Paul Nicholas Gogarty
Ceist:64 Mr. Gogarty asked the Minister for Defence his views on the EU Commission's report, Towards an EU Defence Equipment Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9003/03]
Other Questions. - EU Defence Equipment Policy.
I am aware of the Commission's communication entitled European Defence – Industrial and Market Issues – Towards an EU Defence Equipment Policy, which is essentially a discussion document focused on the European defence industry.
As the document deals with defence industry and market issues such as standardisation, monitoring of defence-related industries, intracommunity transfers, competition, procurement rules, export control of dual-use goods and research, Deputies will appreciate the subject matter is primarily one for my colleague the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment as such issues relating to the industrial environment and markets come within her remit.
In so far as my area of responsibility is concerned, as the Defence Forces are end users of defence equipment, I will naturally be monitoring developments in this area to see if the greater competitiveness sought in the EU defence industry can yield improved economies of scale for the procurement of equipment for the Defence Forces.
Does the Minister accept that the aim of the EU defence equipment policy is to increase spending within the European Union on armaments and to spend more efficiently? If that is the case, does he accept that Ireland, which has the lowest defence spending as a percentage of GDP within the European Union, would have to increase significantly its military spending as a consequence? Does he accept that Mr. Barnier, with whom I had the pleasure of working on the defence working group of the convention, stated publicly that the EU needs to compete militarily with the United States and that the EU defence capability should be built up? Eventually we will have to increase significantly our spending and, if so, in what areas will the Government make cutbacks? Would it be in health, education, public transport and so on?
Deputy Gormley and I must disagree so often as to make it notoriously monotonous for our colleagues who happen to be in the House when both of us are debating. Therefore, I once again apologise to all my colleagues. I know how dearly the Deputy would wish the Government to increase spending on defence and publicly state it will take the money from the health services, education and so on. If the Deputy took note of defence spending in recent years he would be complimenting me on the extent to which I found resources, which no previous Government could find, to improve Defence Forces equipment without asking taxpayers for an extra penny.
This is a document, not a Community decision. Some people have views on the issue because they see to what extent Europe's total expenditure is probably as high as America on the whole.
That is not true. I can give the Minister the figures.
When one adds up the whole lot and puts the percentages together, as far as all the equipment is concerned, there is a wide difference. Some people have ideas about that. As far as the Government is concerned, it makes up its own mind. It decides on the allocation to the Defence Forces and it will not be dictated to by anyone in regard to what it should or should not spend. There has been no pressure on me as Minister for Defence, at Council level or elsewhere, to do what the Deputy is asking. He can be assured that I will not let him wake up some morning, even if he wants to believe it himself, so that he can make political gains out of my stupidity or someone else's stupidity. I have taken action in the Department of Defence to safeguard the funds for education and health by raising resources from our property profile. I will continue to do so to the Deputy's consternation.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.