Aherne the best of luck in his recent appointment. He was a former Cork footballer, captaining the county minor team in the past, and was one of its few successes in the All-Irelands. It was an open UN competition and it shows his calibre. It reflects well on the Defence Forces that he should be chosen by the UN.

I will pass on Deputy Deenihan's congratulations to Lieutenant Colonel Aherne. I was not aware of his full GAA record but I bow to Deputy Deenihan's superior knowledge in these matters.

He pulled a fast one over Kerry one time.

That was not easy.

Top
Share