Vol. 406 No. 5
3 Mr. McCartan asked the Minister for Defence if he will outline, in respect of the Gulfstream aircraft currently on lease for ministerial transport, the total leasing charges paid to date; the total cost of (1) any extra equipment acquired for the aircraft (2) any modifications carried out to it and (3) the fuel used by the aircraft while leased; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
42 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Defence if it is Government's intention to buy a new Gulfstream G3 aircraft; and if so, the ancitipated cost involved.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 42 together. Tenders were invited by my Department in July last for the supply of an executive jet aircraft. A technical and economic evaluation of the various offers made to supply aircraft has been proceeding and no contract has been placed to date for the acquisition of an executive jet aircraft.
The leasing and fuel costs of the Gulfstream III aircraft currently leased amount to about £2 million for the period from 1 January 1990 to 28 February 1991. No modifications were carried out and no extra equipment was acquired for the aircraft.
Would the Minister indicate how long it is intended to continue the leasing arrangement, given the acquisition cost option? Would he agree that leasing has proved to be totally uneconomical?
The lease of the Gulfstream aircraft has been extended to 30 September next.
I thank the Minister of State for that unsolicited information.
I always try to be helpful.
It might be even more helpful if the Minister would listen to the question and try to answer it. Given the figures and the cost of leasing to the end of next September, would the Minister not agree that it is proving to be impracticable and uneconomical? The Government are spending more on leasing the aircraft than it would have cost to buy it in the first instance.
That is not quite so. All these matters have been taken into consideration by my Department and they are quite satisfied that the leasing arrangement is economical. A decision will be taken when the lease expires at the end of September.
What was the optional purchase price when the aircraft was first offered and how does it compare with the £2 million which has so far been expended? Would the Minister confirm that the fuel costs are three times the average for comparable aircraft? In regard to cost effectiveness, is there greater capacity for the utilisation of the craft by the Government?
The answer to the last part of the question is yes. With regard to the purchase price, it is not the practice to disclose details of tenders received, for obvious reasons.
We now move to the next question.
The Minister may have misunderstood. I am not pursuing the issue of the Gulfstream IV and the tenders currently under consideration. I am inquiring about the offer available in January 1990 when the craft was taken on.
I am concerned that the Deputy should seek to circumvent the ruling of the Chair. Question No. 4.
The same applies.
I wish to raise a matter with the Chair. I put down a question to the Minister for Defence regarding preparations to send Irish Army troops to Iraq and Kuwait as part of a United Nations truce supervision operation following the Gulf War. I regret that I received a communication from your office saying the question was transferred from Defence to Foreign Affairs. I seek clarification as to how that arose.
My office will be very glad to facilitate the Deputy should she communicate with them.
It is a disgrace that this can be done. It is very much a matter for Defence, not Foreign Affairs.
The Chair does nothing disgraceful. If the Deputy feels he does, she has a remedy. I should prefer her to take that remedy rather than allow any slur to attach to the Chair.
Not the Chair, the Department.
