Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire
Ceist:4. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence how he will ensure adequate funding for the Defence Forces in line with the report of the commission on the Defence Forces. [6102/25]
Ceisteanna ar Sonraíodh Uain Dóibh - Priority Questions
Defence Forces
We have heard a lot about defence spending in recent weeks but the truth on the ground is that the Defence Forces are in a precarious position because of Government underfunding. We currently have fewer than 8,000 members of the Permanent Defence Force. This is well below establishment, not to mind the 11,000 recommended under stage 2 in the report of the Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces. Morale is very low. Does the Tánaiste regret the neglect of the Defence Forces by the Government and how does he intend to ensure that we have Defence Forces that are fit for purpose?
I thank the Deputy for this important question. I want him, the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann and the people of Ireland to know that as Minister for Defence, I am deeply committed to the transformation of the Defence Forces into a modern, fit-for-purpose organisation to defend the State and meet the challenges of today and the future.
Across Europe, all countries including Ireland, are experiencing an increasingly contested, dynamic and volatile international security environment. There is a need for us to be seen to take our own security responsibilities seriously and we have seen significant increases in our defence spending in the past few years in response to that, which has allowed us to procure much-needed capabilities. The Government has set out a future pathway to continue these expenditure increases.
The Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces was established on foot of a commitment in the programme for Government of 2020. The commission's report, as the Deputy knows, was published on 9 February 2022. There were 69 main recommendations and, with sub-recommendations, there were 130 recommendations in total. The report recommended significant changes for the Defence Forces and for defence provision in Ireland. It covered high-level Defence Forces structures, defence capabilities, organisation, culture and human resources, the Reserve Defence Force and funding.
Given the significant recommendations contained in the report, detailed consideration of these recommendations was undertaken. A high-level action plan and a memorandum for Government were produced and approved on 12 July 2022. This involved the approval of a move to level of ambition 2, LOA2, by 2028, as set out in the capability framework devised by the commission. The move to LOA2 is due to be completed by 2028. This will result in the defence budget rising from €1.1 billion to €1.5 billion, in 2022 prices, by 2028, as part of the annual Estimates processes. We need to go beyond LOA2 and the programme for Government is clear on that. I have been clear since taking up this role that we need to get to LOA2.
In recent weeks, we have heard lots of big speeches, announcements, lofty promises and big commitments. I welcome that the Defence Forces are finally getting some attention. I live in a city that has a large number of Defence Forces personnel who work in Collins Barracks and Haulbowline. They tell me they have heard all of this before. They have heard big talk and small follow-through. The Tánaiste says it is important that we are seen to be increasing the capacity of the Defence Forces. It should not be about being seen to do anything. It is about making sure - in the interests of the men and women in the Defence Forces and the Irish people - that the Defence Forces are supported. It needs to be about action rather than being seen to do things. The reality is that big speeches will not put boots inside the barracks' doors. Only proper resourcing and resolving the terms and conditions and income of Defence Forces personnel will do that. The men and women of the Defence Forces deserve better than what they saw from the last Government.
Regarding the Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces, will the Tánaiste give a timeline? He spoke about needing to go beyond LOA2. Currently, we are substantially below level of ambition 1, LOA1. Will the Tánaiste give a timeline for the Defence Forces to reach establishment and to deliver 11,000 PDF members?
I have given a timeline for when we expect to reach LOA2, namely, by 2028. I will work constructively with the Deputy on this to see if there is potential to accelerate this process. That will be a matter for engagement with Government colleagues, the Taoiseach and the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform. We are taking action on this and any objective examination of Defence Forces spending would have to acknowledge that we have significantly increased Defence Forces spending over the last few years. We now have the highest ever budget for the Defence Forces. Is it enough? The answer is "No". The Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces shows us very clearly that we need on a trajectory to reach LOA2 and then, as the programme for Government says, to head on to LOA3. Since taking office, I have asked my officials to prepare a detailed breakdown of costings for how we can get from LOA2 to LOA3.
The Tánaiste spoke about an objective analysis. Any objective analysis would find that the previous Minister for Defence, who is now the Taoiseach and leader of Fianna Fáil, Deputy Micheál Martin, kept giving unspent money in defence back to the Exchequer. It was €30 million last year and €70 million in 2023 and 2022. Any objective analysis would find that more than 900 people recruited to the Defence Forces since 2020 left within five years. We have had the embarrassing situation where ships have been put to sea with no functioning main gun because of a lack of specialist staff. The objective analysis is that our Defence Forces are at rock bottom in terms of morale and seriously struggling in terms of recruitment and retention.
The Tánaiste gave me an answer to a related question but not quite the one I asked. Talking about progressing from LOA2 to LOA3 is a bit off when we are not at LOA1. When will the Defence Forces reach establishment in terms of personnel?
We will map that out in terms of the progress we need to make between now and 2028. The figures show that last year was the first year in a long time that we saw stabilisation and very small growth, which I do not overrate, in the number of men and women in our Defence Forces. We expect to see this trend continue. Let us look at this in the round. The budget increased each year from 2020 to 2025. A number of capital projects have been delivered. Two new Airbus C295 maritime patrol aircraft were delivered in 2023, with another C295 transport variant due for delivery this year. Also in 2023, two inshore patrol vessels were bought from the New Zealand Navy. The Defence Forces transport fleet was also renewed and there was an investment in Defence Forces protection measures and the upgrade of the Defence Forces communications infrastructure. All of the representative bodies I have met acknowledge these measures.
Air Corps
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire
Ceist:6. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence to discuss health and safety measures in the Air Corps; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6440/25]
The Tánaiste will be aware of a recent settlement for Mr. Gary Coll of €2 million, without liability, after he lodged proceedings regarding exposure to dangerous chemicals while working in the Air Corps. I do not wish to discuss any case before the courts. Many people who are affected do not want to have to go to court. However, as a matter of policy, the Department of Defence has a responsibility to ensure that issues regarding former Defence Forces personnel are addressed, particularly if their health has been compromised. The Tánaiste will be aware of the organisation, Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors, ACCAS, as I sent him the group's demands last night. Will he introduce measures to ensure the mental care of those affected?
There is often time for argy-bargy in the House but I want to acknowledge the constructive way the Deputy has engaged with me and my office in passing on the views and concerns of ACCAS. I will endeavour to also engage on this constructively in return. The health and well-being of the men and women working in the Air Corps and the wider Defence Forces is of the utmost priority for me, both as Tánaiste and Minister for Defence. I take my responsibility to those who commit to military service to the State very seriously indeed and I know the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces and the Secretary General of my Department are with me on this position.
As Deputy Ó Laoghaire is no doubt aware, a number of cases are before the courts alleging historical exposure to toxic chemicals in the Air Corps. As Members of this House, we must respect, and we are respecting, the separation of powers and the constitutional independence of the courts. I know we are not engaging in commentary or debate that may encroach on this independence or, indeed, prejudice a fair hearing.
As Deputy Ó Laoghaire is aware, the HSA has overall responsibility for the administration and enforcement of health and safety at work in Ireland. It monitors compliance with legislation at the workplace and can take enforcement action up to and including prosecutions. The HSA carried out inspections of the Air Corps in 2016, and in October of that year issued a detailed letter to the Air Corps setting out a list of safety measures which required attention to improve the standards in place. The Air Corps engaged with the HSA and set out in detail the response being implemented. Upon completion of the improvement plan the HSA closed its investigation.
Arising from matters contained in the report of the independent review group, the HSA completed inspections of a number of Defence Force installations at the end of 2023 and the beginning of 2024. This included an inspection of Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnell. The Defence Forces prepared an action plan to address the issues outlined in the report. The HSA subsequently conducted follow-up inspections and noted ongoing improvements. The Defence Forces are committed to complying with health and safety legislation and ensuring that the best standards are adhered to. The Deputy will appreciate that as litigation is ongoing, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further. It is important for me to say that separate and distinct from the ongoing litigation, the Defence Forces tribunal of inquiry will investigate the response to complaints made.
It is for this reason that I communicated with the Tánaiste last night. It is important that ongoing monitoring is happening but my primary concern relates to the issues that have arisen over the past 20 or 30 years. For many years personnel in the Air Corps, particularly those in the repair shop, were exposed to very dangerous chemicals. Despite this, there were no meaningful precautions in terms of health and safety until very recent years. In the meantime, hundreds of personnel were exposed. According to ACCAS it has identified 97 untimely deaths since 2000 of Air Corps personnel that may potentially be connected. I am not sure whether the Tánaiste saw the "Prime Time" segment on this, in which Paul Flynn was interviewed from his hospital bed. Some of the people affected by this are very ill. Others have passed away. This is a matter of the gravest seriousness. We know this issue is not unique to Ireland. In Australia there was SHOAMP, which was the study of health outcomes in aircraft maintenance personnel. Will the Tánaiste put in place a similar model to assess the health of the former personnel?
I want to reflect on what Deputy Ó Laoghaire has said to me today, and what he conveyed to me by email on behalf of ACCAS last night. I say this without prejudice or conflation with any other ongoing issues, be they issues before the courts or issues that will rightly be examined by the tribunal in terms of how complaints are handled. The point Deputy Ó Laoghaire is making is that regardless of both of these facts, which are important issues, there are people in Ireland clearly presenting with health needs. Deputy Ó Laoghaire is asking me whether more can be done in the here and now to try to recognise this and respond to those health needs and health concerns. On foot of his constructive engagement with me, and the correspondence he has sent to me, I have asked the officials to give consideration to these matters and advise me on it. I am happy to revert to Deputy Ó Laoghaire in due course.
I appreciate the fact the Tánaiste will reflect on it. He mentioned the tribunal. I would make the point, and the Tánaiste's comments reflect that he may be aware of this, the tribunal only deals with the handling of complaints rather than the substance of complaints.
Yes.
Therefore, that will not be anywhere near adequate. What ACCAS has demanded is to ensure medical care is provided as well as an assessment to identify what were the implications for health outcomes. There is also a need for a statutory investigation of some form, given the role of the State Claims Agency in failing to alert the HSA of ongoing failings when known. It should go without saying these are personnel who were part of the Defence Forces. They gave their careers and long parts of their lives to serve the State. If their health is now profoundly compromised the State has a responsibility to them. The Tánaiste says he will go away and consider it, and I appreciate this. Will he also meet those affected, ACCAS and any other organisation?
I will take advice on this. Generally I like to engage in politics and in public life. I will take advice on this because I am conscious of being a defendant in legal proceedings. I will check this, and if it is possible to find a mechanism or a way to do this I am certainly open to it. I am very conscious of the sensitivities around this and the realities for people's health and lives regardless of where blame or liability lies. That is for others to determine. I am conscious of the real living impact that people who are speaking about their cases have very clearly told us and showed us. There have been occasions in this country when, separate and distinct to issues of courts and liability and without prejudice to any of them, addressing the health needs of an individual group is something that can be given consideration. I am trying to look at this constructively, having only taken up this post a few weeks ago. Deputy Ó Laoghaire has engaged constructively with me on this and I thank him for it. I am happy to come back to him on this directly.
Defence Forces
Sinéad Gibney
Ceist:7. Deputy Sinéad Gibney asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he will outline the proposal to remove the triple lock protection for approving overseas deployment of Irish troops; the protections to be put in place to ensure the integrity of Irish peacekeeping operations is maintained in the absence of UN approval; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6399/25]
Irish neutrality is held dear by the people of Ireland. I am sure that, like mine, the Tánaiste's inbox is reflective of concerns about it. As we know, a proposal has gone to Cabinet to remove the triple lock. This is connected to neutrality. Will the Tánaiste please outline the proposal to remove the triple lock protection for approving overseas deployment of Irish troops? How does he propose to protect the integrity of Irish peacekeeping troops' operations maintained in the absence of UN approval?
I thank Deputy Gibney for this important and timely question. I have absolutely no doubt that as this issue goes through the Houses and draft legislation gets published there will quite rightly be a lot of debate and scrutiny. There should be time and space to get it right. I hope Deputy Gibney accepts my bona fides, because it is my genuine view, that I value Irish military neutrality. There is no proposal, or attempt by me to bring forward proposals, that in any way alter the neutral status of our State. We will have different views on the triple lock but I want to say this at the outset.
This is not a hidden reality as the programme for Government sets out in black and white that the Government intends to reform the triple lock legislation. This was also set out by the previous Government and by my predecessor. We also want to ensure that any amendment to legislation is in keeping with our values and our policy of military neutrality. I agree with Deputy Gibney that the people of the country feel very deeply about the importance of Irish military neutrality.
It is worth stating on the record what the triple lock means. The triple lock is a mechanism that sets out the conditions under which Irish troops may participate in overseas peace support operations. For troops to take part, the operation must be mandated by the United Nations, it must be approved by the Government, and it must be approved by Dáil Éireann by means of a resolution.
I believe a new process is clearly needed to replace the current system underpinning the deployment of Irish troops abroad, which effectively allows UN Security Council members to bind Ireland’s hands in its international engagement by a veto or, often, the threat of the use of a veto. The previous Government had approved the drafting of a general scheme of a Bill to amend the legislation on how Ireland deploys its troops overseas, in terms of overseas peacekeeping and in terms of deployment of Defence Force personnel overseas for purposes other than peacekeeping, such as for evacuation operations of Irish citizens abroad, something which, sadly, has become more frequent in the geopolitical world in which we live. Draft heads of legislation have been prepared. They have not yet been brought to the Government but I intend to do so in the month of March, at which stage they will be able to go through pre-legislative scrutiny.
It is great to hear the Tánaiste assert that he values neutrality. I appreciate it has not been a hidden reality. There is no hiding the fact the Government has put this on the table for quite a while. It is also a reality that both Government parties have moved their position from recognising the integral part played by the triple lock in Irish neutrality to now being on record as saying this is not the case and, similarly, walking away and retreating from what we have seen in a commitment to the multilateralism the UN mechanism offers towards one which now suggests it is not necessary. What will fill the void if the UN Security Council is so problematic? I believe it should be fixed from within the UN. If the Tánaiste is suggesting the UN is not required as part of the triple lock, what will be the third component in addition to the Government and this Chamber?
I would like to see the Security Council reformed. I have said this at the Security Council, at the Munich security conference at the G20 last week. The Security Council urgently needs to be reformed but I cannot imagine Putin or others being open to this. We have to deal with the reality of a Security Council that in my view does not function the way it should and is badly in need of reform. I do not want anybody other than the directly elected people's representatives to have a veto on where our peacekeeping troops go. How we do this, how we get the legislation right and what a new mechanism to safeguard our neutrality would look like are things on which I am eager to engage constructively with Members of the House. My starting point in the debate is that the UN Security Council permanent members should not have a veto on where I as Minister for Defence and the democratically elected Government of Ireland wish to send our peacekeeping troops. There have been examples in the past, and I can go through them in the reply to the supplementary question, when this has impacted and impeded our ability. People in Ireland understand this.
They want Irish Government officials, not Vladimir Putin, deciding where our peacekeepers go.
The vetoes and examples that have been used are completely exaggerated. Even in the hypothetical conversations we have been having in the last couple of weeks about peacekeepers potentially travelling to Ukraine in the scenario that peace is agreed there, I will always acknowledge that of course we would do so when that is agreed by both Ukraine and Russia. That points to the multilateralism that the UN holds. I will ask the question again. What efforts are being made to fix this from within the UN? I appreciate the Tánaiste is saying he does not think Russia would do so, but what efforts have been made? Have discussions and debates even been attempted by diplomats to try to find ways to maintain the multilateralism that is offered by the UN in our triple lock without having to walk away from the UN and try to find another replacement?
Yes, there have been. Consistently, for years, there have been efforts by Irish diplomats and our permanent representative in the UN. Every Irish Government for many years has put forward the idea that the UN Security Council needs to be reformed. As recently as last week, I was articulating this in international fora.
We should be clear on this. The proposals to amend the triple lock came about long before there was any talk of peacekeepers in Ukraine or anywhere else. As the Deputy said, this has been worked on for quite a period of time, so it is not a Ukraine-specific legislative proposal. I want to be clear on that. Let us take the hypothetical case of Ukraine, however. We all want to see peace in Ukraine but, of course, we want to see peace that is fair, in line with the UN Charter, respects Ukraine's territorial integrity and is not a carve-up of a country. Ukraine is not in anyone's gift. If there is peace, however, and if there is a process and an invitation for peacekeepers, I am not satisfied that we have to sit idly by and wait for Vladmir Putin to say whether Irish men and women from Óglaigh na hÉireann can play a role in the peacekeeping. That is the decision of this Government, not of any despots.
We now go back to Deputy Wall, in substitution for Deputy Duncan Smith, to introduce Question No. 5.
Defence Forces
Duncan Smith
Ceist:5. Deputy Duncan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence for an update on a proposed fire station closure at the Curragh Camp; to provide an update on the provision of living quarters for enlisted members in the Curragh Camp; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6504/25]
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and apologise. I ask the Tánaiste for an update on the proposed closure of the fire station at the Curragh Camp and also provide an update on the provision of living quarters for enlisted members in the Curragh.
I thank Deputy Wall very much for raising this issue and the issue of the Curragh Camp, which he knows well. I, too, appreciate the historical importance of the Curragh Camp to many members of the Defence Forces and their families. I am sympathetic to the sense of attachment many serving and former members of the Defences Forces have to the camp. It is no longer a location where significant numbers of people live, particularly families and dependants.
Regarding the proposals by the military authorities to close the Defence Forces Training Centre, DFTC, fire station, the military authorities have been engaged with officials from my Department on this matter since 2023. In December 2024, my Department was informed by the Chief of Staff that a military operational decision had been taken by the military authorities to proceed with the closure of the fire station. In advance of the execution and promulgation of this decision, the then Tánaiste directed the Chief of Staff to advise both the chief executive of Kildare County Council and all residents and occupiers of the premises in the DFTC of the decision. Confirmation that this has been actioned is awaited from military management. I will come back to Deputy Wall directly when I have that. I must emphasise, however, that this is an operational decision taken by the military authorities rather than a decision taken by the Department of Defence or the Government of Ireland.
With regard to the provision of living quarters for enlisted members in the Curragh Camp, I thank Deputy Wall for giving me the opportunity to outline the recent and planned future improvements in this area. At the end of 2024, more than €232 million worth of capital projects were at various stages of development, with another record allocation this year of €50 million to improve the built infrastructure. Deputy Wall may wish to note that two of the accommodation projects commencing this year relate to the DFTC, namely, a new student accommodation facility and the refurbishment of Ceannt Block 1. A consultant was commissioned by the Defence Forces to assess the condition of the vacant housing in barracks and its suitability for conversion or refurbishment to provide for additional single living-in accommodation for Defence Force personnel. This has recently been furnished to my Department. It is currently being reviewed by officials. Once my officials and the Defence Forces have considered the contents, they will submit recommendations to me on the remediation programme to be undertaken.
The Curragh Camp is the jewel in the crown of the Defence Forces, as I and many Members of this House and the Upper House have said many times. The first thing anyone who drives through the Curragh Camp will notice is dereliction and the closed premises on the main street. The news that the fire station is to close has been greeted with disbelief by people who live in the Curragh because it seems to sound the death knell for the Curragh Camp. I ask the Tánaiste to outline his plans, as the incoming Minister for Defence, to ensure the Curragh Camp survives and becomes the jewel in the crown of the Defence Forces again.
With regard to married quarters and encouraging members of the Defence Forces to continue in the Defence Forces, I am currently dealing with three families who cannot find accommodation in County Kildare. They are members of the Defence Forces, but they are finding it difficult. The issue facing them is whether to continue in the Defence Forces, yet I know of 83 derelict houses in the Curragh Camp.
I thank Deputy Wall for raising this matter. I share his view that the Curragh is the jewel in the crown. There is a particular affinity and connection felt by many serving and former members of the Defence Forces and their families. I hope to visit the Curragh in the coming days. I would be delighted if Deputy Wall could join me when I do that. We can engage with people on the ground. I will endeavour to get there this month.
On the fire station decision, I will come back to the Deputy once the loop has been closed by the military authorities in terms of them having undertaken what they said they would do with regard to Kildare County Council and the like. I am excited, though, about the prospect of looking at the issue of vacant housing in the barracks and how we can convert and refurbish some of it and provide for additional accommodation for Defence Forces personnel. I look forward to getting those recommendations. I take the point, from a retention and recruitment point of view, that there is a clear link with the provision of accommodation. We will keep working on that.
I welcome that the Tánaiste will visit the Curragh Camp. That is very important. I will take him up on his request that I accompany him on that visit because it will be important that we meet local representatives who are getting this on the ground from those who live in the Curragh and who have previously, as the Tánaiste said, served on the Curragh. The State needs to use the Curragh Camp and the Curragh itself more. I ask the Tánaiste to look at other Government agencies. The Curragh Camp is right next to the M7 motorway and is a great facility. We should be expanding it at this stage, not looking at stages where we need investment in the Curragh Camp. I have spoken to a number of other local agencies throughout Kildare that would love to be able to use the Curragh Camp. We need to discuss trying to expand the military facilities on the Curragh and including other agencies that are crying out for space in County Kildare. I look forward to a meeting on the Curragh and to further discussing its future with the Tánaiste.
I very much look forward to it too. Deputy Wall is right because not only is the Curragh, to use his phrase, the jewel in the crown from a Defence Forces point of view and a valuable resource for the Defence Forces, but more broadly it is also an incredible resource for the people of Kildare and Ireland. If we look at some of what we have managed to achieve together as a country in recent years in terms of the expansion of public spaces and so forth, there is so much more that could be done with the Curragh. I know Deputy Wall and other representatives from Kildare have been involved in engagement around a plan for the Curragh. I look forward to visiting the Curragh and engaging with the Deputy and others on it very shortly.
Defence Forces
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire
Ceist:8. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence to discuss the need to ensure increased recruitment to the Reserve Defence Force; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6439/25]
The Tánaiste and I had an engagement a while ago that was primarily about the Permanent Defence Force. I want to bring to the Tánaiste's attention the issue of the Reserve Defence Force, RDF. It is a seriously depleted organisation that has much greater potential. It has a huge ability to support the Permanent Defence Force in its own right. As of 15 October, the current strength of the RDF is 1,720. We are a long way from the target of 4,500 that has been set for 2028. How are we going to achieve that target?
I thank Deputy Ó Laoghaire for raising this issue. As he rightly said, there is huge potential in further expanding the Reserve Defence Force and the already incredible work done by its members. I remain committed to bolstering the numbers in the Reserve Defence Force. I am very much aware that the ability to increase its strength is fundamental to the regeneration of the force. The strength of the RDF is a key focus of the Defence Forces office of Reserve affairs. It was a welcome development to have that dedicated office established. It was a recommendation from the Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces. A priority for this office was the development of the Reserve Defence Force regeneration and development plan. This was published only last July. The implementation of this plan sets out 27 actions specifically to revitalise our Reserve Defence Force.
One of the four operational objectives of this plan is maintaining a robust and dynamic induction process with the aim of achieving an effective strength of 80% by 2028. To that end, the Defence Forces have prioritised recruitment into the Reserve Defence Force. I am pleased to say we have seen very positive gains in this respect, albeit from a low base, with 268 members being inducted in 2024. That is an increase of in excess of 300% over 2023, when 65 new members were inducted.
A range of recruitment measures continue to support this objective, including the increase in upper recruitment and mandatory retirement ages for the Reserve Defence Forces to match comparable increases for the Permanent Defence Force.
A further measure is the implementation of a managed induction process whereby a recruitment liaison officer maintains contact with applicants throughout the induction process in order to facilitate an expeditious recruitment process and make sure we do not lose people who put their hands up and say they are interested. There is also an on-boarding process which enables candidates to undergo pre-attestation recruit training. In addition, the office of Reserve affairs has created a Reserve strategic engagement team comprising reservists with relevant marketing, advertising and media production skills. This has led to a number of initiatives to promote recruitment.
There is a sense of a lack of ambition with respect to redeveloping the Reserve Defence Force. Typically, reserve defence forces are a critical element of recruitment to permanent defence forces. We are at critically low levels. Indeed, the Commission on the Future of the Defence Forces reflected the fact that the Reserve Defence Force is important in terms of surge capacity as required. That is not remotely possible at present. There is hardly another reserve defence force in Europe whose membership is a fraction of that of the permanent army. In many cases it is multiples of it. In the past, in virtually every significant town there would have been an FCA hall and an FCA presence with personnel from across the community. We do not really see that any more. Many people have very little contact with or awareness of the Reserve Defence Force. In large parts of the country, it is effectively non-existent. Surely we have to recognise that the Reserve is the best way to attract new recruits. I welcome the actions the Tánaiste outlined.
I thank the Deputy. I agree with some of what he said. It certainly would be factual to say that the Reserve Defence Force went through a rocky period in terms of recruitment and retention. This was through no fault of its own. We have been working in line with the commission on the Defence Forces to get that to a much better place. I acknowledge the Deputy's welcoming some of the progress that has been made. It is factually true that I believe we are now in a place where the Reserve Defence Force is growing in terms of its numbers and will continue to grow. What I am saying is that we expect to get to at least 80% of where we want to be by 2028. That will bring us to a figure of well over 3,000. We are only going to get there if we continue to take action. The office of the Reserve Defence Force and what it termed the regeneration plan represent the way forward. The plan contains specific actions on recruiting and retaining personnel, resourcing the Reserve, training and educating reservists and integrating and deploying the Reserve as well. I met their association recently. If we continue in this way, we can make a lot of progress.
My next question was going to be whether the Tánaiste planned to meet with them. I am glad that he has met them. I hope he took on board some of their suggestions and requests. From what he is saying, it seems that the target is effectively no longer 4,500 for 2028, but 3,000. That would be a fair step back. It was only on 15 October last that the current Taoiseach committed to the target of 4,500. That is a reduction in terms of the ambition. In any event, I appreciate the realisation that it is not a sustainable situation. There are probably parts of the country that require very particular focus because it is stronger in some areas than others. Also, there is more of a tradition of it in some places. I hope the Tánaiste can tell me what suggestions from the representative organisation he might take on board.
To be clear, the target in terms of what the effective strength of our Reserve Defence Force should be remains the same. We do not disagree on that figure in terms of where we need to get to. When the regeneration and development plan was published in July 2024, one of the four operational objectives was to get us to that effective strength of at least 80% by 2028. If we were to map out exactly what 80% is, it is around 3,500. That is the sort of ball park we are in. I am not saying that is where we stop, but that is where we have line of sight in terms of where I believe we can get to. The effective strength in terms of ambition remains the same.
I did have the pleasure of meeting the Reserve Defence Force Representative Association. It was a very good meeting. I do not want to speak for them, but they noted the progress in the office being established and now the regeneration plan. Like all representative bodies, quite rightly, they will want to hold my feet to the fire in terms of making sure we are implementing and driving forward those recommendations, and I am determined to do that. I also want a Reserve that can seamlessly train, operate and deploy on a voluntary basis with our Permanent Defence Force both on the island and overseas.
Military Neutrality
Paul Murphy
Ceist:9. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he will provide details of the proposed changes to the triple lock; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6071/25]
Barry Heneghan
Ceist:15. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he is considering any changes to the triple-lock mechanism, which currently requires UN Security Council approval alongside Government and Dáil approval, for the deployment of Irish Defence Forces overseas; whether any proposed changes are solely intended to ensure that future peacekeeping missions are not unduly hindered by geopolitical deadlock at the UN; whether potential reforms to the triple lock are being considered to enhance operational flexibility while maintaining Ireland’s neutrality and adherence to international law; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6035/25]
Catherine Connolly
Ceist:44. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence the status of the proposed changes to the triple lock; if it is intended to remove the neutrality protection of the triple lock; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6076/25]
Mark Ward
Ceist:45. Deputy Mark Ward asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence regarding the new proposed legislation to scrap the triple lock system, if this will undermine Ireland's military neutrality; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6121/25]
The Government is waging a very thinly veiled stealth war against Irish neutrality. The move to remove the triple lock is part of that very conscious and deliberate campaign by this Government to undermine our traditional neutrality. Can the Tánaiste please explain why the Government is getting rid of the triple lock? Is it not clearly just a move to undermine Ireland's traditional neutrality and involve us in the wars of big powers?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9, 15, 44 and 45 together.
I reject the Deputy's assertion. That will not come as any surprise to him. As set out in the programme for Government, this Government intends to reform the legislation relating to the triple lock also ensuring that amendments to it are in keeping with our values and our policy of military neutrality. I might be shouting into a black hole in relation to this, but I really do hope we can actually have a debate which can respect that we all want to maintain military neutrality. I do, the Government does and the Deputy opposite does. I hope we can have a discussion about the detail of the legislation around the triple lock. Simply conflating the two does a disservice to the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann. It does a disservice to our defence and security obligations as a country and to peacekeeping and the role our peacekeepers can play abroad. We can be militarily neutral and also say that we do not believe the UN Security Council should have a veto on where our peacekeepers go. Those two things are absolutely consistent with each other. The Deputy may have a different view, but that is my absolute view.
As I said to Deputy Gibney earlier, I want to engage constructively on this. I want to get the legislation right. I do not believe the current legislation in relation to the triple lock is fit for purpose. I have said very clearly that in amendments I bring forward, we will want to keep with our values and our policy of military neutrality. Please do not tell the people of Ireland that I am wishing to get rid of military neutrality. That is not my position. Do not misrepresent me, my party or the Government of Ireland.
The triple lock sets out a number of mechanisms in relation to how Irish troops may participate in overseas peace support operations. I believe a new process is needed to replace the current system, which underpins the deployment of Irish troops abroad and which does effectively allow the UN Security Council to bind Ireland's hands in its international engagement by veto or by a threat of veto. The previous Government had approved the drafting of the general scheme of a Bill to amend the legislation on how we deploy our troops overseas, in terms of overseas peacekeeping but also for other purposes, including evacuation operations of Irish citizens abroad. Many times in this House, Deputies have rightly highlighted important issues about how we get our people, our citizens - not troops - back from overseas in times of great danger and in a volatile geopolitical situation. The next step is to present draft heads of legislation to Cabinet and to publish them. Then, if and when we can get the Oireachtas committees set up quickly, let us go to an Oireachtas committee and scrutinise this and get it right.
I do not trust Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael with Irish neutrality. For example, the Department of Defence has just contracted a US defence agency based in the pentagon to redesign the Irish Defence Forces. In the blurb on its website, this US pentagon-based company says it is grounded in American values. Maybe they are the values of Donald Trump as he has shown in a video the Tánaiste may have seen about Gaza, with statues of Trump and dollar signs being made by Trump in Gaza. Should we trust Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, given that millions of US troops were allowed go through Shannon Airport, in a neutral country, to prosecute wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? The Government has involved us in PESCO and the EU militarisation project, which is in turn aligned with NATO, dominated by the United States, Germany and Britain. Why would we trust you with neutrality?
The Tánaiste talks about respect and trust. That is exactly what the people of Ireland do not have for on in him. There has been a carefully choreographed campaign to get rid of our neutrality. The current Taoiseach, back in 2013, clearly spelled out what Fine Gael was up to. At that point, we were told the triple lock was an integral part of our neutrality and so on. You have turned language on its head. If you want respect and trust, then you should have done what you promised in respect of neutrality and let it go to a citizens' assembly. That did not happen. What we got was Dame Richardson in charge of a carefully choreographed, so-called consultative forum, and even then the people of Ireland made their views known and the vast majority said we hold neutrality dear.
Now you have come back with this. It is one of the clearest objectives in the programme for Government. As opposed to the other wishy-washy language, you will change the triple lock and you are changing the triple lock against the wishes of the people of Ireland.
It feels as if there is constantly something unsaid in this debate. The Government is in favour of removing the need for a UN mandate for peacekeeping missions. We have had referendums in the past and a lot of weight was put on the fact that the triple lock existed - that this was a defence of our neutrality. Whatever about your bona fides, the effect of this is to undermine Irish neutrality. The issue that is left unsaid is: what missions does the Government believe need to take place outside of a UN mandate? For all the faults of the UN, this is how it operates. We would certainly like to see it reformed. I take the point that reform is unlikely to happen. However, notwithstanding that, the UN is the organisation that is tasked with providing peacekeepers, generally speaking. What missions does the Minister anticipate Irish troops could potentially go on outside of a UN mandate?
A very worrying thing is beginning to happen in this House where there is a basic lack of respect for the mandate of people who sit on this side of the House. Deputy Connolly has come in here and said that I do not have the trust and respect of the Irish people. I got elected to Dáil Éireann on the same day as she did, as did my colleagues. Together we formed a majority of the people's representatives. We put in our manifesto that if we were elected to government, we would reform the triple lock. We told the Irish people before the election. We do not need any caustic remarks that if people in this House do not like the way we vote somehow or other we have lost the trust and respect. I would not accuse Deputy Connolly of losing trust and respect. I have the trust and respect of my constituents which was just renewed a couple of months ago and we have formed a Government. This is democracy in action. It is not just democracy if you like the outcome. We do not need a citizens' assembly. We have one; here it is. This is the citizens' assembly, the National Parliament where the men and women elected by citizens of this country get sent to debate and discuss issues. If we can do it in a respectful manner, I think we will be very productive.
Deputy Ó Laoghaire asked a valid question. It is not the UN; it is the UN Security Council veto. It is the Vladimir Putin veto that actually has a real ability. Vladimir Putin has no right to say where the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann can go on peacekeeping missions. I will not comment on his election, but he certainly was not elected to this Dáil. There have been a number of times - for example in 1999 where a permanent member of UN Security Council vetoed the renewal of the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force as a subsequent EU peace operation to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia did not have a Security Council mandate. Ireland wanted to participate but we were unable to participate in that. More recently in 2015 the EU established a security mission in the Mediterranean known as Operation Sophia. The mission did not have a UN mandate until 2016 and as a result Ireland's participation was delayed by over a year. The same concerns as regards Operation Althea have since arisen where a potential UN Security Council member veto would have resulted in Ireland having to withdraw from the mission.
Finally in 2017 the Maritime Analysis and Operations Centre (Narcotics), which is an international maritime intelligence centre supported by the EU, requested a Naval Service ship to assist with maritime drug interdiction operations. Although Ireland is an extraordinarily strong supporter of that centre and indeed was one of the founding members of the centre, a ship could not be sent there because there was not a UN Security Council mandate. There are real challenges here and we should work through them in a sensible and respectful manner.
The point of the UN part of the triple lock is that we do not deploy troops in conflicts between the big imperial powers. The Minister is right: Putin is a nasty imperialist aggressor. However, is it not interesting that he does not call Trump a nasty imperialist aggressor when he has just said to the Ukrainians, "We might consider giving you a few weapons, but only if you give us all those raw materials in your country", or while he is trying to do a real estate deal on top of the broken bones and bodies of the victims of genocide in Gaza. The Minister does not mention him as an imperialist or the new German Chancellor who has invited Netanyahu, a wanted war criminal, to Germany which is also involved in NATO. He does not mention them and that is the truth of it. The Minister wants to get rid of the triple lock so we can deploy Irish troops to get involved in conflicts headed up by military alliances dominated by the United States, Britain and Germany - people who are every bit potentially, and often in reality, as nasty as the Russians.
Micheál Martin, the current Taoiseach has repeatedly said that the triple lock is at the core of our neutrality. As a neutral independent sovereign State, we should use our voice to champion the UN structures, to reform the UN structures and to get away from the language of rule-based order and talk about international law which has been hard won following two world wars. Then we come to Putin. On this side of the House, we are all on record as condemning the illegal invasion.
I do not hear the condemning of America for its encroachment - to put it mildly - it is taking over and destabilising of a number of countries in South America. I do not hear the Government condemn the new US President at the moment because it suits its purposes. Our credibility is at stake in relation to being neutral. We need our credibility. We need people to be able to trust us so that we speak truth to power regardless of whether it is in America or in-----
I call Deputy Ó Laoghaire.
Regarding our assessment as to why Ireland should be a neutral State, some people have talked about moral superiority. That is not it in my view. In my view it is a clear-sighted assessment of the role we can play where we can be of most benefit but also do what is in our interests. I believe that neutrality serves us well and has popular support. The Minister has said he is in favour of neutrality. The massive concern is that without the triple lock, effectively a vote of this Dáil ultimately is the only thing that will decide whether troops will be deployed. What we are talking about here is Irish troops operating outside of a UN mandate. For all the flaws of the UN, it is recognised and there is a certain respect for the blue helmets and all that goes with it and Irish troops have served with distinction under it. With Irish troops being deployed outside that mandate, what if something were to go wrong? That is the concern. What if Irish troops were to become embroiled in something controversial or difficult or that might in any way undermine or damage our status as a neutral state?
I agree with Deputy Connolly. We should and do continue to champion the UN and champion reform of the UN. I fully agree with that. I am a huge believer in international law and the workings of the United Nations. At a time when that is under threat from others who are looking inwards and do not believe in multilateralism, we should be even louder in our promotion. I do not disagree on that. However, I also recognise the reality, as I am sure she does that UN Security Council reform is not exactly forthcoming from some of the permanent members of the UN Security Council.
In response to Deputy Boyd Barrett, I have been very clear and have given specific examples on the record in his House as to where I would have liked to see Irish troops being able to assist in various missions that are in line with military neutrality but they could not because of the current reality. I put them on the record of the House. He can go back and scrutinise them and check them out. Those are the examples. I have a longer list I can provide to him as well.
I have also been very clear on our position on Ukraine. We will have a debate on Ukraine immediately after these parliamentary questions. Everybody from President Zelenskyy down knows the support and solidarity that the Irish Government and the people of Ireland have provided to Ukraine. Others can have their position on Ukraine. Ireland and the European Union have our position. I spent Sunday and Monday with European foreign ministers, working extraordinarily hard to make sure we backed in a unified way the UN resolution on Ukraine and we did. We deviated from the US and we proudly deviated in standing up for our values and not amendments or resolutions that did not recognise Russia as the aggressor and the importance of the UN Charter.
We would be having a really interesting debate in this House if there was a conversation about what should be contained in the legislation to amend the triple lock. I find it underwhelming and disappointing that at a time when I am giving real examples of real challenges that have been faced by the men and women of the Defence Forces, the Deputy is not saying, "Let's tease through these."
The Minister has not given one example.
The Deputy must not have been listening. I will give them again in a second.
I am listening very carefully.
I gave them to him; does he want them again? They were: the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force in 1999; in 2015 the Mediterranean operation known as Operation Sophia; the Maritime Analysis Operations Centre (Narcotics) mission operation; and a UN authorisation for EUFOR Operation Althea in Bosnia Herzegovina that we nearly had to miss out on too.
These are the examples.
They are not good examples.
I hope the Deputy heard me that time. I have already given them, but let me give them again. Maybe he does not want to hear them or does not want to engage. Maybe he wants to jump up and say Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil want to get rid of military neutrality. No, we do not. The Deputy might not trust us, but let me assure him that the people of Ireland showed, when they went out to vote in the election, that they do not trust People Before Profit with our foreign policy or our defence policy.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
Every single opinion polls show the majority of people are in favour of neutrality.
So am I.
Whatever. They also, in their hundreds of thousands, protested about decisions of previous Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Governments to allow millions of US troops to go through Shannon Airport to assist US-UK led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where hundreds of thousands of people were slaughtered on the basis of lies put out by the US. The coalition Government of which the Tánaiste was a member allowed that to happen. Why would we trust the Government when it had NATO generals overseeing our troops in Cork at least twice in the past couple of years? Why would we trust it when the Department of Defence has employed a US Pentagon-based contractor imbued with US values to redesign our Defence Forces? Why would we trust it when it is involving us with the PESCO alliance, which is aligned with NATO and dominated by the US, the UK, France and Germany, some of the biggest imperial powers with brutal records of warmongering? Why would we trust it?
I will pick up on that point on trust. Trust is at an all-time low in this Government in relation to neutrality.
Says who?
In the context of troops going through Shannon Airport, the Tánaiste has never once inspected those troops. Repeatedly, he has got information about arms and soldiers carrying arms. Never once did he engage in an inspection. He reassured us. I am never reassured by institutions nor Governments. I like to see evidence.
There is no progress on the occupied territories Bill, which goes to the core of our credibility in relation to how we deal with different aggressors, be it Russia, the US or Israel. The Government is bowing to American interests. There are any number of examples, including the Lisbon treaty and the Nice treaty. We were forced to vote twice. We got reassurances and we got civil declarations and guarantees that we were not going in the direction of a military-industrial complex and a European army.
We got the triple lock.
We were told that over and over. When I talk to people on the ground in Fianna Fáil, they tell me that neutrality is absolutely at the core of what we stand for.
We will have the legislation. The Tánaiste is talking about teasing through it. Of course we will. We will have our engagement, and I hope that there will be enough time for it. However, as far as we are concerned, the triple lock is something that Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil for a long time put a lot of store by and pointed to it as evidence that there was no question regarding Irish neutrality, as Deputy Connolly outlined.
In the context of the Lisbon treaty, which was a very flawed document that contained flawed proposals, one of the fundamental arguments in favour of that and one of the reasons used to sell it to the Irish people was that this would strengthen both our position and international respect for the triple lock. We can have numerous debates about all the failings of the UN. Ireland must use its voice. However, there are many countries across the world that are led by people who we would not have any time for but that are part of the UN. It is the multilateral organisation that makes decisions in respect of peacekeeping missions. We need to be part of UN missions.
I am having an out-of-body experience here. I am in favour of Irish neutrality. The Government of Ireland is in favour of Irish neutrality. The Government of Ireland values Irish neutrality. I spend a significant amount of my working week travelling the world explaining to colleagues, partners and counterparts why we value our neutrality. I also value this place and the democratic mandate of the men and women elected to Dáil Éireann in the context of decisions relating to our Defence Forces. The idea of seconding that out to anybody else is ludicrous. The idea of seconding it out to somebody such as Vladimir Putin is downright illogical. We need to be able to have a sensible debate. We need to publish the legislation,. None of the Deputies has seen the legislation yet but they are all against it. We need to then send it to an Oireachtas committee and scrutinise it. I welcome the fact that Deputy Ó Laoghaire at least is willing to do that.
I take the point about how people were in favour of the triple lock at one time but are now not in favour of it. However, I would respectfully say that the world has changed. There was a time when we used to invite Russian presidents to this country, shake their hands, welcome them and engage. Vladimir Putin is involved in an invasion of a country on the Continent of Europe. The context has changed.
The US context has changed too.
In terms of our defence and security obligations, we have an obligation to do that.
On the occupied territories Bill, I do not wish to be misrepresented. I spent all of Monday in Brussels at an EU-Israel association agreement negotiation. It was stated that we have not made no progress. We have made progress. The 27 member states have unanimously agreed to language that I think that even Deputy Connolly might be supportive of in relation to the differentiation between the State of Israel and the illegally occupied territories. That is what our incredible diplomats, our incredible civil servants, aided, assisted and directed by the Irish Government, have managed to achieve at an EU level this week in the context of the importance of a two-state solution, standing up for and providing more money for UNWRA, standing up for the International Criminal Court and international law and, when it comes to trade, differentiating between the illegally occupied territories of what should make up the State of Palestine and the State of Israel.
Weather Events
Martin Daly
Ceist:10. Deputy Martin Daly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence in the context of Storm Éowyn, the specific protocols and contingency plans in place to ensure Defence Forces assistance in future natural disasters; the criteria that are used to determine Defence Forces deployment in such emergency situations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6069/25]
John Connolly
Ceist:40. Deputy John Connolly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he will outline any occasion during or in the aftermath of Storm Éowyn when the Defence Forces were asked to aid the civil authorities or the civil power, as per their remit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5787/25]
In the context of Storm Éowyn, will the Tánaiste outline the specific protocols and contingency plans in place to ensure the Defence Forces' assistance in future natural disasters and the criteria that are used to determine the deployment of the Defence Forces in emergency situations?
I thank Deputy Daly for raising this important and timely question in the aftermath of Storm Éowyn, which brought a great deal of devastation to so much of our country, particularly, perhaps, to the Deputy's part of the country, namely the west, and to the north west.
I take this opportunity to recognise the contribution made by our Civil Defence units and our Defence Forces in helping those worst affected by the recent storm. As Tánaiste and Minister for Defence - in other words, as their Minister - I thank them for their service and for all they have done. I am particularly grateful to the Civil Defence volunteers who were unstinting in supporting their local communities. I had the opportunity, along with Deputy David Maxwell, to visit the Civil Defence volunteers in County Monaghan to see first hand what they were undertaking. Yet again, the work they engaged in is a reminder to all of us in this House and to people right across the country that we collectively owe the volunteers of the Civil Defence a huge debt of gratitude.
In regard to the Defence Forces, while they are not the primary response agency for non-security related emergencies they do of course where requested provide assistance to the appropriate lead Department in the event of a natural disaster or emergency situation in their aid to civil authority role. In the context of Storm Éowyn, the Defence Forces received and accommodated requests for assistance under the Government task force mechanisms from a number of agencies. They provided assistance ranging from air patrols of electricity lines by the Air Corps, the readiness to support the national ambulance service, they provided accommodation for prison staff during the red warning phase and provision and transportation of equipment and supplies, notably generators, to the affected areas.
My colleagues in government and I are mindful of the impact of this storm. Indeed, looking to the future, we made it clear to the State service providers that any lessons learned must be incorporated into future planning and to the development of the necessary resilience to minimise such impacts, should a weather event of this magnitude occur again. I understand that the review process will be led by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and my Department. The Office of Emergency Planning will engage in doing the same.
I understand the frustration of many of Deputy Daly's constituents, who may have been without power or water supplies for significant periods. In the context of this storm, a great deal of the technical expertise that was required may not have been readily available to the Defence Forces but was available to other agencies. We were trying in every way possible to provide practical assistance in terms of transporting equipment, providing accommodation and, as stated, having the Civil Defence very much on the ground to help the most vulnerable in affected communities.
I am reassured by the Tánaiste's answer regarding the Army's role in dealing with any future natural disaster. We must put it in the context of the devastation that was caused on the west coast, most especially in the Roscommon-Galway constituency that I represent but also in west Galway, Leitrim and Cavan. Forests were blown down, roads were blocked, water supplies were cut off and people had no electricity. In some cases, people did not have water supplies for up to 20 days. This was an intolerable situation. It was unprecedented. I pay tribute to ESB Networks, local authority workers, voluntary groups, sports groups and emergency hub workers.
However, I feel it was important, and people on the ground would have liked the visibility of the Army out on the ground helping people in that situation.
I thank the Tánaiste for his answer to this point. I recognise in his response that he has outlined the challenge Storm Éowyn brought to certain parts of the country. However we like to present it and would contest this position, though, there is a perception in some constituencies, particularly on the western seaboard and midlands and Border area that had the impact of Storm Éowyn been felt in other parts of the country, or had the lack of services as a result of the storm been suffered in other parts of the country, the response might have been greater. I recognise that might be contested but among the most commonly occurring questions I get in parts of the country that are still affected by the lack of communications and communication breakdown was whether the Defence Force could have played a greater role in the restoration operation. I acknowledge the Tánaiste has outlined a number of places where the Defence Force actively participated, but I concur with my colleague, Deputy Daly, that maybe the Defence Forces could have been more relevantly used regarding the homes of people.
I thank Deputies Connolly and Daly. This is my first time engaging with Deputy Connolly, and I congratulate him on his election to Dáil Éireann. I look forward to working with him.
I take the point. As he said, we might contest the views of some, but regardless of whether we contest them, I accept they are the deeply held views. It is exactly how people felt in large parts of this country. I have heard very clearly from people in the west and the north west how they felt extremely isolated and anxious and they wondered whether the electricity was ever going to come back on. Whatever about managing without electricity or water for a day or two, which is not an insignificant challenge, the number of people who had to manage for many weeks is almost unimaginable in terms of the gravity of the challenge that posed.
As a Government, as State agencies and as community organisations, everybody put their shoulder to the wheel. We saw the best of Irish meitheal in terms of people trying to respond. We saw the benefits of the investment we made over a number of years in community facilities. In many parts of the country we had sports club with shower facilities and others that were readily made available to communities. I thank those sports clubs for that. We saw the Civil Defence, of which I am proud to be a Minister, play a very boots-on-the-ground role. I saw the Defence Forces respond to every request that was made of them. The way it works is the Defence Forces responds to requests from the civil authority and local authorities. In fairness to everyone - I am not blaming any local authorities; everyone was working hard - there was a technical expertise element that was perhaps not readily available to the Defence Forces in some of the issues that would have been pressing to the Deputies' constituents.
To be very clear, the State has to do better and be better prepared for adverse weather events. That is why the Taoiseach, others in government and I are determined that the "lessons learnt" thing is not just a box-ticking exercise, but is actually a deep dive into what went well, where went well, because it was not consistent across the country, and what can go better. The Defence Forces will be very willing to play a full and honest role in that assessment.
I am reassured by what the Tánaiste said. What we need is a reassurance that we learn lessons from this storm. There needs to be the three corridors. We need Uisce Éireann and our local group water schemes to be generator ready. The three corridors issue might be a bit more complicated to solve, but it has to be solved in the national interest, when 700,000 households were without electricity, some of them for almost three weeks. In that context, people need to be reassured that every asset of the State is put into play when we are under pressure with an emergency that struck the west coast in particular.
In retrospect, perhaps we should have called a state of emergency and utilised all those assets. Again, it is easy in retrospect to say that. However, we need to learn the lessons from this storm.
I thank the Tánaiste for his response.
It is clear from his response that he recognises the necessity of the review and how in-depth it needs to be. The Tánaiste also has a clear understanding of the suffering people endured. In terms of the range of skills that is available to the Defence Forces, one area that comes to mind is medical and support skills for people who are medically vulnerable. There certainly is a sense in certain locations, when there was no power, that medical assistance was needed or would have been required and the Defence Forces might have been in a position to provide that.
The Tánaiste put his finger on it when he said that the Defence Forces came to the aid of the civic authorities in all places where it was requested to do so. However, some agencies might be unclear of when that request can be made. The Commission on the Defence Forces report proposes that there should be "Clear inter-agency policies and planning for the deployment of the Defence Forces". We could incorporate that into the review of Storm Éowyn and how we can use that recommendation going forward.
The Deputy is entirely right. As he and I know, nobody is more willing to get stuck in, help out and serve their country than the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann. It is important to have an even greater level of clarity in terms of interagency response. I will certainly reflect and engage with the Defence Forces in my own Department regarding the medical skills and assistance point. I thank the Deputy for making that point.
I agree with Deputy Daly. We have to recognise that there are certain things we have to do at a national level. There is no passing the buck in that regard. Where things worked well was at a local level. One of the things we have to do, and I know this a view shared by our colleagues, the Taoiseach, all members of the Government and Government parties, is resource local communities and empower local authorities. Where is the generator in the community? Where are the emergency shower facilities? What is the plan if the telecommunications network goes down? We are all so reliant on technology these days. What is available in terms of the Civil Defence? Without pre-empting the review, I am very confident that mapping that out better at a local level and the Government resourcing, financing and supporting it will be one of the things in it.
One thing that worked well is the red weather alert. While I am very conscious that one man tragically lost his life - we think of him and his family - it is a near miracle that we did not see even more fatalities. There is a lot of nonsense on social media regarding the scaremongering of weather warnings. One of the lessons that needs to be learned from this is that these weather warnings are serious. When they are put in place, they are put in place for a reason. We should encourage our authorities to continue to do what they were doing, being forthcoming, honest and blunt with the Irish people in this regard, because I have no doubt that it helped save lives.
I agree with the Deputy regarding trees. We are now spending a fair whack of money every year putting electricity poles and wires that have been knocked down by trees back up. It is not a sustainable situation. We need more trees in the country. We all love trees, but we need to put them in the right place.
Military Neutrality
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire
Ceist:11. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he will outline his proposals to remove the triple lock neutrality protection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6108/25]
We are returning to this issue again. We have had a discussion regarding the principle of it, and it remains my strong view that the effect of getting rid of the triple lock, whatever the intention, will undermine Irish neutrality. The Tánaiste talked a great deal about the detail and so on. This is an opportunity for him to tell us what is going to be in the legislation and outline, to the greatest detail that he can, what exactly this is going to look like.
I thank the Deputy again for engaging on this. I accept that we have very different views on this. I am not trying to deny that. How we engage, however, is important. Teasing through detail, our fundamental views and positions and everyone accepting our bona fides is good. I accept the Deputy's bona fides in terms of the value he attaches to military neutrality. Let me be as helpful as I can.
The Deputy needs to recognise that I have not brought the Bill to Cabinet yet. I intend to bring the draft legislation and general scheme to Cabinet in March. I will publish it straight thereafter, so it will be available for Members of this House and the Irish people in March. I want to be clear. The Deputy made the point about wanting to make sure adequate time is available. That is absolutely my intention. Of course, it will have to have pre-legislative scrutiny. The Government will not seek any waiver to that. That is an opportunity for those who follow these debates from home. That is an opportunity for people, organisations and others to be brought in and to give their views as to what they may think of the legislation, good, bad or indifferent. It is a matter for committees to decide who comes in, and for the committee on defence to make a report, which I will consider.
The Bill will provide for a modification of the existing requirement regarding the triple lock with regard to the dispatch of the Defence Forces for services outside the State as part of an international United Nations force. In effect, the requirement for the UN Security Council mandate will be removed. However, governing principles will be included, which will apply to any future deployments where operations must adhere to the principles of the UN Charter. We are big believers in the UN Charter. We spent most of the time talking about the importance of people adhering to the UN Charter in places such as Ukraine and everywhere else and the absolute primacy of the charter. I intend to ensure that the principles of the charter and international law are embedded in any legislation.
These principles have been refined to ensure appropriate legal effect as part of the drafting process. It is also proposed that the Bill would set out the general principles that will apply when a contingent is being despatched for service and there will be a requirement to seek Government approval. Where the number of Defence Forces is over a certain number, Dáil approval will also be triggered.
I will not make a final intervention after this because we have ventilated it well enough.
It sounds to some extent as though these are criteria the Dáil should have regard to, but ultimately it remains a decision of the Dáil and there is no safeguard beyond that. I am concerned about that. It is not the UN Security Council or anyone on it that has prevented us from sustaining a peacekeeping presence in the Golan Heights; it is because of a lack of resources and underinvestment in the Defence Forces. The most recent issue for Irish personnel being in a position to contribute to peacekeeping was, unfortunately, the approximately 130 personnel who were withdrawn from the Golan Heights and that was because of the failings and underinvestment in the Defence Forces.
Returning to the first question, the most fundamental issue we have to resolve that is relevant to this area is the proper resourcing of our Defence Forces.
I might come at it from a more positive viewpoint than how the Deputy characterises it. However, I agree with the general point that before we talk about deploying anyone anywhere, we have to make sure we have enough people who are adequately trained, adequately equipped and have the best infrastructure and capabilities available. On that, we might differ in areas of emphasis, but I accept that the Deputy wishes, as I hope he accepts I do, for the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann to be properly resourced and that the number of people in the Defence Forces grows.
As I said, the number grew last year, albeit from a very low base. It was the first year in a number of years that we saw a stabilisation in recruitment and retention. We need to drive that on this year as well.
I accept that we have ventilated this a lot and that we will have many more chances to do so in the time ahead. The Bill will also consider other provisions, including additional circumstances around undertaking military close protection duties, emergency evacuation of Irish citizens from volatile security environments and a new purpose of participation in international operations to counter illicit trafficking by sea and air. We have an important role to play in that as an island nation. The legislation will address that too.
Defence Forces
Peter 'Chap' Cleere
Ceist:12. Deputy Peter 'Chap' Cleere asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence the capital works projects currently under way at Stephens Barracks, Kilkenny; the estimated cost of each of these projects; when each project will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6091/25]
I acknowledge the significant increase in investment that has gone into the Defence Forces in recent years. It has been felt on the ground. My question relates to the capital works projects currently under way at James Stephens Barracks in Kilkenny, the estimated cost of each of these projects and when each project will be completed. Will the Tánaiste make a statement on the matter?
I formally congratulate the Deputy on his election. I look forward to working with him and thank him for providing me with the opportunity to outline the investments the Government has made under the infrastructure development plan, IDP, in Stephens Barracks, Kilkenny. I hope to visit it shortly.
The Defence Forces IDP sets out a programme of anticipated project delivery based on the achievement of the high-level goals as set out in White Paper 2015. The programme reflects the complex environment in which the Defence Forces operate and the corresponding need for appropriate infrastructure to provide accommodation and training for personnel, and maintenance and storage of equipment for land, sea and airborne operational requirements. The plan, which was launched in 2020 and was agreed at the brigade level, is reviewed annually to determine key built infrastructure goals for the next five years. In 2024, more than €43 million was spent on building works in military installations and barracks across the country under the capital element of the Defence Forces built infrastructure programme.
Currently, one capital project is under way in Stephens Barracks, which is the development of a new barracks accountant facility. This project is expected to be completed this summer and the total cost including VAT is just over €620,000. This new facility is required to support the barracks accountant of the 3rd Infantry Battalion, will store all barracks accountant equipment and files and provide an office and associated facilities for the staff. The addition of Solar PV on the roof of the new building along with ground mounted solar in an adjoining greenfield area will assist the unit in meeting the Defence Forces energy efficiency and decarbonisation agendas. This project brings the total investment to date in Stephens Barracks to more than €5.5 million, which has seen the development of a new gymnasium, completed in 2021, the provision of underground site services in 2022 and the refurbishment of Block C accommodation, which was completed in March 2024. The Deputy may also wish to note that another two projects are scheduled to commence in the barracks in 2026. They are the construction of a new military equipment store, locker block facilities and the upgrade of the other ranks accommodation blocks.
A significant level of investment is under way. More projects are to come and I look forward to visiting the barracks shortly with the Deputy to see the benefit of this investment in the Defence Forces.
I would welcome the opportunity to welcome the Tánaiste to Kilkenny to visit James Stephens Barracks. He will undoubtedly be impressed with the facilities and infrastructure there. I implore him to continue with the existing roll-out of the capital programme and in addition, if addendums are necessary, ask him to consider the refurbishment of the old church and convent into a medical aid centre. It would be of huge benefit to the barracks. It is not in the capital plan at the moment but if we could look at it and if there was scope for it, it would be a huge addition and of huge benefit to the employees of the barracks.
It is absolutely imperative that Stephens Barracks remain open and that the troops remain based in Kilkenny. It provides a fantastic service. It is the only barracks in the south east. People come from all over and it is a tremendous addition to the city. Will the Tánaiste give assurances that we will continue to invest and secure the future of the barracks and the associated staff?
I certainly will ensure consideration is given to the additional projects the Deputy mentioned, in addition to the two that are scheduled to commence next year, the new military equipment store, locker block and upgrade of the other ranks accommodation block. I will ask my officials to engage with the Defence Forces on the other projects he referred to.
We will continue to invest in and support Stephens Barracks. I am aware of the important role it plays in our Defence Forces strategically and the affection and pride the people of Kilkenny and the south east region have for it. We are in a period of investment. We will see greater levels of investment, which is right, in defence and security in the time ahead as we reach level of ambition 2 for our Defence Forces and move towards level of ambition 3. For example, by the end of last year, more than €232 million worth of capital projects were at various stages of the procurement pipeline and I expect that trend to only go in one direction.
I welcome the Tánaiste's commitment to the barracks in Kilkenny. That security is vital. There are more than 400 staff and each of them makes a vital contribution to the economic fabric of Kilkenny. To put that into context, outside their traditional duties, members of the Defence Forces based at Stephens Barracks, Kilkenny are regularly drafted in by the local authority to grit the city and county's footpaths in freezing weather. We have had flooding in many of our towns and villages and the Defence Forces are never found wanting in providing support. That has been acknowledged in the past and I want to put on the record today that the support they have given on the ground, especially to the local authorities, is immense and the economic contribution they make to Kilkenny city and county is also important. I welcome the Tánaiste's comments and support in this.
I thank the Deputy. He is right to mention the primary role the Defence Forces play and carry out with distinction. We all feel a great sense of pride, which we have been talking about in the Houses this afternoon, when we see our troops abroad. I think of our UNIFIL colleagues in Lebanon and look forward to visiting them shortly. We also see on a local level the difference the men and women of the Defence Forces play in providing aid to the civil authority. When the bad weather comes, such as snow or flooding, their willingness to assist local authorities when requested, coupled with the Civil Defence, which is also vibrant in the Deputy's area, makes a real and positive difference and I know it makes us all proud. That is why we will continue to support the Defence Forces. We need to see transformation and a number of issues need to be addressed, but we also need to continue to invest in recruitment, retention and facilities and we will continue to do that in Kilkenny as well.
Defence Forces
Shane Moynihan
Ceist:13. Deputy Shane Moynihan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence for an overview of the procurement of additional assets for the Air Corps and the Naval Service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5668/25]
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Tánaiste as ucht a bheith i láthair inniu chun an cheist seo a fhreagairt. I am extremely proud that Casement Aerodrome, the headquarters of the Air Corps is based in Baldonnel in my constituency, Dublin Mid-West. Like Deputy Cleere, I would love to invite the Tánaiste to visit the facility and see the tremendous work our personnel in the Air Corps do. My question relates to the procurement of additional assets for the Air Corps and Naval Service. One of the key recommendations made in the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces was to ensure the Naval Service and the Air Corps have adequate equipment. I would welcome the Tánaiste's initial thoughts on that matter.
I would be delighted to accept his invitation to visit Casement Aerodrome at Baldonnel. It is somewhere I know well but I would benefit from coming in, sitting down and looking at what I know is the exciting master planning being done for that site. There is huge potential to do so much more. I will very much take the Deputy up on his invitation. I look forward to the visit with him.
My priority as Minister for Defence is to ensure that we have operational capability of the Defence Forces and that it is maintained at the level it is at, but that we go significantly beyond that so it is developed further. This is to enable the Defence Forces to carry out the roles assigned by Government.
Equipment priorities for the Defence Forces are considered in the context of the established capacity development and this will be called the equipment development planning processes. This has been underpinned by significant increases in funding, with the last budget providing a record allocation of €1.35 billion for our defence sector, which is an increase of €100 million on the previous year.
A number of projects are currently being progressed under the Air Corps aircraft renewal and replacement programme. The delivery of a third Airbus C-295 aircraft, in military transport specification, is scheduled for this September. A contract was awarded in 2024 for a Dassault Falcon 6X multipurpose strategic reach aircraft, which is scheduled for delivery in December of this year. A contract was also awarded last year for the provision of four Airbus H145M light-utility multirole helicopters, with deliveries of those four Airbus helicopters due to begin in 2027. In addition to these procurements, further rotary wing capability will be the subject of a future procurement process beginning in the near term.
Projects under the Naval Service vessel renewal and replacement programmes are also being progressed. Two inshore patrol vessels purchased on a government-to-government basis from New Zealand, LÉ Aoibhinn and LÉ Gobnait, were commissioned into service in 2024. Other projects being progressed include planning for the potential procurement of a multirole vessel, the replacement of a secondary armament across the fleet, and enhanced sub-sea awareness capabilities. Further additions to the equipment development plan are also being kept under consideration.
I agree with the Minister that the planned upgrade for the Baldonnel site is extremely exciting. I am looking forward to seeing progress on that. I am aware that South Dublin County Council is extremely engaged on that overall, aside from the connectivity that was made available for personnel who work in the aerodrome.
On the specific questions relating to equipment, I welcome the Minister's responses and thank him. Will he provide more information on the progress that is being made in acquiring the new multirole vessel to replace the decommissioned flagship LÉ Eithne? We need a flagship but we also need that multirole vessel.
Will the Minister provide more information on the development and procurement of a primary radar system, including the recognised air picture functionality? As we move towards LOA2 are there further plans, outside of what he has outlined, to purchase additional aircraft or additional medium-lift helicopters?
I cannot give more details on where we are in replacing that naval vehicle beyond what I have said. On radar and subsea awareness capabilities, and particularly given the current security environment in which Ireland resides as the State is not immune from the current geopolitical security environment, I have asked my officials to consider a more aggressive procurement strategy around how we can make progress on this. Recommended as part of the move to LOA2 is the development of a new air defence system compatible with and integrated into the recognised air picture, RAP, which also requires military primary radar air capability. A project team comprising senior civil and military personnel has commenced work on a programme to develop further military radar capabilities. This includes military primary radar systems, ground-based air defence, and maritime and counter unmanned aerial systems. These are costly and complex projects but delivery has been prioritised by the Government and 2028 has been identified as a target date for delivery. I have asked officials to consider a much more aggressive timeline given the security environment in which we reside.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as ucht an fhreagra sin. I welcome very much the fact that the product team has been put in place, and that the Minister has asked for a more certain timeline in the delivery of that equipment. I believe it will be the first time an Irish Government will buy that sort of equipment. Perhaps the Minister will speak a little bit as to how the Minister is keeping value for money at top of his mind and what is the approach being taken to procurement to ensure that the equipment we purchase is adequate for our needs and also ensures value for the taxpayer. I thank the Minister for the information relating to the acquisition of the multirole vessel. I will be watching that with interest.
I welcome the delivery later on this year of the Airbus C-295 military transport aircraft. Airlift capacity is something that we need to make sure we are not reliant on friends and neighbours for delivery of our citizens wherever they may be in whatever trouble spots around the world.
I very much welcome that delivery as well because we have to be cognisant of the fact that all too often the evacuation is required of our citizens from certain parts of the world. It is becoming a much more frequent occurrence and while we have great partners, we are proud members of the European Union and we have great friends, we also have an obligation to be in a position to assist our own citizens. Some of the significant investments we are making in our Air Corps will make a real and meaningful difference in that.
I assure the Deputy with regard to the work that has been done on radar and the systems. We are absolutely endeavouring to secure the normal value for money and business cases and procurement processes, and all the other things that the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery, and Reform quite rightly make us follow. To ensure value for money for the taxpayer these will absolutely be to the fore of our consideration and to the group that are working on it. As the Minister for Defence, the most important and urgent thing to the fore of my mind would be making sure we can get our hands on this as quickly as possible.
Defence Forces
James Geoghegan
Ceist:14. Deputy James Geoghegan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence his views on whether there is a need to enhance the community use of the playing pitches at Cathal Brugha Barracks; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6099/25]
My question to the Minister is to ask his views on whether there is a need to enhance the community use of the playing pitches at Cathal Brugha Barracks.
I thank the Deputy. I know this one well because we have met with Ranelagh Gaels on a number of occasions in recent months. I thank him for the work he has been doing with them. The Defence Forces facilities that we have are, of course, primarily for our Defence Forces but where it makes sense to make parts of that available for community use for sports use and for our young people then we should do that as well. The Deputy will be aware there is a long-standing policy of my Department and the Defence Forces of allowing, where possible and appropriate, third parties to access Defence Forces facilities and properties to support local communities. It also raises in a positive way the profile of our Defence Forces among the general public. This policy does extend to a wide number of groups and activities, including GAA clubs, soccer clubs and numerous community groups across our country.
While the Defence Forces use the pitch facilities for their own activities, I am pleased that currently a number of schools and sports clubs in the local community surrounding Cathal Brugha Barracks have arrangements in place for the usage of the playing pitches within the barracks outside of those times. In that regard the all-weather pitch is currently being used by the community for a total of 27 hours per week, while the GAA playing pitch is used by two local sports clubs - Ranelagh Gaels and Portobello GAA - for a total of 28.5 hours per week.
I take the point of trying to agree a longer-term arrangement, which I believe is where the clubs want to get to. I am very supportive of that I will work with the Deputy on that. I am pleased that my officials are currently in engagement or negotiation with Ranelagh Gales and Portobello GAA with a view to try to put in place a longer-term arrangement for the use of the GAA pitch, which would allow for enhanced development with regard to lighting, changing facilities, and the condition of the pitch. People need to know they are going to have the use of it on a longer term basis for them to make these planning decisions.
I assure the Deputy that my Department is absolutely committed to ongoing positive engagement with the clubs and with local schools to ensure the use of those military facilities where possible.
I thank the Minister. It is great to hear his own personal commitment to this advancement in addition to the Department. I wish to highlight our gratitude to the Department for the good faith negotiations they are having with Ranelagh Gaels and Portobello GAA, and for the years of community supports that the Defence Forces and the Department have offered up to the area.
As the Minister said, it is about the long-term facilities there. Ranelagh Gaels is a club that started when I left school, although I might have been a bit better on the round ball than the oval ball had it been there when I was there. What has developed in our community is a club where more than 1,600 people are now members of Ranelagh Gaels. Every child at every door we knock on has a Ranelagh Gaels jersey. It has grown the sport not just among young boys but in particular among young girls and teenage girls. We know that to ensure we retain teenage girls in sport the changing facilities are a big part of it. This is why having this long-term arrangement would make such a big difference to the club.
The Deputy is entirely right. I have had the benefit of being in his constituency and meeting with him and the Ranelagh Gaels in previous roles I have held. I look forward very much to doing that again and to personally assisting in any way I can on this, and more broadly in regard to Defence Forces facilities across the country. There are sensitivities around Defence Forces facilities, as there should be, but there is also a common-sense approach that my Department and the Defence Forces endeavour to take. These are State assets and State resources. Where they can be used for the community, and particularly for schools and sporting clubs, there is a real advantage. I am conscious that having a certainty around use allows clubs to plan investment to put in place changing facilities. I know that is a big issue for Ranelagh Gaels. I congratulate them because 1,600 members is a sign of such a successful and vibrant club.
I look forward to visiting them again with the Deputy shortly and to my officials continuing to engage. My understanding is that meetings have already taken place and that discussions are ongoing on the longer arrangement. Let us work together on it.
This is very welcome. I am sure the club will be delighted to hear all of the Tánaiste's contributions to this debate. As he said, this shows in a positive way how the Defence Forces and barracks can become integrated in an urban community. The best way in which Cathal Brugha Barracks in Rathmines can be integrated in the community is through the level of support the barracks has always shown the two GAA clubs operating in the area. Demonstrating this investment in the future will make a massive difference to so many children in the area. Ranelagh Gaels have pioneered autism-friendly sports through the Ranelagh Rockets, which the club runs every Saturday and which makes a massive difference to the children who engage with it as well as for inclusion generally in the entire community. It has been such a wonderful initiative. It is great to have the Tánaiste's support.
Tá cúpla soicind fágtha ach ní fiú dul ar aghaidh le haon cheist eile, faraor. Is é sin deireadh le ceisteanna chun an Tánaiste agus an Aire Cosanta.
Is féidir teacht ar Cheisteanna Scríofa ar
www.oireachtas.ie
.
Written Answers are published on the Oireachtas website.