Vol. 567 No. 6
5 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent work of the high level group established under the aegis of his Department to monitor developments in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. [11469/03]
6 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent work of the high level group established under his Department in response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. [13027/03]
7 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the number of occasions on which the high level group established under the aegis of his Department following the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 has met; the last occasion on which a meeting was held; if he will report on its recent work; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13492/03]
8 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent work of the high level group established under his Department in response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13612/03]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 8, inclusive, together.
Responsibility for internal national security is a matter for the Garda Síochána, with support as appropriate from the Defence Forces.
The National Security Committee comprises representatives of those agencies at the highest level and of the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Defence and Foreign Affairs and is chaired by the Secretary General to the Government. It is concerned with ensuring that I and the Government are advised of high level security issues and the responses to them, but not involving operational security issues.
It would not be appropriate to give detailed information about meetings of the committee, but it meets regularly as required and members liaise on an ongoing basis. It is continuing to monitor developments which might have security implications, in particular, developments in the international arena.
I note that the head of MI5, Ms Eliza Manningham-Buller, and the head of the CIA met recently in London following remarks made by the reputed deputy leader of al-Qaeda urging Muslims to attack British and American missions. In that context, is the Taoiseach concerned that the increased expenditure on security arrangements at Sellafield have been reported to him? BNFL has stated that it has increased defence and security measures there. Is the Taoiseach happy that that is the case and has he raised that with Prime Minister Blair?
Some time ago the Minister for Defence admitted in the House that in the event of a terrorist attack or an attack on an international facility here by outside forces, the only recourse the Government would have would be to seek outside help. Have arrangements been put in place if that unfortunate event were to ever take place? For instance, is the Taoiseach happy with a situation where the Minister for Defence needs 2,000 extra nuclear/biological suits for the Army and can only supply 50% of them?
Is that situation really up to scratch internationally in today's terms? Is the Taoiseach happy that the 25 proscribed terrorist organisations in Britain and the 14 in Northern Ireland are being monitored in so far as is possible in terms of their implications for the 26 counties?
Before the Taoiseach replies, Deputy Rabbitte submitted a question.
No, Sir. Deputy Kenny has asked a similar question.
I have a question on this matter. It is listed.
This will be the final reply from the Taoiseach if we take more questions. I will allow a brief question from Deputy Sargent. When I say a brief question, Deputy, there is no use asking five or six questions.
When the Ceann Comhairle stops talking, I will ask the brief question.
Yesterday when the Deputy was asked to ask a brief question, when the questions concluded we were—
I had four questions yesterday. I only have one question and I will take proportionately one quarter of the time I took yesterday.
I will take one question from Deputy Sargent and one from Deputy Ó Caoláin.
On foot of Deputy Kenny's question, does the Taoiseach agree that given our proximity, the Irish Government should have the same visiting entitlements to installations such as Sellafield as has the International Atomic Energy Agency. If we are to prevent terrorism, it is important to insist on parity of access to information rather than being drip-fed what the international agency, or the British Government tells us.
Will the Taoiseach advise the House of his view in relation to the recently speculated introduction by the United States of the requirement of finger-printing for all visitors to the United States and whether or not he has spoken—
That question is well outside the realm of these four questions.
With respect, a Cheann Comhairle, I do not wish to be argumentative but it is absolutely in the context—
We must confine ourselves to the questions before us.
The questions are tabled arising out of the terrible events of 11 September and, clearly, this is an outworking or reaction by the United States Administration. I am asking the Taoiseach to comment on the question that I posed.
It does not arise out of these questions.
Some of the questions asked are for the Minister for Defence because they relate to the office of emergency planning and the co-ordination by that office of the work of the emergency services in the preparation of contingency plans. The task force on emergency planning is chaired by the Minister for Defence and meets frequently to assist on these issues. The high level group in my Department co-ordinates the Departments of Defence and Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and Foreign Affairs, the Army and the Garda Síochána in order that intelligence information, which is normally extremely sensitive, can be collectively discussed.
Deputies Kenny and Sargent asked about BFNL. I have taken up that issue directly with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, on a number of occasions. I have written to him extensively on this issue taking into account the views of agencies here. The next round of the action on this matter will occur shortly. We continue to explore the legal issues so I do not wish to say anything further as it will be part of our case. We are continuing to highlight our case which the Attorney General will present shortly.
On the issue of biometrics, it is clear that the United States is continuing to use biometrics which is the new intelligence. It will increasingly be used as a security measure and will become a feature of life. The world congress of biometrics will be held here in the near future. I have been reading some of the newspapers and it is quite clear what has happened.
