Gerard P. Craughwell Challenges Foreign Forces' Roles in Irish Waters

Minister, Chair Crockwell. Thank you very much, Minister, you're welcome. Minister, first and foremost, I want to congratulate the National Maritime Plan that was launched yesterday. It was a fine piece of work. There are many questions that it raises, not least of which the funding of some of the plans that are involved in it. But anyway, I want to cut to the chase. Coming up on the European presidency, there has been a lot of talk about cooperation. And indeed, the Taoiseach, and as far as I recall, the Tornestown perhaps yourself, adverted to the support that was offered to Denmark by Germany when they had problems. And this brings me to the constant mantra about cooperation with other countries. Has anybody briefed you on the difference between non-executive postures and executive postures? For example, if we're relying on the French, will they be outside the 12-mile limit? Will they have rules of engagement where they can take lethal force if they need to do that? Has anybody discussed this with you whatsoever? Because the case of Denmark is very clear. Denmark is a member of NATO, and Chapter 5, or Article 5 of NATO, requires NATO countries to come to the assistance of other NATO countries. Cooperation, when we're talking about cooperation, are we talking about ships and personnel and aircraft that will have lethal or access to lethal action should it be required? For example, if there's a French or Northern Irish police person or whatever in this country, and somebody makes a run for a Prime Minister's car, are they allowed to shoot them? Is there rules of engagement there? I'm deeply concerned that we're masking what is a constitutional requirement by calling it a non-executive posture. So I would be interested in an answer to that. We did raise the issue after you left yesterday of cadets pay. Cadets pay $26,000 a year. You're expecting people as old as 39 to join the Defence Forces, and then you offer them a pension. And you don't, Deeper does, offers them a pension scheme post-13, which is repugnant to anybody wanting to spend life in the public service. You speak about the government's commitment to the Defence Forces. I can tell you that following the maritime launch yesterday, I have had dozens of phone calls from people, not so much complaining about the maritime strategy, but complaining about government and government's lack of interest in the Defence Forces. The Thornish that went on record saying he wanted $3.4 billion for the Defence Forces. That is about the budget that's required to meet LOA2, and he was given 1.4. When, in God's name, did we ever see a situation in this country where a minister said he was looking for A, B or C, and was told by somebody else, a civil servant, that they couldn't have it? This is outrageous, so it is. So, I want to know where the difference is going to come to meet the LOA2. The naval ports that are mentioned in the National Strategy, there's no funding for Dun Laoghaire, there's no funding for Galway. I'd be more than interested to see how that happens. Primary radar, we're hearing about it at every meeting. What do we do if we find something at 40,000 feet flying into Irish airspace? What exactly do we do with it? We send a strongly worded letter up. We don't have the capacity to go up there. I've mentioned the single pension scheme. The other thing that was mentioned was the cooperation with other countries with respect to the sharing of intelligence. NATO countries cannot share intelligence with non-NATO countries. I'd be interested to know how we managed to get around that one. Given the time allocated to me, I'll leave it at that now. Thank you. A lot of questions to be answered. Firstly, in relation to the presidency and cooperation, so these are all the matters that I am currently engaging at the moment with, to identify what we could possibly do, what the possible options are, given that we are not a NATO member, given that we are a neutral country. So this is what is being explored at the moment. What are, so there's no agreement, despite reports today that we've made an agreement with France and the UK. There's no agreement that we would have ships in our waters, within our 12-mile limit, but I am exploring what options may be available to us should we require assistance. And I think, you know, whether we're comparing ourselves to Denmark or anybody else, what I'm looking at is the fact that we have a maritime domain seven times the size of our landmass. We have certain capabilities, but if we require additional support, we should not be afraid to ask for it if it is within our constitutional limits. And I think that's, you know, I think there's an onus on us to make sure, particularly during the presidency, when you have, obviously, a huge amount of visits that will take place. You have a high-level meeting of 47 heads of state. You have ministers that will be coming for six months. It's really important that the security, not just of our own citizens, but that all of those are taken extremely seriously. So I'm currently engaging on what possible powers may be available to us, what possible options may be available to engage with other colleagues and other allies, essentially, to be able to provide support if needed. But that is underway at the moment. And, of course, when that concludes, we'll obviously be able to engage with colleagues more further on that. But in terms of the general responsibility for security or what happens if something goes wrong, be it on the ground, be it in any other way, An Garda-Shia Khan is leading out on the security more generally. But they are working very closely with the Defence Forces. So I know that the Chief of Defence Forces has met quite regularly with our Garda Commissioner. Their teams are engaging. And, of course, we are assisting in however we can when it comes to challenges on land and when it comes to the maritime domain. This is where the Defence Forces have the responsibility. And, again, it's really important that we do everything that we can to protect our skies and our seas during those six months. I myself met with Minister Callaghan last week as well just to make sure that there is good progress being made and that there is as much cooperation as is needed and necessary throughout the six months between both the Defence Forces and An Garda-Shia Khan. In terms of cadets' pay, look, I really want to make progress on this. The local bargaining is where we have been directed and where I suppose this has, for the most part, been addressed. But what I've asked, because I met with the unions only recently and this issue was discussed, I've asked my officials to look at are there other ways in which we could respond to the need for an increase in pay overall. So that work is underway. I'm not saying we have an answer here, but I would like to see if there's something outside of the local bargaining that we can do to respond to this. And look, in terms of the pension scheme, that's obviously a whole of – it applies to everybody post-2013, but I think we're all conscious of the limitations that are within that, but that would have to be a whole of government and a change at a much wider level as well. In terms of our budget, I will say, having been involved in the education budget last year, I didn't get everything I asked for and certainly would have felt that I needed all of us and more. So I think we all face that same dilemma when it comes to budget time and trying to get as much funding as possible and with competing needs. I really do have to commend, though, the Thaunashta for the work that he and the department did. The capital budget itself has increased by 55%, and while I appreciate we're starting from a low base, and I do accept that, I think that shows and is a really clear outline of how determined we are to increase that. And certainly in my term, I will do everything I can to increase that further. In terms of our current spending, again, that has gone up by almost €400 million in a very short space of time. So again, I appreciate we're starting from a low base, but just that increase in itself allows us to increase the number of members that we have. It allows us to, you know, spend that in other capital ways maybe that we don't within the capital budget more broadly. And then obviously the maritime security strategy and any of the other strategies that were launched, that will all be dependent on the budget we have. So we have to prioritise, and I've said clearly, Raider will be prioritised first. The first sonar in terms of the maritime will be prioritised. And anything longer term, because any of these projects, be it in new developments, be it in purchasing, they take a long time. So the work to get us to the point where if we have more money, I'm ready to spend it, that's what I'll be doing. So examining the potential new bases, that will be done now to make sure that if we have access to additional funding, whether it's through SAFE, whether it's through our own budget, that we're ready to go work in terms of the extra vessels. That work is underway now so that when we have access to more funding, we're ready to go. But we do have to work with what we have. We have to make sure that we spread it out in the best way possible, that we prioritise it. I just have to come back to the issue of foreign troops or foreign security service people on Irish soil. Are we working on rules of engagement? We don't need to know what they are. Are we working on rules of engagement that allow for the use of lethal force, should it be required at sea, in the air or on land? So at this stage, we are exploring what may be possible if a decision was taken then through the Defence Forces, who would obviously be responsible for the operational side of it. That would then have to be developed in line with what was legally possible. But we are not at that stage. We are at the stage where we are exploring what may or may not be possible. Do we then need to ask for that assistance? That hasn't happened yet. And if that is the case, then it would be for the Defence Forces. It's on guard the Sheikana who are in lead of the security overall to set out what those operational procedures would be. But we are not at that point and no decision has been taken. Thanks very much. Chair, if you don't mind, I just want to address the issue you were just on. We see the Defence Forces, there's a special grievance procedure, there's all sorts of things. And the points made by the Chair are very important, but sexual harassment and bullying and all sorts of maltreatment of people takes place in every organisation in this country. Why are we just looking at the Defence Forces? Why don't we look at the hospitals? Why don't we look at the guard the Sheikana, the teaching services, prison services? It's sexual harassment and bullying and horrendous treatment. And I know the case that the Chair is speaking about, and it's particularly horrific, so it is. And I would compliment her for her support to the individuals involved at the time. But I take issue with the fact that members of your government made statements following the independent review, which, to my mind, should not have been published in the way it was prior to a tribunal having taken place. But it goes on in every aspect of life, and we need to address it from that point of view. Now, I want to talk... I'll just make a point more there, if you don't mind. What I'm getting at is the State issuing a firearm to somebody when they have a barring order. I think that's quite different when there's a State issue there. I do, but it's no different than issuing a syringe with drugs in it. It's the same outcome that can be there, you know. But anyway, the battle group that we're trying to put together, the people for the battle group for right now, I think today or yesterday might have been the closing date for volunteers. Minister, your department, and I've dealt with members of your department, they're decent, hard-working people who try to get support questions and support people when issues are raised. Who is blocking the subsistence allowance for the battle group volunteers? If it's deeper, who runs your department? Is it deeper or is it you? And the final one I want to address again is the triple lock. I know I'm at odds with the chair and with other members of this committee. To my mind, the triple lock is a childish, almost infantile approach to the deployment of troops. But it is going to, if you want, overshadow the good things that are coming and the things that need to be questioned in the Defence Amendment Bill. The triple lock, there's a constant misconception there. It has nothing to do with neutrality. They're mutually exclusive, the two things. And secondly, we are not, in international law, we are not a neutral country. We do not qualify under international law. We never lodge in The Hague or neutrality. We do not meet the requirements from a defence point of view in neutrality. And there is nothing in our constitution that stops you and the government tomorrow morning having a military alliance with anybody you want. So we need to be honest about it. But the triple lock, I dread the legislation coming through. I would wish that you would pull it out of the Defence Amendment Bill and bring it in as a separate bill entirely. And let's have the blood on the floor and let's kick it all over the place and get rid of it. But please, we're going to lose out on proper debate on the important issues that are coming in the Defence Amendment Bill. And I would ask you to reconsider how you bring that forward. But going back to the allowance for the battle group, will you give a commitment today that you will see to it that the allowance is paid? And the last one I want to ask you is, will you give a commitment to this committee that you will come back to us and let us know if and when agreements are being put in place should foreign military personnel be used? Are there rules of engagement? Have they been agreed? We don't need to know what they are. We just need to know if they've been agreed. Thank you. I've left one minute over, or a second over seven minutes for the answer to the question. Deputy, in relation to the battle group, there have been no changes to the way in which subsistence is paid. There have been no changes to the way in which various different allowances can be paid. It is still in line with public sector pay policy. So from our part and on my side and the departments in terms of the funding of these... Sorry, no, the last group that went out got €175 per day. I do remember when they go out, they're going for seven weeks. They have nowhere to go. They're locked into this situation they're in. They've one day off, but the one day off is hanging around the place. And I understand that they pay for their accommodation and their food out of that €175. €175. But you're asking people to go overseas. Tell me any civil servant or politician that will travel overseas without subsistence. None of us will. Deputy, what I'm saying is what's happening overseas, any payments for travel and subsistence are in accordance with the rates and how they should be paid out. So what I'm saying to you is they are being paid out as they should be, and the rates have not changed the way in which public sector pay subsistence should be paid. Defence forces have been told there will be no subsistence. They've been told there will be no allowance. But what I'm saying to you is we have not changed the way in which public sector pay should be paid and is paid. So that is not changing. There have been no changes to how it can be. It has to be in line with the public service pay, as you say, or public sector pay. So you're saying the allowance will be paid? No, what I'm saying is there are no changes to the rules as to how they should be paid. But any other changes may be based on changes to circumstances generally. Can you explain then why the last group got €175 per day and this current group are getting nothing? So again, Deputy, the way in which public servants are paid, these people are being treated in the same way. But the circumstances... There'll be no volunteers. I can't speak to the circumstances as to where they're going and where they're staying and how that is being worked out. There'll be no volunteers. There'll be none. We will be once again embarrassed on the international stage. So again... Who's blocking this? So nothing has been blocked, but the terms of the conditions have not changed at all. The conditions perhaps have. I am so, so disappointed in that answer. I mean, you want to retain people in the Defence Forces. You want to have people proud to serve in the Defence Forces. And we won't pay them the same way we pay civil servants, politicians, and anybody else that travels. Greg, that's time. Sorry, can I just say on that, so you're paid based on your accommodation and food. So if a civil servant went somewhere and their accommodation and food was paid for, they wouldn't get that. So I'm just saying that... Deduct it out of the subsistence. What I'm just saying is that there is no change here. I have asked for a report from the Chief of the Defence Forces on this, but this is not something that I have or that we have directed to change. There's no change in how this is done, but if a civil servant was going on this trip, it would be applied in the same way. Can I just say that? It's based on the accommodation and the food and what is paid for you or not. There will be no one. And that is where the shift has... There will be no one. Both gone over. Deputy O'Leary. Deputy O'Leary.