Pádraig MacLochlainn
Question:12. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Defence the position regarding Ireland’s naval base allowing non-manned aeroplanes or drones to land. [34539/14]
View answerNaval Service Operations
Questions (12)
Written answers
The Defence Forces currently operate an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System, commonly referred to as UAVs. These UAVs, are, in effect, an information gathering asset which have no offensive capability. They do not carry weapons. The UAV systems were acquired to enhance the capability of the Defence Forces to provide a low cost and low risk means to increase surveillance capabilities and intelligence gathering. The UAVs operated by the Defence Forces can provide an aerial observation capability with the provision of a live feed back to a monitoring or Command Control post. It is in this context that the Naval Service is currently examining the usefulness of such technology to extend patrol coverage, to aid in the intercepting of drugs shipments, fisheries protection, search and rescue missions and pollution monitoring. Since 2006 the Naval Service has facilitated test flights for tactical level (small) UAVs on Haulbowline Island.
The ongoing research in this area is part of the policy in ensuring that modern and effective technology is available to the Defence Forces to fulfil its role both at home and overseas.
Defence Forces Expenditure
Questions (13)
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:13. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Defence the amount spent to date in 2014 on weaponry; the amount that was purchased from Israel; the projected purchase of weaponry from Israel for 2015; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34573/14]
View answerWritten answers
The primary purpose for the procurement of weaponry and defensive equipment by the Department of Defence is to maintain the capability of the Irish Defence Forces on overseas Peace Support Operations and to afford the greatest possible force protection to Irish troops whilst on such missions. The amount spent on weaponry by the Department including ammunition stands at €10.6m to date. I am advised that the Department of Defence has acquired no weaponry from Israel this year. However, other non-ordnance related military equipment was acquired from an Israeli company with a value of almost €2m, exclusive of VAT. The expenditure relates to a contract awarded to Elbit Systems for the supply of ten Ground Surveillance Radars to the Defence Forces following on from a detailed tender process carried out over the last twelve months. The main purpose for the acquisition of the Ground Surveillance Radars is again for force protection on overseas missions. At present, there are no plans to purchase weaponry from Israel in 2015.
A number of Israeli companies have successfully tendered for and have been awarded contracts by the Department of Defence for the provision of defensive equipment to the Defence Forces as a result of competitive tender competitions. This is not a new development and has been the situation for many years.
The principle of competitive tendering for Government contracts is used by the Department of Defence for the acquisition of defensive equipment, including weaponry, for the Defence Forces. Central to those procedures is the requirement to allow fair competition between suppliers through the submission of tenders following advertising of the tender competition on the e-tenders site.
Such tender competitions are open to any individual company or country in accordance with the terms of all UN, OSCE and EU arms embargoes or restrictions. There are no such restrictions or embargoes in place on Israel or Israeli companies. Tender competitions are held in accordance with the EU Code of Conduct on Export Controls.
Air Traffic Control Services
Questions (14)
Pádraig MacLochlainn
Question:14. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Defence if he granted permission for two F16 jets to fly across Dublin on 30 August for an American football event held in Croke Park, Dublin. [34542/14]
View answerWritten answers
Primary responsibility for the regulation of activity by foreign military aircraft in Ireland rests with the Minister for Foreign Affairs & Trade in accordance with the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order 1952. On the 21st August 2014, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade sought observations from my Department and the Defence Forces in relation to the overflight and the radio frequencies to be used by the US aircraft that participated in the opening ceremony of the Croke Park Classic American football game. Having consulted with the Military authorities, my Department replied with no observations. My Department and the Defence Forces had no other role in the matter.
Shannon Airport Facilities
Questions (15)
Mick Wallace
Question:15. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Defence his plans to instruct the Irish Defence Forces to detain and intern any US soldier transiting through Shannon Airport in compliance with Article 11 of the Hague Convention (V) on neutrality; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34546/14]
View answerWritten answers
I have no plans to instruct the Defence Forces to detain and intern US soldiers transiting through Shannon Airport. Firstly, An Garda Síochána has the primary responsibility for law and order, including the protection of the internal security of the State. Among the roles assigned to the Defence Forces is the provision of Aid to the Civil Power (ATCP) which, in practice, means to assist An Garda Síochána when requested to do so. The Defence Forces deploy personnel to Shannon Airport, in response to requests for support from An Garda Síochána.
Secondly, Ireland is not a party to the Hague Convention (V) respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land, and I understand from my colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, that there are no plans to become a member.
Foreign Policy Review
Questions (16)
Eoghan Murphy
Question:16. Deputy Eoghan Murphy asked the Minister for Defence in view of recent hostilities in eastern Europe, his plans to review the State’s defence doctrine and resources, in particular the triple-lock policy which may impede future peacekeeping or other deployment needs in eastern Europe. [34545/14]
View answerWritten answers
The Green Paper on Defence, which was published in 2013, provided a comprehensive overview of the current defence policy framework and set out an assessment of the defence and security environment at that time. It also considered the relevance of the “triple lock” mechanism in a world where defence and security threats are becoming more interconnected, more diverse, less visible and less predictable than heretofore. The Green Paper noted the requirement for a UN resolution as part of the “triple lock” reflects the central importance of the UN in granting legitimacy to peace support and crisis management missions. The Green Paper also noted that at the same time, the “triple lock” also constitutes a self imposed, legal constraint on the State’s sovereignty in making decisions about the use of its armed forces.
The Green Paper recognised that on balance the advantages of retaining the “triple lock” mechanism can be seen as outweighing the disadvantages. Nonetheless it is an issue worthy of discussion in advance of the adoption of the next White Paper on Defence.
A key part of the development of the White Paper is the consideration of potential challenges to our defence and security environment that may emerge into the future. As recent events have highlighted, the defence and security environment can be volatile and unpredictable.
The identification of policy options for the defence aspects of the Government’s response to these challenges and the associated capability implications is another key part of the process. There must also be consideration of other demands that will be made of the Defence Organisation over the coming decade and the broad roles that Government may assign to the Defence Forces.
The White Paper on Defence will include an updated assessment of the future defence and security environment, with appropriate input from the Department of Defence, Department of the Taoiseach, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Department of Justice and Equality, Defence Forces and an Garda Síochána.
Working Groups comprising civil and military representatives from the Department of Defence and the Defence Forces are currently considering future operational demands and the defence capabilities required to meet projected future operational requirements. In the course of their deliberations, the Working Groups are taking into consideration the inputs received from a wide variety of stakeholders. This includes the views of international organisations which have been sought with a particular focus on likely future trends in international peace support operations.
Discussions have also been held with a range of other Government Departments on cross-cutting policy issues and likely future demands from Government bodies and State agencies. This includes the ongoing review of Ireland’s Foreign Policy and External Relations. These discussions are continuing, as required, throughout the White Paper process.
This ongoing work will underpin recommendations regarding defence provision for the next decade.
Defence Forces Medicinal Products
Questions (17)
Clare Daly
Question:17. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Defence in relation to previous parliamentary question responses, if he will specify the international best practice that he was referring to in relation to prescribing Lariam to the Irish Defence Forces, in view that Ireland is the only country which prescribes Lariam as the only drug of choice. [34549/14]
View answerWritten answers
In January 2011 the Department established a working group to examine the use of Lariam and other anti malarial drugs in the Defence Forces. I am advised that the Group investigated all the various issues surrounding the use of Lariam and obtained advice from leading Domestic and International medical experts.
Experts advise the need for:
- individual assessment on a clinical basis in relation to their suitability for any chemoprophylaxis;
- good screening procedures in relation to mental health;
- careful prescribing with attention to contra-indicators is essential;
- commencement of medication in advance of travel so that any adverse effects can be reported;
- early detection of adverse effects
I am advised the Defence Forces policy with regard to the prescribing of Lariam is compliant with the said expert advices. The Defence Forces policy is also in line with current Health Product Regulatory Authority (HPRA) guidelines, formerly the Irish Medicines Board. The HPRA is the statutory authority with responsibility for quality, safety and efficacy of medicines in Ireland.
It is the policy of the Defence Forces that personnel are individually screened for fitness for service overseas and medical suitability, i.e. a medical risk assessment for Lariam is carried out on an individual basis.
The Defence Forces are fully aware of the range of reported side effects attaching to all anti-malarial medications. Significant precautions are taken by the Medical Corps in assessing the medical suitability of members of the Defence Forces to take any of the anti-malarial medications. The choice of chemoprophylaxis is dependent on a number of factors. These include the type of malaria in the destination, resistance to particular drugs, the profile of the traveller (contra-indications, underlying health conditions, purpose of travel), the duration of travel and adherence issues. The choice of medication is a medical decision made by Medical Officers in the Defence Forces having regard to the specific circumstances of the mission and the individual member of the Defence Forces.
The Irish Defence Forces are not the only Defence Force using Lariam. I am advised that Lariam is also used by Sweden, Israel, Greece, Canada and Slovenia.
Anti-malarial medications must remain in the formulary of medications prescribed by the Medical Corps for Defence Forces personnel on appropriate overseas missions, to ensure that our military personnel can have effective protection from the very serious risks posed by this highly dangerous disease.
Defence Forces Strength
Questions (18)
Dara Calleary
Question:18. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Defence his assessment of the social and economic impact of the decision to disband the Fourth Western Brigade; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34570/14]
View answerWritten answers
Following the comprehensive review of expenditure in 2011, the Government decided to stabilise the strength ceiling of the Permanent Defence Force (PDF) at 9,500 personnel. The Minister for Defence was faced with a choice of retaining the three Brigade Army structure (which was designed in the 1990’s for an overall PDF of 11,500 personnel), or re-organising the PDF to reflect the actual achievable strength level of 9,500 personnel. The structure intended for a strength ceiling of 11,500 personnel was an ill fit for a strength ceiling of 9,500 personnel. Its retention would have been inefficient, leading to under-strength Units and the retention of headquarters and administrative structures intended for a much larger force. Clearly this was not a viable option.
In this context, the Minister for Defence initiated a major re-organisation of the Defence Forces encompassing the consolidation of three under-strength Army Brigades into two full strength Brigades. This was to ensure that within the revised strength ceiling, the operational effectiveness of the Permanent Defence Force was optimised in order to fulfil all roles assigned by Government.
Key aspects of the reorganisation included the consolidation of under-strength units into a smaller number of full strength Units, a reduction in the number of headquarters and the associated re-deployment of personnel from administrative and support functions to operational Units.
The re-organisation within a stabilised strength ceiling of 9,500 personnel did not require any job losses as this strength level is the same that existed when the current Government took up office in 2011. I have seen no evidence that supports any contention that the re-organisation has led to any significant adverse economic or social impact.
The current organisational structures are based on recommendations made by the then Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces and the then Secretary General of the Department. I am confident that the current structures contribute to optimising the capacity of the Permanent Defence Force to deliver the required operational outputs, within the available resources. This remains one of my key objectives as Minister for Defence.
Defence Forces Deployment
Questions (19)
Clare Daly
Question:19. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Defence his views on whether Irish peacekeeping troops would be more effectively deployed to locations other than the Golan Heights, in view that the 40 years of the UNDOF mission has failed to facilitate the resolution of the conflict; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34548/14]
View answerWritten answers
A contingent of the Permanent Defence Force was deployed to the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) in September 2013 at the request of the United Nations. The current deployment, the 44th Irish Infantry Group UNDOF, comprises 130 troops and consists of a Force Reserve Company and support elements. Their role includes the provision of a Quick Reaction Force which is on standby to assist with on-going operations within the UNDOF Area of Responsibility. Since its establishment in 1974, UNDOF has successfully supervised the implementation of the Disengagement Agreement between the Israeli and Syrian forces, maintaining an area of separation between the forces which is over 75 kilometres long. The mission has also been successful in supporting the efforts of the international community both in the Golan Heights region of Syria and in the broader Middle-East region. However, the escalation of the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic has affected the UNDOF area of operations significantly in the past year or so.
In light of the evolving situation in the mission area, I have requested the UN to review the capacity of the mission to fulfil its mandate. The UN Security Council will be briefed later today on UNDOF and how the mission can respond to the changed circumstances. Already, there has been fundamental realignment of the mission over the weekend reflecting the situation on the ground. The Force Headquarters, including the Irish contingent, have been redeployed from Camp Faouar to Camp Ziouani, which is on the Israeli side of the separation zone, in response to developments on the ground.
The outcome of the review by the UN may result in significant changes to the mission that will permit Ireland’s continued support and participation. The Irish contribution to UNDOF is an important element of the Force. In this regard, I would like to pay tribute to the members of the 44th Infantry Group in their role as UNDOF’s Quick Reaction Force in discharging their duties effectively in the challenging operating conditions they face in the region.
Defence Forces Personnel
Questions (20)
Bernard Durkan
Question:20. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the extent to which resolution has been found to issues relating to those required to retire from the Defence Forces on foot of specified years of service but who are willing to remain on; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34568/14]
View answerWritten answers
A claim has been received from PDFORRA in relation to this matter and it is being dealt with under the Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme for members of the Permanent Defence Force. Discussions have been taking place with the Representative Association, with regards to their claim, under a special Subcommittee of Conciliation Council. As discussions under the Scheme are confidential to the parties involved, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the matter at this time, other than to emphasise that in dealing with this issue the manpower and operational needs of the Defence Forces must be the primary consideration.
The need for continuing recruitment to the Defence Forces of young and fit men and women so that the Defence Forces can discharge all the roles assigned to them by Government, both at home and overseas is an issue of which I need to be cognisant. It was for this very reason that this policy was introduced in the first place.
I would not like to pre-empt or second guess the outcome of current discussions at Conciliation Council and it would not be appropriate for me to comment publicly on the matter at this time.
Defence Forces Strength
Questions (21)
Dara Calleary
Question:21. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Defence if he will review the decision to disband the Fourth Western Brigade; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34569/14]
View answerWritten answers
Arising from the comprehensive review of expenditure in 2011, the Government decided to stabilise the strength ceiling of the Permanent Defence Force (PDF) at 9,500 personnel. The three Brigade structure then in place had originally been designed in the 1990s, when the strength ceiling of the PDF was 11,500 personnel. Clearly, at a strength ceiling of 9,500 personnel, this structure was no longer viable.
In this context, the then Minister for Defence initiated a major reorganisation of the Defence Forces encompassing the consolidation of three under-strength my Brigades into two full strength Brigades. This was to ensure that within the revised strength ceiling, the operational effectiveness of the Permanent Defence Force was optimised in order to fulfil all roles assigned by Government.
Key aspects of the reorganisation included the consolidation of under-strength units into a smaller number of full strength Units, a reduction in the number of headquarters and the associated re-deployment of personnel from administrative and support functions to operational Units.
I am satisfied that the recent reorganisation of the Defence Forces has maintained the operational capacity of the Defence Forces to the greatest extent possible within the available resource envelope. It has allowed the Permanent Defence Force to continue to fulfil all roles assigned by Government. This remains a key focus for the future.
Defence Forces Deployment
Questions (22)
Seán Ó Fearghaíl
Question:22. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Defence the number of Irish Defence Forces personnel currently on missions overseas; the number of such missions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34577/14]
View answerWritten answers
As of 8 September 2014, Ireland is contributing approximately 422 Defence Forces personnel to 14 different missions throughout the world. Full details of all personnel currently serving overseas are listed in the following tabular statement.
The main overseas missions in which Defence Forces personnel are currently deployed are the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) with 197 personnel, and the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) in Syria with 135 Defence Forces personnel.
Other missions in which Defence Forces personnel are currently deployed are the EU Training Mission in Mali (EUTM Mali) with eight (8) personnel; the EUFOR mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina with seven (7) personnel; the NATO-led international security presence (KFOR) in Kosovo with twelve (12) personnel; the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan with seven (7) personnel, and the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) in South Sudan with two (2) personnel. Ireland also contributes 26 observers and staff to various United Nations and OSCE missions, 14 personnel to the Nordic Battle group headquarters in Sweden and 15 other personnel to staff appointments at UN, EU and OSCE headquarters.
The current contribution of some 422 personnel to overseas missions reflects the Government’s continued commitment to our responsibilities in the area of international peace and security.
|
Number |
||
|
1. |
UN MISSIONS |
|
|
|
UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) HQ |
9 |
|
|
UNIFIL 45th Infantry Group |
184 |
|
|
UNIFIL Sector West HQ |
4 |
|
|
UNTSO (United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation) Israel, Syria & Lebanon |
13 |
|
|
MINURSO (United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara) |
3 |
|
|
MONUSCO (United Nations Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo) |
4 |
|
|
UNOCI (United Nations Mission in Ivory Coast) |
2 |
|
|
UNDOF (United Nations Disengagement Observer Force) Golan Heights Syria |
135 |
|
|
UNMAS (United Nations Mine Action Service ) South Sudan |
2 |
|
|
TOTAL |
356 |
|
|
UN MANDATED MISSIONS |
|
|
|
EUFOR (EU led Operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina) |
7 |
|
|
EUTM Mali (EU led Training Mission) |
8 |
|
|
KFOR (International Security Presence in Kosovo) HQ |
12 |
|
|
ISAF (International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan) |
7 |
|
TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL SERVING WITH UN MISSIONS |
390 |
|
|
2. |
ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE (OSCE) |
|
|
|
OSCE Mission to Bosnia & Herzegovina |
2 |
|
|
Staff Officer, High Level Planning Group Vienna |
1 |
|
TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONNEL SERVING OSCE |
3 |
|
|
3. |
EU MILITARY STAFF |
|
|
|
Brussels |
5 |
|
4. |
NORDIC BATTLE GROUP 2015 |
|
|
|
FHQ Sweden |
14 |
|
5. |
MILITARY REPRESENTATIVES/ADVISERS/STAFF |
|
|
|
Military Adviser, Permanent Mission to UN, New York |
1 |
|
|
Military Adviser Irish delegation to OSCE, Vienna |
1 |
|
|
Military Representative to EU (Brussels) |
4 |
|
|
Liaison Office of Ireland, NATO/PfP (Brussels) |
2 |
|
|
EU OHQ Operation Althea, Mons, Belgium |
1 |
|
|
Irish Liaison Officer to SHAPE & Military Co-Op Division, Mons, Belgium |
1 |
|
TOTAL NUMBER OF DEFENCE FORCES PERSONNEL SERVING OVERSEAS |
422 |