Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Select Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 2 Apr 2014

Defence Forces: Motion

We now have a quorum and are in public session. I ask members to turn off their mobile phones as they interfere with the recording of the proceedings. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the following motions which were referred to Dáil Éireann on 11 March and 1 April, 2014. The first proposal is as follows:

That Dáil Éireann approves the report by the Minister for Defence regarding service by the Defence Forces with the United Nations in 2013, copies of which were laid before Dáil Éireann on 11th March, 2014, in accordance with Section 13 of the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006.

The second proposal is as follows:

That the proposal that Dáil Éireann approves the report by the Minister for Defence regarding service by the Defence Forces with the United Nations in 2013, copies of which were laid before Dáil Éireann on 11th March 2014, in accordance with section 13 of the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006, to be referred to the Select Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, in accordance with Stranding Order 82A(3)(b) and paragraph (8) of the Orders of Reference of Select Committees, which, not later than 8th April, 2014, shall send a message to the Dáil in the manner prescribed in Standing Order 87, and Standing Order 86(2) shall accordingly apply.

I welcome the Minister and his official to the meeting. I now invite the Minister to make an opening statement on the first proposal.

As the Chairman has indicated, the following motion was placed on the Order Paper of Dáil Éireann:

That Dáil Éireann approves the participation by Ireland in a European Defence Agency Category B Project on Counter Improvised Explosive Devices Manual Neutralisation Techniques pursuant to section 2 of the Defence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009.

In commending the motion, I will briefly outline the function of the European Defence Agency and the background to the programme that Ireland wishes to participate in.

The European Defence Agency, EDA, was established by a joint action of the Council of the European Union in 2004, "to support the Member States and the Council in their effort to improve European defence capabilities in the field of crisis management and to sustain the European Security and Defence Policy as it stands now and develops in the future”. On 6 July 2004, the Government approved Ireland’s participation in the framework of the European Defence Agency on the basis of a memorandum submitted by the Minister for Defence in association with the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

The EDA is an agency of the European Union. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice President of the Commission, Baroness Cathy Ashton, is head of the agency. Baroness Ashton is also chairman of the EDA steering board, its decision-making body which is composed of Defence Ministers of the 27 participating member states, that is, all EU member states except Denmark, which has an opt out on defence matters under Protocol 5 to the Treaty of Amsterdam, and the European Commission.

Ireland participates in the framework of the agency and contributes €300,000 to the annual costs of running the agency, including its annual work programme. Outside of the annual general work programme, the agency also supports a range of other work programmes and projects funded on an ad hoc basis by the member states in various compositions. In some instances, all member states will participate in these projects and programmes unless they specifically decide to opt out. These are referred to as Category A projects or programmes. In other cases, a small number of member states will group together to pursue a particular initiative, referred to as a Category B project or programme.

In a climate of diminishing defence budgets, there is a need for greater efficiency and effectiveness in defence expenditure. Therefore, the European Defence Agency is focused on assisting member states in obtaining better value for existing spending levels, improving competitiveness, securing greater efficiency, particularly in the area of research, technology, manufacturing and procurement, which have been notable for fragmentation and duplication.

I now wish to reference in particular Ireland's involvement in EDA projects and programmes. Following Government and Dáil approval, as appropriate, Ireland has participated and is currently participating in the following programmes or projects. There is a Category A programme on force protection, now completed, which involved measures to protect military forces engaged in operational activities which is a key issue for the Defence Forces engaged in peace support and crisis management operations overseas. There is also an ongoing Category A programme concerning chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear protection. This is a key capability area for the Defence Forces. Participation in this programme and access to the results of the research, studies and development work packages to be undertaken by the programme will enable the Defence Forces to remain at the leading edge of capability development in this key area.

In addition there is an ongoing Category B project concerning maritime surveillance. The aim of this programme is to further develop the recognised maritime picture, RMP, exchange network technology that allows for the sharing of information among the wider EU defence community in support of the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy. It is complementary to the EU Commission initiative to establish a common information sharing environment for the exchange of maritime data. The programme involves improving network and systems security to allow classified information to be shared in the future and also developing a user interface which will allow member states without access to their own RMP system to view data.

The proposal I am putting to the committee today is to seek approval for Ireland to participate in an EDA programme in the area of counter improvised explosives devices in manual techniques. Manual neutralisation techniques, MNT, is a method used by explosive ordnance disposal and improvised explosive device disposal operators who, on occasions, cannot use remote or semi-remote techniques to render an improvised explosive device, IED, safe.

As a result, these complex explosive devices have to be neutralised manually. For example, MNT is used where there is an immediate threat to the life of a hostage who has an IED attached to him or her. This is a four year category B project which will involve researching, developing and delivering a range of training courses and exercises to address the use of manual neutralisation techniques. The objective is to enable personnel to conduct a proper threat and risk assessment which is of substantial importance in this context; to analyse the design of complex IEDs - clearly, if one is unable to do this, one will not know the necessary steps to take in the neutralisation process; to develop and plan the needed course of action; and to render safe the explosive chain or remove the explosives from the device. The activities, courses and exercises are aimed at enhancing participating member states' national counter improvised explosive devices capabilities in support of operations and missions, both at home and abroad. There are five member states interested in participating in the project, with Austria acting as lead nation.

The Defence Forces have identified a capability gap in the area of manual neutralisation techniques, specifically in relation to bomb disposal operations. The Defence Forces ordnance school which has responsibility for training bomb disposal personnel strongly supports Ireland’s involvement in the project. The courses and exercises over four years will allow for the upskilling of explosive ordnance disposal and improvised explosive device disposal operators on a consistent basis and their skills to be tested in an international environment.

Manual neutralisation techniques are required where there is an immediate danger to life as a result of an IED being placed in such a location that evacuation will take too long or is just not possible - in this case, the IED would present a direct threat to human life, critical military or civilian infrastructure or location; IEDs contain dangerous payloads - if the IED contains a payload that may cause enormous damage or casualties such as a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear threat, it may be necessary to ensure the device does not function; there are sensitive explosives when disruption would cause them to initiate – if very sensitive home-made explosives have been used, it may be inappropriate to use conventional remote techniques. In the event that one of the situations outlined occurs, having operators trained in the use of manual neutralisation techniques is crucial. Safety and preservation of life and property are enhanced when the operators possess advanced manual render safe procedure skills. That is what the course is designed to ensure.

The benefit to Ireland of participation in the programme is that it will address all future Defence Forces manual neutralisation techniques, MNT, training requirements. The training of manual neutralisers is very costly and it would be difficult to justify separate national training programmes. To date, the Defence Forces have not participated in any MNT training abroad as the costs associated with it are extremely high - approximately €28,000 per student for the initial training course. Explosive ordnance disposal and improvised explosive device disposal operators are also required to undertake refresher courses on a continuous basis. To this end, participation in the project will provide seven weeks of training each year for four years, that is, a two week refresher course, including the full exercising of operators in various manual neutralisation techniques scenarios, and a five week comprehensive course.

Currently, there are no MNT instructors or assessors trained within Ireland. To continue to enhance and operate this essential capability, outside instructors and assessors would need to be approved at a substantial cost to the State. However, if Ireland participates in the project, the Defence Forces will be in a position to train its own personnel and offer courses to foreign students who could be charged a course fee. This four year project will allow up to six Defence Forces personnel to refresh their skills and qualify to the required level of MNT per year. Defence Forces participation in this category B project will greatly enhance their capability and increase EOD-IEDD operators’ skills and address safety issues in a cost effective manner. It will also improve Defence Forces interoperability and operational effectiveness across EU and UN-mandated missions. Under the programme, the cost per student for initial training will be approximately €10,000. The total cost of the programme, including refresher courses, will be in the region of €230,000 over the four years. I am satisfied that the cost of participating in the programme will deliver value for money and can be met from within the proposed financial allocations for the Department of Defence.

I reiterate the benefits of our participation in the programme. The Defence Forces have extensive expertise in countering IEDs and identified manual neutralisation techniques as an important area to reduce the effects of IEDs on operations. To date, the Defence Forces have contributed to and benefited from the work of the European Defence Agency. As preservation of life is the primary concern in bomb disposal, it is important that the Defence Forces continue to develop their capability in this key area. The role of manual neutralisers is life saving and a priority for participating member states. However, as I have stated, the training of manual neutralisers at a national level would be highly cost-intensive owing to the equipment and specialist advisory role required. Should the Defence Forces participate in this category B project all future manual neutralisation techniques training will be addressed internally. I hope members will give their support to what is proposed. To put it in very straightforward terms, it is in the interests of enhancing the skills set of members of the Defence Forces and ensuring they have the maximum knowledge in dealing with this very difficult area. It is in the public interest should we have difficulties in dealing with improvised explosive devices. It is in the interests of the safety of members of the Defence Forces in the context of the difficulties that arise when they are engaged in UN-mandated missions in conflict zones across the world. I hope members will be supportive of the proposal.

A number of committee members who visited Defence Forces installations in the past few years were briefed on the work of bomb disposal personnel. What struck me at the time - I am sure colleagues will agree - was the exceptional courage and bravery involved in neutralising some of the explosives used. The officers involved had to put their own lives at risk. The Minister listed three scenarios. Where an improvised explosive device is placed in a location from which evacuation would take too long and-or is not possible, there is no other way to deal with it except that a person must manually interact with the device that could explode at any time. The person concerned has protection but depending on the payload used, it may not be sufficient. In the second scenario the person has to interact with improvised explosive devices that may contain a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear threat, while in the third the person has to interact with sensitive home-made explosives which cannot be disarmed using remote techniques. It takes tremendous courage and bravery to do this work. We met young soldiers mainly, both men and women, who put their lives on the line and I was impressed by their professionalism. We see more and more of these explosive devices in Ireland. There was a recent case in Cork. I would appreciate it if the Minister could tell us, if he has the information to hand, the number of devices the Defence Forces have dealt with in Ireland in the past couple of months.

I thank the Minister for his presentation and concur with the Chairman's remarks. My party has been supportive of the work of the European Defence Agency since it was initiated. It would be appropriate for the select committee to acknowledge the contribution and achievements of all those who have participated in the various programmes undertaken since 1994. One appreciates the importance of this programme and the development of manual neutralisation techniques which is obviously vital for the Defence Forces in so far as they have a responsibility to deal with crises, both at home and internationally.

It seems to be a very practical approach to dealing with a very real challenge. We can achieve maximum cost-efficiency by co-operating with other member states in acquiring the additional skills we need. I note that the Department of Defence ordnance school is enthusiastic in its support of this initiative. To that end, I fully support the proposal.

I would like to put two brief questions to the Minister. He said a four year training programme for six personnel would meet all future Defence Forces training requirements. Are we to take it that he is satisfied that when these personnel are trained, they will become the trainers? Will we subsequently be in a position to provide opportunities for other countries' defence forces personnel to come here?

The Minister alluded to figures for the numbers of devices. According to the figures available to me, there were 70 call-outs to deal with IEDs in 2011 and 96 in 2012. Such figures are frightening in a country as small and peaceful as Ireland. We know about the reasons for the continuous call-outs that had to be dealt with in the past, when the Defence Forces developed skills to deal with appalling situations. In the Minister's view, is there a strong correlation between the development of gangland crime and the drugs industry and the use of IEDs that has led to an ever-increasing number of call-outs which have to be dealt with by the Defence Forces?

I remind the Deputy that the nature of these courses means that the individual members of the Defence Forces who participate in them will become our future trainers. They will have the necessary qualifications and skills which will be updated and upgraded to carry out future training in the very areas in which they will receive training on foot of this proposal. Apart from the benefit of their participating at this level and receiving training without the need for outside trainers to be formally brought in, it is also beneficial that they will become our trainers in future years. That is particularly advantageous.

I will respond to some of the Deputy's queries. Of course, very particular skills have been developed within the Defence Forces to neutralise IEDs. This goes back to the time of the Troubles when the Provisional IRA and others used such devices. They occasionally manufactured them on this side of the island to be taken to the other side. The use of these devices has now transferred to criminal gangs. I know from the justice side of my brief that these devices have been used in the gang warfare between members of different drug gangs. Some of those who may previously have been engaged in terrorism on the island have facilitated the use of their skills to assist in the creation of these devices.

The Deputy asked about the number of engagements the Defence Forces have had in the last couple of years. I do not have an exact breakdown that shows how many cases were identified with criminal gangs not engaged in terrorism. There is an overlap between those engaged in terrorism and those engaged in criminality. I think the Deputy knows some of the groups I have in mind, but I do not intend to enter into that aspect of the matter at this forum. However, there is an overlap. This is a continuing cause of concern. These devices should not be created in this country by individuals engaged in criminal and terrorist activities. The lives of those who engage in criminal activities are put at risk when these devices are manufactured and used to target other members of the criminal and terrorist fraternity with whom they are at war. The lives of ordinary people who might be in the wrong location at the wrong moment are also placed at risk in such circumstances.

I was asked for the most recent statistics. I am told that, as of 11 March, the Army bomb disposal team has been called out on 27 occasions to date this year. Eleven IEDs were made safe during these call-outs. The figures cover just over two months of the year. During 2013 there were 250 call-outs or taskings during which 81 IEDs were made safe. Call-outs can be necessary when people are not certain about what is contained in a particular bundle. They might be concerned that it is an IED, but it might not turn out to be. There are also items that are discovered to be hoax bombs. One cannot take risks in such circumstances. Untrained individuals cannot be asked to deal with something that might turn out to be a hoax, but equally it might be real. This is a continuing and ongoing issue and it is important that we maintain our skills set at the highest level possible.

I thank the Minister for attending this meeting. Having listened to his presentation, I fully support the proposed investment. It is critical in the light of the suspicious activity taking place in our society. Children are finding suspicious devices - it does not matter whether they are viable - in playgrounds and on waste ground. It is in all our interests and in the interest of safety that the Defence Forces have the expertise to deal with them. For that reason, I support the proposal before the committee.

With the indulgence of the Chair, I take the opportunity afforded by the presence of the Minister to commend the wonderful women in the Navy and the Army who were on parade in Glasnevin Cemetery this morning at the Cumann na mBan commemoration. It was wonderful to see and they are a credit to us all. As a citizen and a parliamentarian, I was very proud of the female members of the Defence Forces, and their male colleagues, who were in attendance. We should all be proud of them. I would like the Department to convey our thoughts to them because they deserve to be acknowledged. I think we take their work for granted.

We would all like to be associated with those remarks.

I will be happy to convey the Deputy's views, with which I identify totally.

We are straying a little, but I am sure the Chairman will give me a moment's latitude. Members may be interested to know that as part of the current process of recruiting additional members of the Defence Forces, I have asked that particular attention be paid to efforts to improve the gender balance within the forces. I am concerned that we are not recruiting enough women. Unfortunately, working in the Defence Forces is not seen by many women and second level schools as a career for women. I emphasise that women can make a great contribution to the Defence Forces, while developing their personal skills in a way that will set them up to obtain other employment of great interest after they have finished in the Defence Forces. I have asked those working on the recruitment drive to place a particular focus on trying to improve the gender balance in the Defence Forces.

I am also keen to ensure greater cross-community representation in the Defence Forces. We know that over 12% of the population of the State is made up by individuals who were not born here. We have engaged in citizenship ceremonies since March 2011.

We have over 68,000 new Irish citizens. Many of these are young people, including children and teenagers. It is important our Defence Forces represent today's face of Ireland. I thought I should mention this in the context of the kind comments made by the Deputy.

I have three short questions. In regard to the European Defence Agency, is there a contradiction between Ireland's membership of this agency and our foreign policy, particularly in the context of the triple lock? Also, the Minister mentioned that all operations in which we are engaged are UN-mandated operations. Will that remain the case?

My second question concerns the broader issue of European Union arms spending on weapons. Many citizens of the Union have concerns regarding the huge amount of money spent on weapons while we have approximately 27 million young people unemployed in the Union. Will the Minister comment on this?

The Minister said that five member states were interested in the project led by Austria as the lead nation. Is that just five out of 27 that are interested in the project?

Is that not a particularly low number? I fully support the idea that armies must be trained in bomb disposal and in the prevention of such issues. However, I would like to know what is going on if only five member states are interested in taking part in the project.

I will deal with the last question first. The member states interested in the project are those with particular concerns in this area and whose own forces do not provide skill set training in these areas. The project is the coming together of particular member states in a manner that is economically wise and co-ordinated to ensure their individual defence forces either acquire or maintain skills in this area. This is important, particularly in an era when none of us is immune to terrorism. Leaving aside the gang warfare mentioned by Deputy Ó Fearghaíl and myself earlier, we do not know when an incident no one ever anticipated may occur in our country. If we do not have these skill sets, this could be a concern and problem. This skill-set is also of crucial relevance to UN peacekeeping missions. I cannot over-emphasise its importance in the context of devices. Whether we are talking about our troops in the Lebanon, on the Golan Heights or in the other 12 locations where they are engaged in UN peacekeeping, we cannot be sure when this skill may be required. It is an important skill and this project facilitates countries coming together in a way that is economically useful for the countries concerned.

In regard to whether our missions abroad are still based on UN mandates, the answer is "Yes". On the question of how all of this fits in with Ireland's general position, I suppose we can on occasion become unnecessarily concerned about our participation in the European Security and Defence Policy on the one side and neutrality on the other. The Deputy also raised issues about expenditure. Ireland's traditional policy on neutrality is completely unaffected by the treaty on the European Union, as amended in the Lisbon treaty. The treaty will not result in Ireland having to become part of any alliance or military formation. The legally binding guarantees secured by Ireland at the European Council prior to the second Lisbon treaty referendum clearly state the Lisbon treaty does not affect or prejudice Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality. Nor does our engagement with the European Defence Agency affect our traditional policy. We are members of NATO's partnership for peace, which is focused on humanitarian intervention and peacekeeping missions, and we work with other EU member states on some of these missions. Our engagement with the EDA is valuable, because it ensures our capabilities can be maintained at the highest levels and ensures the possibility of interoperability with other member states.

In regard to military expenditure, I always wonder about questions raised on this issue. If we look, for example, at the issue of peacekeeping missions in conflict zones, we need an arms industry. We cannot send our soldiers to the Lebanon with toy guns, in ordinary family cars or without proper reinforcements. We cannot provide vehicles that do not have the necessary weaponry defence required. Therefore, if we recognise that we need armies, we need an arms industry. Otherwise, we cannot operate in real situations. I doubt anybody would suggest we should send people to the Golan Heights where, unfortunately, part of the tragic Syrian civil war is being re-enacted between the official forces of President Assad and the various other groupings without them being armed. Either we must manufacture arms - we do not - or we must purchase them from people who do.

Europe has and needs an arms industry. The importance of this industry was recognised in the declaration by Heads of State at the December meeting of EU leaders and it contributes a great deal of employment for young people across the Union. I wonder, if Russia invaded the rest of Ukraine and positioned its troops directly on the borders of the European Union, with the threat of perhaps invading Poland or some other EU country, whether we would just say "You are very welcome, come in," or agree that it is important that countries faced with that threat have sufficiently large armies and armaments to act as a deterrent. One of the difficulties is that in a perfect world no one should have arms or need armies. I do not know when that perfect world will exist. As far as I know, it has never existed, not for as long as mankind has existed. Even in the age of the caveman, people went around with clubs beating each other's heads in.

The Minister is bringing us on a nice tour there, but my question is directed at the issue of nuclear and chemical weapons and so on. I was not talking about small arms industries.

They are armaments. I think we are going somewhat beyond the subject.

The Minister brought us on a tour and is making up stories once again. I was concerned about weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons.

That is not what this is about.

We can have that debate another time.

I am glad to see the Deputy defend the nuclear arms industry.

I am not defending anything.

I call Deputy Ferris.

On the subject of the member states involved in the project, which states are involved apart from Austria? Have any other states considered the proposal and decided not to go ahead with it.

I see that Deputy McGrath, having made his single transferable contribution has now departed.

The five states engaged in this are Austria, Germany, Italy, Sweden and Ireland. If others wanted to engage I doubt they would be prevented from engaging, but the five mentioned are the ones who have decided it is appropriate to engage. In the context of the EDA, we often see arrangements which involve only some member states and not others, particularly in the context of niche skill areas. There is nothing unusual about this.

Thank you. We will move on now to the next item of business.

I am pleased to report to the committee on Defence Forces' participation in United Nations' missions in 2013. The report for 2013 was laid before Dáil Éireann on 11 March 2014 and the following motion has been placed on the Order Paper:

That Dáil Éireann approves the report by the Minister for Defence regarding service by the Defence Forces with the United Nations in 2013, copies of which were laid before Dáil Éireann on 11 March 2014, in accordance with section 13 of the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006.

In commending the motion I will shortly outline some of the key aspects of Ireland’s involvement with the United Nations in the past couple of years. A central tenet of Irish foreign policy is support for the multilateral system of collective security represented by the United Nations. In this regard, Ireland has worked to uphold the primary role of the Security Council in the maintenance of international peace and security. This commitment has found expression in Ireland’s long-standing tradition of participation in UN peacekeeping operations. Ireland has participated continuously in UN peacekeeping operations since 1958, a service which comprises more than 63,000 individual tours of duty, an extraordinary number if we compare the size of the Defence Forces with those of other states. Participation in overseas peacekeeping missions is a key element of Ireland’s foreign policy and has been an important dimension in meeting Ireland’s international obligations as a member of the United Nations and the European Union. Irish foreign policy is directed at supporting co-operative arrangements for collective security through the development of international organisations, especially the United Nations. This has included supporting effective international action in areas such as disarmament, peacekeeping, development and human rights. This approach continues to define Irish priorities within the UN system. Notwithstanding our current economic difficulties, Ireland continues to willingly play a full role in contributing to the security of Europe and the world, providing professional peacekeepers for a range of missions throughout the world.

During 2013 the Defence Forces continued to make a major contribution to international peacekeeping through their participation in UN-led and UN-authorised missions. Defence Forces personnel deployed to two additional UN-led operations in 2013, namely, the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, UNDOF, on the Golan Heights in Syria and the United Nations Mine Action Service, UNMAS, in South Sudan. The Defence Forces also deployed personnel to the European Union Training Mission in Mali known as EUTM Mali.

Our main mission in the year under review was the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL. The UNIFIL mission continues to represent Ireland’s largest overseas deployment. For most of 2013, a total of 361 Defence Forces personnel were serving with UNIFIL. Ireland commanded the joint Irish-Finnish battalion until 26 November 2013 when Finland assumed command and deployed an additional company. There were two rotations of Irish personnel during 2013. The joint battalion is based in sector west of UNIFIL’s area of operations in an area designated by the force commander, in the vicinity of At Tiri and with two posts on the "Blue Line" which separates Lebanon and Israel. Last November I had the honour of visiting the 42nd infantry group currently serving with UNIFIL when I attended the transfer-of-authority ceremony to mark the hand-over of command of the joint Irish-Finnish battalion to Finland. Reflecting the high regard in which Irish peacekeepers are held, Brigadier General Patrick Phelan of the Defence Forces who was appointed deputy force commander of UNIFIL in April 2012 had his appointment extended for a further year until the end of this month at the request of the United Nations.

Partnership with other like-minded states has become an increasing element of our overseas peacekeeping operations. The participation of both Finland and Ireland in the UNIFIL mission is but one example that demonstrates our joint contribution to international peace and security. In the absence of partners such as Finland, the range and nature of overseas operations which Ireland could undertake in support of international peace and security would be notably curtailed. Such joint deployments further support interoperability and build experience. They also significantly contribute to the range and nature of operations we can undertake in support of the United Nations and further deepen the excellent bilateral relationship between partnering countries. The United Nations has stated UNIFIL plays a vital role in stabilising southern Lebanon, in particular the area adjacent to Israel where Irish troops are deployed.

Ireland is contributing approximately 404 Defence Forces personnel to 14 missions throughout the world. The year under review saw a new Irish deployment overseas to UNDOF on the Golan Heights in Syria. UNDOF is assisted by military observers from the United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation’s observer group for the Golan Heights which includes six Irish officers. Members of the 44th infantry group are deploying to the UNDOF mission and will replace the 43rd infantry group which has successfully completed its tour of duty. I take the opportunity to thank the personnel returning home from Syria for the contribution they have made to the peace and security of the region. I also wish each and every member of the 44th infantry group a safe and successful mission.

At the request of the United Nations and following Government approval, four members of the Permanent Defence Force deployed for service with the United Nations Mine Action Service, UNMAS, in South Sudan in August 2013. Their role is to provide a specialist training team on conventional munitions disposal, landmines and specialist search awareness for South Sudan police personnel. In addition, following Government approval, eight members of the Permanent Defence Force were deployed for service with the EU Training Mission in Mali, EUTM Mali, as part of a joint training contingent with the United Kingdom armed forces. Irish personnel were deployed to the mission on 23 March 2013 and rotated in September 2013. Training by EUTM Mali has been making good progress and the mission’s mandate has been extended until May 2016. EUTM Mali is recognised as an essential partner in the reconstruction of the Malian state and the main instrument for the reconstruction of its armed forces.

The deployment of some 404 personnel to overseas missions is a very significant contribution in the context of the reduced resources available for defence. It reflects the Government’s continued commitment to our responsibilities in the area of international peace and security. It is important for Ireland to continue to build on our long tradition of service to the founding principles of the United Nations by making practical commitments of personnel to peace support operations. I assure the committee that, notwithstanding the economic challenges we are facing, the Government is committed to ensuring the Defence Forces will continue to contribute in a meaningful way to overseas operations. However, our contributions will be practical and sustainable within the resources available for defence. Relative to our size and available resources and capabilities, both financial and military, Ireland is, proportionately, a very large peacekeeping contributor within the international community. In 2013 it was the fourth largest EU contributor to United Nations missions.

The Government and I place high importance on the valuable work being done by members of the Defence Forces throughout the world. I fully recognise the importance of operational experience in peace support operations for the ongoing development of the Defence Forces. I had the honour to see at first hand the dedication and professionalism of our military personnel serving overseas when I visited the Irish battalion serving with UNIFIL on two occasions last year. I look forward to a return visit to our troops in Lebanon in the near future, possibly during the second half of the year.

A key facet of Ireland’s approach to international peace support operations is the engagement of Defence Forces personnel, at all levels, with the local communities they are called on to serve. Irish troops serving overseas display not alone their professional commitment in fulfilling the United Nations mandate, but also support and encourage local communities through humanitarian and community projects. In Lebanon previous Irish battalions have completed a number of projects during the years with financial help from Irish Aid. I am delighted to see that recent battalions have continued this excellent tradition. Overseas service has become a core activity of the Defence Forces. Ireland's record of service in UN-authorised peace support operations is second to none. The Defence Forces have made and continue to make a significant contribution to such operations throughout the world.

I acknowledge the significant demands placed on personnel who serve overseas and their families. Without their loyal and continuing support, our strong tradition of service overseas, under the auspices of the United Nations, would not be possible.

Their committed and dedicated service in overseas missions reflects well, not alone on the Defence Forces, but on the nation as a whole and contributes to the excellent reputation which Ireland holds among peacekeepers throughout the world.

Some of my EU counterparts have remarked with some amazement that when they visit their troops abroad on UN peacekeeping missions, they always meet some members of our Defence Forces. One asked me before Christmas how many tens of thousands of troops we have. When I told him the objective strength of our Defence Forces is 9,500 he thought I was misleading him for security reasons.

I thank the Minister for his presentation and echo all his good words about our Defence Forces overseas.

I do not wish to delay business unnecessarily but I would like to raise two issues.

We do not have time to deal with them now as there is a vote in the Dáil. We will suspend the meeting and return after the vote.

If the committee agrees the report I will write to the Minister.

If the Deputy puts his questions to me I will respond to him within a few days.

The Taoiseach mentioned an incident in the Dáil this morning and I think I speak for all committee members in saying we deplore that incident. I thank the Minister and his officials for attending today.

Barr
Roinn