Skip to main content
Normal View

SELECT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS debate -
Thursday, 17 Jun 2010

2009 Annual Output Statement - Defence of Defence

Apologies have been received from Deputy Treacy. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the annual output statement and Revised Estimates for the Department of Defence group of Votes. I propose that we consider the annual output statement first, followed by the Revised Estimates. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The Dáil has ordered that the following Revised Estimates for Public Services be referred to the committee for its consideration: Vote 36 - Department of Defence, and Vote 37 - Army pensions. I thank the Minister for Defence, Deputy Killeen, for attending with his officials to assist in our consideration of the annual output statement and the Revised Estimates. In particular, I congratulate the Minister on his appointment. This is the first time he has appeared before the committee.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before the committee to assist in its consideration of the Revised Estimates and the 2009 annual output statement of the Department of Defence. I am accompanied by the Secretary General, Mr. Michael Howard, and other officials from the Department. I have circulated a copy of my opening statement which I will go through quickly. That is probably the best way to begin proceedings.

The annual output statement outlines the performance of the Department in 2009 and the targets to be achieved in 2010. While the 2009 outturn is based on activity levels throughout the year, the Estimates for 2010 reflect activity levels anticipated at the beginning of the year. As such, the statement does not refer to changes that have occurred during the year, for example, the return of the mission to Chad.

The combined Estimates for 2010 provide for gross expenditure of €965 million, including a capital carryover of €1 million. In 2009 gross expenditure was €1.013 billion, including a carryover of €3 million. We all understand the financial situation is such that it is not possible to provide the level of resources previously available. However, the Defence Forces are in a healthy state to meet the challenges posed by the reduced financial allocations which have been improved in every respect since 2000. The year 2010 will undoubtedly be difficult, but I have absolute confidence that the defence organisation will rise to the challenge. We are already accustomed to doing more with less and the Department and the Defence Forces have proved themselves capable in this regard. At this juncture, I record my thanks to all members of the defence organisation and the Department on their success so far.

On provision for pay and allowances, there is provision for up to 10,000 Permanent Defence Force personnel. A total of 770 civilians and 360 civil servants are employed with the Defence Forces. It also provides for the pay of members of the reserve while on full-time training.

On the pension side, the Estimate provides for payment of 10,000 service related pensions and 1,100 disability related benefits. The strength of the Defence Forces on 31 May was 9,809. Arising from the report of the Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure Programmes there is provision for 10,000, and recruitment is under way in that regard. Currently, recruitment is under way for 40 recruits to enable the Naval Service, and limited general recruitment to the Army will be advertised shortly.

A review of structures and posts is under way and that will be the subject of discussions with the Department of Finance to agree the employment control framework for the Defence Forces.

While these are challenging times my priority is to ensure the Defence Forces are organised, equipped and staffed in a manner which will ensure they can continue to deliver the services required of them by Government.

There is a commitment in the renewed programme for Government to having a new White Paper on Defence prepared for the period 2011 to 2020. It is planned to submit a new draft White Paper for Government approval in spring of next year. This new White Paper will build on the previous one published in 2000. This has guided the modernisation, reform and transformation of the Defence Force organisation during that time.

The new White Paper will chart a course for the continued development of the Defence Forces organisation. Preliminary work has commenced and I hope to be in a position to bring a memorandum to Government in the not too distant future.

There has been a significant investment in equipment and infrastructure in the past ten yeas. I have seen at first hand the fruits of that investment, and it is undoubtedly the case that the modern equipment available to Irish soldiers means they are now second to none in terms of the equipment available to them. It is imperative the Department and the Defence Forces look to whatever efficiencies we can make, taking into account the current difficult environment and the overall financial envelope, but I am sure we will be able to do it and in that context the acquisition of defensive equipment will be on a prioritised basis to match operational capabilities and requirements.

Several important equipment purchases are being advanced in 2010, including the acquisition of the 27 light tactical armoured vehicles, LTAVs, 45 4x4 patrol vehicles, two heavy recovery vehicles, 22 minibuses, two ambulances and four midi-coaches. Some of those have already been delivered.

With regard to the LTAVs, their acquisition has been a top priority for the Defence Forces, given the extensive nature of their roles on overseas peace support missions, particularly from the threat of improvised explosive devices and the potential for hostile fire in certain threat environments. Seventeen of them have been delivered and a further ten will be delivered during the early autumn.

Regarding the vessel replacement programme, it has been in progress following the commencement of a tender competition in 2007. The competition sought tenders for the purchase of two offshore patrol vessels, OPVs, with an option for a third, and one extended patrol vessel, with an option for a second.

As regards the OPVs, a preferred bidder was selected last year following tender evaluation and contract negotiations have taken place. The vessel replacement programme was considered as part of the Estimates and budgetary process for 2010. This included consideration of the report of the special group on public service numbers and expenditure programmes. In that regard, the particular recommendation in the report was that the programme be extended over a longer timeframe than initially envisaged. Subject to Government approval being granted, delivery of the new vessels would now be expected to commence on a phased basis from 2014.

The acquisition of new ships for the Naval Service is a key focus for me as Minister for Defence. Modern new vessels are necessary to ensure the Naval Service will be fully equipped to carry out its day to day roles in enforcing the State's sovereign rights over our waters and our fisheries and meeting Ireland's obligation in the area of maritime safety and security and fisheries protection.

As I said, along with the extensive investment in Defence Forces equipment we have also made substantial investment in infrastructure, accommodation and training facilities. Major projects were completed in various barracks including McKee, Casement Aerodrome, the Naval Base in Haulbowline and Renmore Barracks in Galway. That is continuing in 2010, including in the Defence Forces training centre in the Curragh, Collins Barracks and Finner Camp.

Regarding the reserve, the RDF review implementation plan has provided for the phased enhancement of reserve capabilities over the period to the end of 2009. As we have reached the end of the planned timeframe, there is a requirement to review progress and chart the future direction of the reserve. As members will be aware, the value for money review is ongoing. The steering committee has informed me it will be engaging in stakeholder consultation in the coming weeks and months. The Reserve Defence Force Representative Association, as a key stakeholder, will be involved in the consultative process. It is anticipated that this review, coupled with the lessons learned from the implementation plan, will inform the development of future plans for the reserve.

Regarding the European Union, with the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty on 1 December 2009 the EU's European Security and Defence Policy, ESDP, has been renamed the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP. That is an integral part of the EU's Common Foreign Policy. Ireland's participation in the framework of CSDP takes place within the context of our commitment to the primacy of the United Nations and the maintenance of international peace and security. Within that framework, the ambition of the EU is to be able to respond rapidly to emerging crises, and that continues to be a key objective of the development of the Common Security and Defence Policy.

Ireland's participation in the development and evolution of CSDP is fully consistent with our policy of military neutrality and our commitment to international peace and security. Obviously, it also enhances our position on the international stage.

The Lisbon treaty makes some amendments to existing provisions on security and defence but does not alter their essential features. It is appropriate to mention at this time that Ireland's traditional policy on military neutrality is completely unaffected by the ratification of the Lisbon treaty. First, the Lisbon treaty states that national security remains the sole responsibility of each member state. Second, all decisions must be taken by unanimity, which means that, de facto, Ireland has a veto. The Lisbon treaty provides for common defence arrangements. However, the adoption of such an arrangement would require the unanimous approval of all the member states.

Furthermore, the main priority in the area of CSDP is the improvement of the EU's capability to undertake the agreed range of tasks to meet the objectives of the 2010 headline goal and the most high profile aspect of that is the decision of the EU to acquire the capacity to deploy force packages at high readiness - commonly known as battle groups - in response to a crisis. The EU achieved full operational capacity to undertake two battle group sized rapid response operations concurrently on 1 January 2007.

In 2009, the Government approved Ireland's participation in the Nordic battlegroup. Other contributors are Sweden, which acts as a framework nation, Finland, Norway and Estonia. The Nordic battlegroup will be on stand-by for six months commencing on 1 January next and Sweden, as the framework nation, will take the lead role. A total of 150 Defence Forces personnel will be involved in the Nordic battlegroup in 2011. However, the level of commitment will only arise should the battle group be called on to undertake an operation. The number of personnel involved leading up to and during the stand-by period, where the battle group has not been mobilised to undertake an operation, will be of the order of 15. These personnel, who will be mainly staff officers and NCOs engaged in training and planning activities, will be split between the respective operational and force headquarters.

Ireland continues to participate in the framework of the European Defence Agency. It is important to note that such participation does not impose any specific obligations on Ireland other than a contribution to the budget of the agency. As part of the Lisbon treaty package, it was agreed that participation by Ireland in any specific project or programme of the agency will be subject to Government and Dáil approval.

On overseas missions, Ireland is currently contributing 167 Defence Forces personnel to 12 different missions. Our current contribution to overseas missions has reduced dramatically when compared with 1 January 2010 when we had 758 Defence Forces personnel deployed overseas. The reduction is mainly arising from the withdrawal from Chad in May of 400 Irish personnel serving with the MINURCAT mission. Also, the KFOR in Kosovo was reduced in April 2010 following the drawdown of Irish personnel from 232 to approximately 40.

The reduction in Ireland's participation in KFOR was designed to deliver savings in line with the recommendations of the Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure Programmes. However, in regard to Chad, entirely different circumstances were at play and I have previously explained those circumstances to the Dáil. Ireland's early termination of the mission was regrettable and an undesirable development as we had planned on being in Chad until March 2012. It was not a decision we wanted to have to make. My preference would have been to continue to participate fully in the MINURCAT mission. However, events since the decision was made have reinforced the Government's decision because the new resolution regarding Chad, which was adopted on 25 May, has changed the character of the mission significantly. Under the new mandate the Government of Chad assumes full responsibility for the protection of civilians, a responsibility that was originally assigned to the military component of MINURCAT. It is my considered view that the future role for this mission, with the absence of any civilian protection remit by the UN force, creates an unsatisfactory position on the ground and is not the type of mission in which Ireland would wish to participate.

It had also been decided to drawdown in July 2010 the Defence Forces contingent serving with EUFOR's Operation ALTHEA in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We subsequently got a request to continue that, to which we acceded. That has meant that mission will continue to the end of the year.

Our latest contribution to an overseas mission has been the deployment, in April 2010, of five members of the Permanent Defence Force for service with the EU Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP, based in Uganda. The objective of that mission, which was launched in April of this year, is to contribute to the training of Somali security forces. I have no doubt there will be further invitations for deployment of Irish forces, which will be considered on a case-by-case basis. It is important to point out that when considering any request, the existence of realistic objectives and a clear mandate which has the potential to contribute to a political solution, consideration of how the mission relates to the priorities of Irish foreign policy and the degree of risk involved are among the many factors taken into account. There are no such requests on hand at present.

I want to briefly mention the office of emergency planning. The Government task force on emergency planning continues to meet regularly. The task force comprises Ministers and-or senior officials from all Departments and key public authorities and its role is to improve co-ordination of emergency planning across Government and to share information and best practice. Among the issues addressed by the task force in the past year include influenza pandemic, aviation security, the severe weather events that occurred in late 2009 with flooding and early 2010 with snow and ice, and the volcanic ash plume crisis. Every meeting of the task force receives an update from the chair of the national steering group on the implementation of the framework for major emergency management. The task force also receives regular reports of the security threat analysis from the Garda Síochána and the Defence Forces. It also operates the National Emergency Co-ordination Centre, which is considered to be very successful.

Oversight is an important part of the work of the office of emergency planning. Each year the Minister submits an annual report to Government on emergency planning that provides a summary of the most significant issues during the year. Bilateral meetings are held with all Departments to discuss emergency planning activities and this helps to provide the report with an overview of the main developments.

In regard to decentralisation, approximately 180 civil servants and 50 military personnel will relocate to Newbridge in the coming months. There had originally been a plan to have the Defence Forces headquarters at the Curragh. This location, along with a number of other deferred locations, will be considered as part of the overall review of the decentralisation programme in 2011.

Material on the various subheads has been submitted separately as has the annual output statement and, if the Chairman wishes, we can proceed on that basis.

I welcome the Minister and his officials to this discussion on the Estimates. I thank the Minister for his great co-operation since being assigned to this post. I also thank his officials for their assistance given to me, and I am sure to Deputy O'Shea and other members, during the past three years. The Department of Defence is a well run Department. If other Departments had adopted similar measures to those adopted by this Department, we would have secured better value for money over the years and we might not be experiencing the current financial difficulties. We are getting more for less from this Department at this stage because of the implementation of White Paper and so on. It is important to recognise that.

When will the employment control framework be signed off? I understand there are difficulties in this respect within the Department of Defence moreso than in the Department of Finance. The employment control framework is critical from the point of view of recruitment and also from the point of view of promotions. If the framework is not agreed, neither recruitment nor promotions, which are critical at this stage, can take place. It would be helpful if the Minister could be more specific regarding the framework.

I welcome the fact that the Minister seemed to be more precise today in stating that the number of personnel who will serve in the Defence Forces will be 10,000. I would like him to confirm that this is the minimum and the maximum number. He indicated on Question Time that he considered that what mattered was not the numbers but how efficient the numbers were. A previous commitment to having 10,500 personnel was given by Government and following the McCarthy report a commitment to a figure of 10,000 was agreed. It was also Fine Gael's policy that the number should be 10,000, although the number has dropped below that by almost 200. We need a strength of 10,000 to have a functional defence force taking account of the Army, the Naval Service, the Air Corps and overseas missions. To have an effective defence force, we need 10,000 well-trained and well-equipped personnel, with the required personnel in all the ranks carrying out their functions and operating to their full capacity, whether that be providing aid to a civil power, acting in emergencies and so forth. The Minister might clarify that 10,000 is the establishment figure for the Defence Forces and that he will not deviate from that, irrespective of financial circumstances.

I am strongly in favour of vessel replacement as required. Three of our main vessels are past their term of useful service. The war we are fighting in this country is the war on drugs. We have had different wars over the years, an economic war and a terrorist war, but we are now fighting a war on drugs. The role of the navy will be critical to this fight in the years ahead. Much of its activity is intelligence driven but unless the navy has a continuous presence along our coastline and in the seas under our jurisdiction there will not be a deterrent to people importing drugs into this country. They are prepared to take any chance, even at the risk of being arrested and imprisoned, to import drugs into this country.

We have a very long coastline - the coastline of Kerry alone is 300 miles. Unless the navy has a presence along our coastline, there will not be a deterrent to people bringing in drugs into this country. Intelligence gathering is important in tackling the major international movement of drugs. With such intelligence, the movement of drugs that originate in, say, Colombia can be tracked across the world. I am sure we could look on screen at such drugs in Haulbowline. We need a naval presence to detect the small movement of drugs up and down our coastline when consignments of drugs are broken drown and moved by smaller vessels into little coves around the country. That is where the problem arises. It is important that the navy would be properly equipped, including the replacement of existing vessels, where necessary. Consideration should also be given to increasing the number of naval vessels. We especially need offshore patrol vessels and for them to be continuously at sea.

The navy lost 200 days at sea this year. Is it planned to reverse that decision and give the navy back those 200 days, as it were? One of the reasons for the loss of those days was a cut in expenses but the navy has a problem in terms of manning its vessels having regard to its numbers. I welcome the fact that the Minister is recruiting 40 personnel to the Naval Service, and this will be an important addition.

The Reserve Defence Force could play a greater role in supporting the numbers and activities of the Naval Service. Its role should be examined because some members of the Reserve Defence Force have expertise in sailing and other maritime activities. The members of the reserve could play a useful role if numbers in the Permanent Defence Force segment of the Naval Service have been reduced or cannot be replaced immediately. I would like the Minister to respond to that point.

The Minister explained there were difficulties with the overseas mission to Chad and with the United Nations mandate. However, as he is aware, participation in overseas missions is the lifeblood of a defence force and especially ours. We cannot keep training our troops when there is no forthcoming mission and no such mission for which to train, apart from the regular types of training and programmes undertaken by members of the Defence Forces. However, people will get very frustrated if they do not have an objective in their training. That is the reason overseas missions are so important. Our Defence Forces will lose out and perhaps will not be as professional in a certain way if they do not have the challenge of overseas missions. Has the Minister contacted the United Nations with a view to identifying further missions and to increase the number of personnel abroad, which is currently only 167 compared to 758 previously? I believe, and I am aware that the Minister agrees, that overseas missions are critical. Has a saving been made by withdrawing earlier from Chad? Is there a savings element in the Estimates?

I must stop Deputy Deenihan. There is a vote in the Dáil so we will suspend the sitting.

Can I just finish? The Minister can reply when we reconvene. Decentralisation to the Curragh has been postponed. However, as I have been asking for some time, will the Minister consider the possibility of providing a crèche there as well? It could serve both the Army and the staff being moved there.

Finally, I am glad the Army Equitation School is being continued. One of my big achievements in the last three years was getting the Minister's predecessor to visit the equitation school. It was an embarrassing moment when I went there and they were calling me "Minister Deenihan". I am glad I got him to visit it with a plethora of cameras, and I am sure this Minister has already been there.

The Minister can respond after the suspension.

Sitting suspended at 11.02 a.m. and resumed at 11.18 a.m.

Perhaps the Minister might respond to the points made by Deputy Deenihan.

I thank Deputy Deenihan for acknowledging the work of the officials and my predecessor in regard to the modernisation of the Department and working within resources.

In regard to the employment control framework, Deputy Deenihan was concerned that there might be some further delays in the Department. My understanding is we will be in a position to engage with the Department of Finance in the next couple of weeks and that the vast majority of the issues have been cleared at Defence Forces and departmental levels.

We had a very good debate on the numbers, involving Deputy O'Shea, Deputy Deenihan and others, at the last Question Time. I emphasised the need to be able to show that there was a requirement we were able to meet in terms of the remit and responsibility of the Defence Forces. I made the point that I believed numbers were not the most effective barometer for that.

Deputy Deenihan asked me to give a commitment that, irrespective of financial circumstances, numbers would be retained. I do not believe any Minister could responsibly give an undertaking to do anything irrespective of financial circumstances but my intention is to maintain the numbers at 10,000. Currently, there is 190 fewer than that which actually constrains the capacity for embarking on recruitment because it is a very small number. It has enabled us to do the targeted recruitment to the navy at 40, which is immediate, and further targeted recruitment to the general Defence Forces. I will look at the question of a cadet class, which needs to be looked at in this context.

If one were in a situation, for example, where there were 800 vacant places then one could strategically place fairly substantial numbers, but in circumstances where it is so close to the 10,000 limit, there is little scope to do that. We must work within those kind of figures and we are continuing to do that.

It is important to emphasise that there is no question whatever about the efficacy of the force. Everything is to the very highest standard.

On vessel replacement, I strongly agree with the points made by Deputy Deenihan on drugs. He made the point that 200 days are lost at sea, as he would describe it. Frankly, that arises from the financial situation and we will try to minimise the impact of that. We are working hard on the vessel replacement programme. We debated previously the relative importance of the Naval Service patrols as opposed to the other systems, including information etc., that is available. It is important to state they all interact positively with each other and I am happy we are doing that effectively at present.

He also raised the potential role for the RDF in support of the Naval Service, and that may have some significance. My strong view is that the recruitment to the Permanent Naval Service will successfully deal with any shortcomings there have been in terms of staffing in that area in any event, but there is an important role for the RDF across all sectors and we will be charting that in the White Paper.

On the overseas missions, I agree with Deputy Deenihan that a mission is the lifeblood of the organisation. We have had an enormous commitment to the UN over a long period and there is a strong case to be made for a phase of retrenchment in terms of training and particularly in terms of equipment. That will take a few months in any event. We have not had a formal contact from the UN at this stage. We are aware of where missions are in place and in the event that one is put forward, we will judge it on the criteria which I outlined in my statement.

The savings from Chad will not arise in the context of today's discussion because the 2010 Estimate is based on the projected activity for the year at the start of the year and is not impacted on in the context of these Estimates. It will arise in the outturn for 2010 in the context of the 2011 Estimates.

Deputy Deenihan also made the point strongly about a crèche in relation to decentralisation. The point is well made. Any further decisions on decentralisation will be made in the context of the outcomes of the review that is underway and will be completed early next year.

I also take his point on the equitation school. I did not realise he was claiming credit for the fact that it continues. It is a fact of political life that people claim credit for matters, usually meritoriously.

I welcome the new Minister, Deputy Killeen, and his Secretary General and officials. I already wished him all the best in the new position and I am sure he will do a good job.

I will not go back over issues already raised. On the Irish Red Cross, as the Minister would agree, there are issues that need to be resolved. Was there a report returned to the Department on how the money the State made available to the Red Cross last year was used? I refer to the broader question of the review group and its recommendations and, most importantly, the putting in place of a new chairperson, which position has been vacant since December last. There is a real need to put a new person in place.

There is also the general issue, which we dealt with previously at Question Time on the last occasion, that the link between the State and the Irish Red Cross developed during the pre-war period when all sorts of events were anticipated and in the main did not come to pass. On the issue of the Minister nominating 14 members of the council and the chair, I wonder is that really necessary in this day and age. In general, is the Minister satisfied with the recommendations of the review group and do they go far enough? If there is to be legislation, will that legislation be published and dealt with prior to the summer recess?

On naval vessels, the Minister stated that delivery could possibly start by 2014. What exactly may happen in 2014? On this issue of vessels, there has been a proposal in the past that the Reserve Defence Force Naval Service could be involved with smaller vessels for patrolling purposes around the coast. I understood that the vessels might cost in the order of €1 million. Was that proposal ever seriously looked at, is it still current and does the Minister see merit in that proposal? On the point made previously by Deputy Deenihan, we have a vast coastline. Many of our patrols are very much intelligence led and that has brought good results. In terms of random patrolling, however, has the Department or the Naval Service any new ideas as to how this could be enhanced because there are vast stretches of the coast, particularly in the west, that are not properly patrolled?

A draft of the White Paper is to be with the Government in the spring. What exactly will be the procedure for developing the paper and will comments from outside agencies or the public generally be invited in the context of delivering that draft to Government next spring?

On the issue of pensions, there is a 2.7% decrease in the Revised Estimate. Obviously, this is demand led. I take it that if the demand increases significantly for any reason this year, the funds would be available to meet the requirements.

I note, in the actions in support of the civil power, there was a Naval Service salmon patrol. I wonder what that was. Given that drift-net salmon fishing is prohibited, why was it necessary to bring in the Naval Service for a patrol? It stuck out as I was reading it.

The explosive ordinance disposal group was called out on 196 occasions. Obviously, this is done at the request of the Garda Síochána. What is the pattern of those call-outs? How many of them are real? How many of them are hoaxes? From where are they emanating? Do they relate to paramilitaries or criminals? Has the Department any idea of who is responsible for the hoax call-outs?

There has been publicity recently on Irish Army officers supplying arms to assassins in the Seychelles. What I really want to know is whether there is any substance to this, and if there is, what it is.

During the term of office of the Minister's predecessor, the committee was addressed by Mr. Noel Richardson and Mr. Michael McDonough. Both gentlemen, former Army officers, made the case for the involvement of Army personnel in the promotion of physical fitness activities in schools and the wider community. The former Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, undertook to arrange a meeting between Deputy Deenihan and me and the two individuals to whom I refer. Is the Minister going to deliver on the commitment given by his predecessor in this regard and, if so, when is the meeting likely to take place? Deputy O'Dea indicated that it was intended to hold the meeting in early March. However, the matter was obviously overtaken by events.

I am glad the issue of a cadet class is under consideration. The Minister has indicated that advertisements relating to Army recruitment will be appearing in the near future. In the past we discussed the matter of establishing panels. Last year there were people who would have liked to become involved with the Army but no recruitment took place. Those to whom I refer are now above the relevant age limit and, to an extent, have been discriminated against. I am asking, as a one-off gesture, that they be included in the competitions to be held this year. When such competitions are held, panels should be drawn up in order that people might be called when positions in the Army become available.

My final question relates to the Army's mission to Chad. Was it possible for the Army to bring back a significant amount of the equipment it brought with it to Chad?

I thank the Deputy for acknowledging the work of the officials and my predecessor. The position on the Irish Red Cross is that neither the Department nor the Minister receives an expenditure report because that organisation operates entirely independently of the Department. While a departmental official sits on the council, that is as far as it goes. Grants in aid are generally extended. The accounts are audited by the society and I do not believe any questions arise in that regard.

The recommendations of the review group should be at the core of how we decide to move forward. I have been considering these recommendations and also the fact that the approval of the International Red Cross for this approximate way forward has been taken into account. I have not concluded my deliberations because there is benefit to be had from a degree of tweaking. I take the Deputy's point that the acting chairman is, in fact, the vice chairman. The recommendations of the review group would impact on how the new chairman would be appointed.

I have been examining the possibility of appointing an interim chairman, pending implementation of the recommendations. One of the issues that arose in this regard was whether legislation would be necessary. The advice I have received suggests legislation would probably not be required in order to implement the core recommendations of the review group. Members will accept that because it is so difficult to avail of the services of Parliamentary Counsel in order to draft legislation there is a long timescale involved. The latter would be extremely frustrating and unhelpful in the context of the standing of the Irish Red Cross. I am disposed, therefore, to moving towards implementing the recommendations of the review group. I am also in the process of attempting to judge what the timescale will be in that regard. I will make a decision in the next month or so. If it seems more sensible to appoint an interim chairman, I will do so. In view of the fact that the committee deals with these matters, I will keep members informed of progress.

I do not have any hang-ups about whether the Minister for Defence should appoint the chairman. My instinct is to veer towards what is contained in the recommendations of the review group in that regard.

On the question of naval vessels, a case has been made for the operation of smaller vessels inshore, perhaps with the involvement of the RDF or Naval Service personnel. There are a number of difficulties in this regard, the most major of which revolves around the fact that it appears that the seas off the west coast are becoming much more difficult to negotiate. It is difficult, therefore, to chart the future of inshore vessels, particularly in the context of the role of the Irish Coast Guard. Even if we were to decide that, from a strategic point of view, this would be the best route to take, the age profile of the fleet is such that proceeding with the replacement programme is an absolute first step. There are steps we could consider taking if the vessels in the fleet were not so old. In the current circumstances priority must be given to the replacement programme before we proceed to consider other possible developments.

I would like to have the widest possible consultation on the White Paper. I had forgotten that this is the first occasion on which I have come before the committee. I have appeared before one of the other committees of the House. We should engage in the widest possible public consultation process on any of these matters. As a general principle, I am strongly in favour of the participation of the committees of the Houses in any such process. I would be happy to come before the committee at any time in order to update it on progress. I have indicated to the representative organisations that I would like them to approach the process with a relatively open mind and a willingness to engage. The process and the outcome will be better if this is the case.

The Deputy is correct to point out that there is a 2.7% decrease in the provision relating to pensions. The decrease is on the basis of the best available data at this point. Pension provisions will be honoured and the matter will be dealt with, if necessary.

I understand the Naval Service's salmon patrols are instigated in response to requests made to it. In such circumstances, there must have been some activity which required investigation.

I have some figures for explosive ordnance disposal. In 2009 there were 196 incidents in total, some 61 of which related to actual explosive devices, while 84 were hoaxes. A total of 42 were referred to as being "routine" and there were five false alarms. The figure for actual explosive devices, 61, is high. That is an average of five a month or more than one a week. This is a serious matter. To the end of May, there were 78 call-outs in total. If this figure were to play out over the entire year, the total would be somewhat lower than last year. There were 84 hoaxes last year, but there does not appear to be a pattern. It is difficult to interpret the exact position. It is sometimes suggested some hoaxes are deliberately aimed at diverting resources. I do not know whether that has been found to be the case in this instance. The total number of actual explosive devices to date this year is 20, while there have been 23 hoaxes. This is an extremely important element of the work of the military which does not receive a great deal of publicity. In the context of the resources we devote to it, we must be prepared to provide equipment of the best quality. Those who carry out this work are owed a debt of gratitude for the risks they take.

The issue relating to the Seychelles is under investigation. As the Chairman, Deputy O'Shea and other members are aware, the investigation may lead to future action. In such circumstances, it would unhelpful or dangerous for me to speculate further on the matter. It may be that people may be obliged to answer charges on the matter. However, there is no indication at this point that this will prove to be the case. When it becomes possible to make information available, without the possibility of damaging any action that might arise, I will be happy to provide it. I have an open mind about the proposal on the promotion of physical activity regarding the Army. I say that in my strong belief that there are core activities of the Army that need to take precedence. Given that my predecessor undertook to set up a meeting, I will try to have that arranged as quickly as possible. I enter the caveat that if it has the potential to impact negatively on the core functions of the Defence Forces, I might regard it quite critically.

There are good reasons for the recruitment restriction on age grounds. Owing to the physical demands of the military lifestyle, people need to be young and fit. The age profile of the Army across its 10,000 membership is very important. At this point I would not be prepared to consider a deviation from the current age requirement. I take Deputy O'Shea's point that when recruitment is somewhat sporadic, there are small cohorts of people who might be interested and miss out for that reason. While I am sorry that is the case, because of the overall requirement regarding age and activity it would not be wise from the perspective of the military to make that change.

All of the key military equipment used in Chad has been returned or is in the process of being returned. With some equipment - mostly kitchen-related - a judgment was made that because of the cost and difficulty it did not make sense to return it. We are in the process of doing a deal with the UN in that regard. The military equipment was returned. There is no doubt that had we delayed the decision we would have lost some of it and there would have been a considerable risk that it would have fallen into the hands of people which might have had the impact of exacerbating the situation on the ground.

In answer to a question on explosives from Deputy O'Shea, the Minister gave the number of call-outs, etc. He also asked whether there is a breakdown as to whether they are subversives, criminals or other.

That is not contained in these figures. If we have it I will send the documentation to the Chairman for the committee's use. It is quite interesting. I do not believe we have that breakdown. It has been pointed out to me that given this committee's involvement with the justice side, it might be better to get that breakdown from the Garda. There are concerns on both fronts.

A new development plan needs to be put into place for the new Reserve Defence Force and a value for money review is being carried out at the moment. I am not sure it makes sense to hold back the new development plan until the value for money review is completed. I sensed considerable frustration in that organisation when I met its representatives recently. There is considerable scope for it to become involved in other activities, involving more interface with the civil authorities and civilian life generally. I seek reassurance that the issue of developing a new plan is not being sidelined until the review is completed. I ask the Minister to reconsider putting a member of the general staff in charge of the Reserve Defence Force. This is an issue of great concern to the Reserve Defence Force. Its representatives feel that if the person were a member of the general staff, he or she would not be aligned to an organisation like RACO. It would not cost very much money to make that change. This would give a very worthwhile boost to morale in the Reserve Defence Force.

Deputy O'Shea makes a fair point. We need to decide where we go regarding the reserve. We are likely to have the results of the value for money study fairly quickly and it will be informative. I have tried to look back over the action taken regarding the reserve in recent years and why it is in its current situation. Departmental officials, my predecessor and the military authorities appear to have done all of the things recommended as the way forward at particular points, in particular the pilot scheme for recruitment implemented by my predecessor. They do not seem to have worked. It is a bit unfair to judge them quite as starkly as that. Based on what Deputies O'Shea and Deenihan said to me on the last day we had oral questions, it indicates that despite having done pretty much everything that was recommended, there seems to be another problem and we may need to look more fundamentally at the role of the reserve. The Deputy may be on a rich vein regarding the other activities and availability to the civil authorities. There have been suggestions that during the extreme weather conditions, including flooding, and ice and snow, better use could have been made of the reserve. We need to assess the outcome of all the recommendations that have been made and implemented as far as I can see.

We also need to have engagement, as I have already had, with the representative body to take a realistic view of what is attainable and what we need to do to attain that. I have a pretty open mind on the role of the head of the reserve. I know the point is made very strongly. However, when I consider that the other recommendations that have been implemented do not seem to have had the desired result in general, I have a strong sense that there is not a quick fix or a magic solution for the reserve. It will require considerable commitment and consideration. We should be prepared to do that. If it took six months or a year to do so and we emerged, in the context of a new White Paper, with a very good plan, that might be a better way rather than a knee-jerk reaction with one or two, what would seem like, quick-fix solutions.

I thank the Chairman, other members of the committee and the committee officials for their courtesy in the consideration of the Estimates and the annual output statement. I look forward to working closely with the committee in the future.

I thank the Minister and his officials for attending and the members for their co-operation.

Top
Share