Vol. 897 No. 3
70. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Defence if he has considered reviewing our existing policies on defence, with a view to taking a more active role in the promotion of peace and the protection of our neutrality, given the deteriorating situation in the Middle East and the total failure of the Western military intervention in the region; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41185/15]
The Minister told us he was not going to lecture foreign countries on how they should best protect their citizens. I was not expecting him to tell President Hollande that it is pretty irrational to be bombing the living daylights out of Raqqa, where there are 500,000 citizens, and that it would not do much to protect the citizens of France. Does he not think, given the failure of all these military interventions, that it is time we stopped being complicit by allowing Shannon Airport to be used as a US military air base? The Minister is allowing his Defence Forces to go down there and protect military planes on their way to war situations.
The straight answer is that I do not. I do not think we should be making decisions on the basis of what people think in other parts of the world about who is using our airports and who is not. We have had a policy for many decades of facilitating the US with the use of Shannon Airport under a fairly strict protocol, which is the responsibility of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. That is as it is. Ireland has an extraordinarily positive record in terms of its involvement abroad in conflict areas. Deputy Wallace seems to be suggesting that in every part of the world where there has been Western intervention, as he calls it, it has been a disaster. That is not always the case. Irish peacekeepers in southern Lebanon have played a significant role in rescuing many lives. On the Golan Heights the Irish Defence Forces are currently playing a real stabilising role, and the UN wants us to stay. Defence Forces personnel in Mali, under difficult circumstances and clearly in a dangerous part of the world, are helping to train national security services to protect their own citizens. There are many examples, particularly involving Irish troops, where intervention abroad is necessary and has a positive dividend for local populations.
Deputy Wallace's view of the world seems to be that the West should simply pull out of the Middle East, should have no involvement in places like north Africa and should simply allow dictators to run riot in regions.
I am not suggesting that intervention has always been successful. In many cases, intervention has caused severe problems and triggered lots of other problems. I am saying that Irish decisions, in relation to both where we send our troops and our relationship with other sovereign countries, are based on trying to support peace, stability and democracy and protecting human rights of vulnerable people in exposed circumstances, and I stand over that.
The Minister's argument is completely irrational. How can the Minister stand up there and make out that the military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Syria, have been successful?
I have not.
Shannon has been used to facilitate military intervention-----
I have not said that.
I did not interrupt the Minister.
I did not quote Deputy Wallace.
Shannon has been used as a US military air base to facilitate its military intervention in those countries, and it has destroyed them. Over 2 million citizens have been killed, and we are part of it.
The Government is content to let this go on. What has this got to do with keeping peace? The Minister states that we are good at peacekeeping. We are not keeping much peace by allowing Shannon to be used as a US military air base. We are facilitating the slaughter of innocent people.
In the past five years alone, arms exports have increased by 16%. Militarisation of the planet is destroying it. Military intervention has created numerous failed states in this region and there is a vacuum which is being filled by ISIS. The Government is still prepared to do business with Saudi Arabia, which is facilitating ISIS. The Government has no difficulty with that. It is crazy. How does the Minister stand over it?
With respect, Deputy Wallace is straying into sweeping statements on broad foreign policy.
They are not sweeping statements. I am simply being accurate.
They are sweeping statements.
My job as Minister for Defence is to ensure that when we make the decision to send Irish troops to different parts of the world, they are making a positive contribution towards stabilisation, peace support and peacekeeping, and that is exactly what they do. My job is to be prepared when An Garda Síochána asks for assistance in terms of aid to the civil power, whether it is in Shannon Airport or elsewhere. To date, the only threat to planes landing in Shannon Airport has been Irish people who were looking to create headlines in that regard.
We have a relationship with the United States, which is not one where we are allies but is certainly very friendly, and we facilitate the United States in Shannon Airport under fairly strict conditions. That is what it is, but the Deputy reads all sorts of extras into it that simply are not there.
We are facilitating them, but the price is unbelievably disappointing. Will the Minister not admit that what they are doing is destructive and that it has not helped peace? Did he read what the Pope said about it only last week, that the arms industry has just run out of control? The Pope stated what is happening is ludicrous but it is all in the interest of making money. We are facilitating it. When are we going to call a spade a spade and say that the Irish people do not like the idea of facilitating the US military machine, that 2.5 million US troops have gone through Shannon since 2001 and that we give permits for arms and munitions to go to these regions and to drop bombs on people's homes, killing some of them and creating refugees of what remains?
The Irish people do not want to be associated with the Minister's philosophy. It is about time the Government woke up to it. It is outrageous that we are continuing to support the US military position, for financial reasons and, perhaps, ideological reasons, but it is not what the Irish people want.
This is not about being for or against the so-called "US military machine". The US intervenes in different parts of the world for all sorts of different reasons.
One hundred and forty-five countries last year alone.
There is no simple philosophy behind it. In many ways, the US is damned if it does and damned if it does not. When there is a crisis, people call on the US to intervene.
We never called for them to intervene.
When they intervene and if, sometimes, they make mistakes, everybody blames everything on them. Not all the problems are the fault of the military machine, as the Deputy seems to make out.
I never said they were.
It is exactly what the Deputy says every time we have questions.
71. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Defence if he will report on his Department's engagement with Kildare County Council regarding the situation of overholders at the Curragh. [41176/15]
My question is posed against the background of the continuing national housing emergency and the crisis in social and general housing provision. I seek to establish what the Minister is doing about the small number of families on the Curragh Camp classified by the Department as overholders and the level of engagement he has had on the matter with Kildare County Council.
Under military regulations, married quarters have, in the past, been allocated to serving personnel upon request. Personnel who leave the Defence Forces or who vacate a married quarter property that had been assigned to them are required under regulations to return vacant possession of that property. Where the property is not vacated, those remaining in the property are overholding and, given that they have no right under military regulations to hold or reside in military accommodation, the Department will, in accordance with normal procedures, continue to seek to recover possession over time.
While each case of overholding is dealt with on an individual basis, it is important to remember that the Department does not have a role in the provision of housing accommodation for the general public. The Department does, however, assist in whatever way it can in order to resolve the cases of overholding without recourse to legal action, as it is preferable not to have to use legal means to obtain vacant possession of the properties concerned. The securing of alternative housing is a matter for the individuals concerned in the first instance. If individuals are not in a position to secure housing in their own right, they may qualify for social housing or some level of housing assistance and, when requested to do so, the Department provides whatever documentation it can to support such applications.
My Department will deal with any overholder in a vulnerable position in a sensitive manner. However, the ongoing illegal occupation of Departmental property by those who have no entitlement to do so cannot be supported and the Department cannot subsidise housing for people who have no entitlement and who may well have the means to supply housing for themselves. The Department initiated discussions with Kildare County Council to determine whether there was a possibility of a joint initiative to provide solutions to the overholding issues in the Curragh. The council indicated at the time that due to budgetary constraints its policy is to lease suitable properties in order to provide accommodation for those who meet the criteria for social housing assistance. My Department will continue to remain open to considering any initiatives that might be put forward by the local authority in this regard. While we want to be as helpful as possible, there is a legal issue that means the Department of Defence cannot be a housing authority.
While nobody expects the Department of Defence to be a housing body, Kildare County Council has 6,757 social housing applicants, of which 39 cases including12 families with 35 children are in emergency accommodation. Last year, the Minister was to be commended on the role he took on behalf of his Department in addressing the homelessness crisis in Dublin when he offered accommodation at St. Bricin's Military Hospital in the aftermath of the tragic death of Jonathan Corrie not for from this House. Does the Minister not see a fundamental inconsistency in that, at a time of housing crisis, his Department would pressure people out of existing accommodation, notwithstanding the fact that many of them should have long since left the accommodation? If they did not leave the accommodation during the good times, to try to push them out during a housing emergency is unreasonable.
This is exactly why we are talking to Kildare County Council about trying to ensure they can move from accommodation that is not theirs into some form of supported housing, if they are in a vulnerable position, or social housing.
We have to move gradually towards recouping a property that belongs to the Department of Defence and is not the property of an individual. Of course people may want to stay for as long as they can in accommodation to which they would previously have been entitled. As I have said, we will try to deal with every case individually, to be as fair as we can and to support people who are vulnerable. I have to signal that we have a legal obligation to deal with a property that in many cases is not the property of the tenant.
This is an age-old problem. When I was a member of the local authority many years ago, we operated a policy of allocating 10% of all social housing units built in the area surrounding the Curragh to people who were overholders at that stage. There continued to be a problem. I am asking the Minister explicitly to back off from pressurising people out of their homes for the duration of this housing emergency. Will the Department speak to Kildare County Council about the possibility of a lease arrangement in respect not only of those houses that are currently occupied, but also the many houses owned by the Department that are capable of being used to meet the emergency situation that exists in County Kildare? The Department of Defence quite rightly made a contribution to the homeless crisis in Dublin. I am asking it to make a contribution to the social housing crisis in County Kildare for the duration of that crisis only.
There are 26 overholders residing in or near the Curragh Camp. We are looking at them all individually. We will try to be as supportive as we can but we cannot put in place some kind of blanket arrangement that ignores the presence in these houses of people who should not be in them and allows them to stay in those houses indefinitely simply because there is a housing crisis in some parts of the country.
Why not?
The Department is not a housing body. Many people who are on housing lists at the moment would love to be living in this accommodation but are not.
I am asking for this to be done for the duration of the crisis.
There may well be some overholders who can afford to rent or potentially buy their own properties. Is the Deputy saying it is okay for them to stay for as long as they want? We will try to take a fair and compassionate approach to people who are in vulnerable positions. We have been doing that. We have been reaching out to Kildare County Council to work in partnership with us on that. The council has said it has a funding challenge in this regard. We are open to proposals. If the Deputy has a proposal as opposed to simply saying we should go away and not do anything, I would like to hear it.
I have given the Minister two proposals.
That will get the Deputy through the election.
72. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Defence if he is satisfied that due regard was given to the potential pitfalls of military Keynesianism for Irish defence policy and Irish neutrality in the discussions surrounding the drawing up of the White Paper on defence. [41207/15]
I have tabled this question on foot of the Minister's concerning comments about trying to plug the Defence Forces in with innovators and entrepreneurs. It seems that such people will be given access to the Defence Forces to help them to develop jobs and so forth. There are clear dangers in such a strategy, such as we might not be able to control the end product in military terms. I seek assurances about the level of debate that took place during the preparation of the White Paper. What safeguards does the Minister intend to put in place to ensure the plug-in he is encouraging does not involve us dealing with the likes of Israel and Saudi Arabia?
I am glad the Deputy has asked this question because it allows me to clarify the matter in the House. I think the Deputy sometimes likes to paint me as some kind of-----
Hawk.
-----militarised warmonger.
The Minister does it himself.
If the Deputy had been part of the conversations that took place during the preparation of the White Paper, she would know that nothing could be further from the truth. We are talking about spending significant sums of taxpayers' money on building a peace and leadership institute in the Curragh. We hope it will train people from universities all over the world in how to keep peace rather than how to make war. While our Defence Forces have a defence capacity, we are focusing our resources primarily on their interests abroad. This means protecting them, training them and ensuring they are effective in peacekeeping. That is why I am looking for a bigger budget. I am not doing so for any other reason.
In terms of the platform that is the Defence Forces infrastructure, we want to work with the private sector to develop technology that can help the Irish Defence Forces to do what they do more effectively.
That is not about testing weapons but is about things like testing kite technology on the decks of ships, which is happening at the moment. It is about putting better communications systems in place in order that we can have improved and secure communications and we can test them within the Defence Forces. It is about improving observation, improved safety training and all the other practical things we can test within the infrastructure that is a Defence Forces training camp, a Naval Service ship or an Air Corps airplane in order that we can improve the technology and link in with many of the technology innovators we have in Ireland.
I often use the example of Cork Harbour and the Irish marine and energy resource cluster. Some 48 companies now work in the Beaufort laboratory next door to the naval base and we have an opportunity to work with some of them in marine innovation and marine technology using Naval Service vessels. It is not about testing weapons or anything else on those lines, as some people like to paint it.
I did not say anything about testing weapons. I spoke about the Minister shacking up with regimes such as Saudi Arabia and Israel, which also pride themselves on their ability to develop security measures and high-tech IT solutions such as those the Minister has lauded in the House. Private firms, with which the Minister wants us to link up, are in the business of profit. They are not interested in world peace and are not interested in providing the best product. I specifically asked what measures the Minister has put in place, given the inability of the arms industry, including manufacturers, suppliers and security personnel around the world, to control where their products end up. For example, with what type of partners will the Minister go into consortia for the purposes of accessing funding under Horizon 2020? What assurances will the Minister give us that he will have nothing to do with companies based in Israel or Saudi Arabia? I ask because they are the ones which are profiting most and are looking for partners in that type of technology. I do no think that is compatible with our neutrality.
I will not start naming individual countries but the statements in the White Paper are about promoting innovation through the Defence Forces. Public private partnerships between the Defence Forces and private, predominantly Irish, companies are well under way and have been very successful. We are developing new designs, technologies and innovations that may well be very useful to the Irish Defence Forces or may have a very useful application in the civilian world and have nothing to do with defence or military capacity whatsoever. If 9,500 people are training and have a lot of equipment, it makes sense to match up that equipment with some of the need that is out there in the private sector to test, design and develop new technologies. We are doing this in a spirit of innovation, not in a spirit of war-making. The Deputy has probably read the White Paper. It is an assessment of risk and is consistent with Irish foreign policy in terms of neutrality. It is about promoting peace and stability worldwide and providing basic security response capacity in Ireland.
Despite the best intentions of the Minister, where the product ends up is outside his control unless he stipulates in advance that he will put in safeguards prohibiting co-operation with countries which have a proven pedigree in this regard. For example, Israel has supplied over 60% of the world's drones since 1985 and new types of technology such as the Sea Knight, an unmanned patrol ship which was used to fire upon Palestinian fishermen in and around Gaza earlier this year, were developed elsewhere but are being used for coercive activity. These could just as easily apply to some of the projects about which the Minister spoke.
Given that Saudi Arabia ranks fourth in the world in terms of military expenditure, spending more than $80 billion in 2014, and is branching out into the areas to which I referred, what assurances can the Minister give that Defence Forces personnel will not become involved in consortia making bids to access funding from Horizon 2020? The Minister implied that we would do so. He should provide an assurance that we will not do so as this is the minimum level of human rights compliance required.
I did not imply anything. I stated that this will be an open and transparent process, which will use basic infrastructure in the Defence Forces to be able to test, develop and design new products that can be useful to us. We have made clear that it will not involve facilitating the testing of weapons or munitions. That is not what this process is about. I encourage Deputies to read the White Paper as that is made clear in the document.
73. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Defence the strategic planning his Department has engaged in since the closure of Columb Barracks in Mullingar in County Westmeath; if he will ensure that its maximum potential is achieved; the other Government agencies or Departments, if local or national, that have been liaised with in regard to this; the amount or the proportion of Columb Barracks that is in use; the terms and conditions in place for such use; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41210/15]
Four years ago this month, the Minister and his Cabinet colleagues made the most regrettable decision to close Columb Barracks in Mullngar. What level of consultation has the Minister had with local and national organisations in that four-year period? Has he put in place a strategic plan to ensure full utilisation of what is a magnificent facility in Mullingar town?
Following the closure of Columb Barracks, my Department wrote to other Departments and public bodies inviting them to express an interest in the property, with a view to its disposal by the Department. No such interest was expressed at the time. My officials also met local representatives and officials from Westmeath County Council to discuss the future of the barracks.
As the Deputy is aware, my Department was approached by the Westmeath GAA County Board for the use of the barracks as a training centre. Parts of the barracks in Mullingar are currently used by the county board on a short-term lease and discussions are taking place to negotiate a long-term lease with the board. The former barracks is also currently used by An Garda Síochána and the Customs Service for training purposes and it is intended that these arrangements will remain in place. A number of other local groups, including the Irish United Nations Veterans Association, the Order of Malta and the Midlands Regional Youth Services have also been allocated units in the barracks. Leases with these and other local community groups are being progressed by the property management branch of my Department.
The Department of Justice and Equality, which is the lead Department for the refugee accommodation programme, is also working with my Department to establish whether any of the buildings falling within the remit of my Department are suitable for the purposes of temporary accommodation. As yet, no decision had been made on that matter. My Department has also received numerous requests from other community groups wishing to avail of accommodation within the barracks.
As the Deputy will appreciate, proposals involving the long-term retention of Mullingar Barracks by my Department, which includes administering multiple leases and fulfilling the many responsibilities of a landlord, will place a significant administrative and financial burden on my Department. Accordingly, I would be pleased to discuss with any interested group, including the local authority, proposals they may have for the possible purchase and future development of the site for the benefit of the local community.
The Minister has effectively conceded that, four years after the closure of Columb Barracks, he does not have a plan for the site. The current approach is unco-ordinated and disjointed and reflects a wait and see attitude. The Minister is correct that the barracks are being used by a number of community groups. Many of these groups do not know what the future holds for them. The GAA has sought a longer term lease for some time but the matter remains unresolved.
What is most amazing is that the Department has written to various State agencies asking if they have any interest in the barracks while, at the same time, paying €30,000 per annum for a private facility for the Reserve Defence Force. Would it not be feasible to use this €30,000 for the purposes of maintaining and managing the facility to ensure it is fully utilised?
My party made a proposal in our review of the White Paper on Defence to make Columb Barracks a national facility for the Reserve Defence Force. The proposal was supported by my constituency colleague and Government backbencher, Deputy Penrose. Has the Minister considered our proposal?
Four years after the Minister's party, with the support of the Labour Party, decided to close Columb Barracks, Mullingar, the Government does not have a plan to ensure full utilisation of a magnificent facility in Mullingar town. At the time of the closure, the Government promised the barracks would be fully utilised within a short time. This is another broken promise by the Government.
It is ridiculous to suggest that the Government can force an outcome on this issue. The Department will work with the local authority, community groups, clubs and other Departments to find a process that can deliver full utilisation of Columb Barracks in a manner that is in the interests of Mullingar town. This is precisely what we are trying to do. However, one cannot force such an outcome as other bodies must want to be part of the process.
The Reserve Defence Force could use it.
With respect, the whole point of the one force policy is that the Reserve Defence Force will train in barracks with the Permanent Defence Force.
The Department is paying €30,000 in annual rent for a premises in Mullingar for the Reserve Defence Force.
Please allow the Minister to continue without interruption.
We are moving to ensure that the Reserve and Permanent Defence Forces can operate and train together in a seamless way. The Department has considered the suggestion made by Deputy Penrose regarding the use of the barracks and does not believe it is consistent with the future needs of the Reserve Defence Force.
