Officer Reductions Abroad
53. Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the concerns expressed by RACO about his proposal for officer reductions abroad; his views on these concerns; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38458/05]
Mr. Kitt: Ireland subscribes to the United Nations stand-by arrangements system, UNSAS, under which the State offers to provide up to 850 personnel on overseas service at any given time. Ireland’s commitment under the UNSAS represents 10% of the total Army strength. This is the maximum sustainable commitment that Ireland can make to overseas peacekeeping operations. This overall commitment is not being reviewed.
Ireland’s peacekeeping activity has now grown to the point where more than 140 officers are serving overseas. While this is a laudable contribution on the international stage, the Minister has stated that the long-term sustainability of such a level of commitment is open to question. The Minister, in addressing the conference, indicated that the proportion of officers within the overall UNSAS commitment of 850 would be reviewed to ensure that we balance our obligations to Ireland’s foreign policy with our obligation to the other roles of a well-managed Defence Forces.
I assure the Deputy that any re-balancing of ranks within the overall 850 will not reduce the effectiveness of the Defence Force’s contribution to Ireland’s foreign policy or international peacekeeping.
Mr. Gormley: The Minister of State has repeated what the Minister said at the conference instead of answering my question. Why is the number of officers serving overseas in various missions not sustainable? Where has the Minister found a shortfall in our Defence Forces? Where does he want these officers to serve? Are they needed to serve in various EU military committees or for duties in Ireland, as Chief of Staff, General Jim Sreenan, seemed to indicate at the RACO conference? He said that Ireland must remain vigilant against possible terrorist attacks. Would these potential terrorist attacks mean we need more officers at home? Will the Minister of State spell out in detail why we need to re-balance the number of officers and where they are supposed to go?
Mr. Kitt: I mentioned earlier that I was privileged to serve as Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development. When I met Army personnel abroad, I have always been proud of their work and, having visited Liberia twice, I am aware of their commitment.
The involvement of 850 personnel in overseas missions will not be changed. The issue under discussion relates solely to the number of officers. The Minister has simply outlined the need to look at that officer involvement. The Deputy rightly described the role of the Defence Forces as multifaceted. They defend the State against armed aggression, aid the civil power, participate in multinational peace support, provide a fishery protection service in accordance with State obligations as a member of the EU and carry out such other duties as may be assigned to them. The key point, however, is that the Minister is simply reviewing the involvement of officers in this approach. It is the normal thing to do and Deputies will hear from the Minister when the review has been carried out. The involvement of Irish Army personnel abroad will be maintained.
Mr. Gormley: The general secretary of RACO has expressed concern about what the Minister said. When this review is being carried out, I assume discussions will take place with RACO to see if it is appropriate to reduce the number of officers serving abroad because that seems to be at odds with what the Defences Forces want.
Mr. Kitt: I am aware of the views of RACO on this issue and those views will be taken on board by the Minister. The Chief of Staff agrees that the high number of officers serving overseas may adversely impact on commitments at home. This issue arises in the context of the Liberian mission coming to an end. That mission has been extended but the Defence Forces requires a rest period of several months to re-organise, bring equipment up to scratch and alleviate the pressure on personnel. These comments are being made in a timely way when our involvement in Liberia, in particular, is on such a large scale. I take on board the comments made by Deputy Gormley.
(Written reply)
88. Mr. Gogarty asked the Minister for Defence his views on his recent assertion that the number of Defence Forces officers serving overseas is unsustainable in view of the Defence Forces domestic commitments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38204/05]
Minister of State at the Department of Defence (Mr. Kitt): I propose to take Questions Nos. 63, 65, 67, 69, 75, 87, 88, 102, 104, 114, 116 and 117 together.
At present Ireland subscribes to the United Nations Standby Arrangements System, UNSAS, under which the State offers to provide up to 850 personnel on overseas service at any given time. Ireland’s commitment under the UNSAS represents 10% of the total Army strength. This is the maximum sustainable commitment that Ireland can make to overseas peacekeeping operations. This overall commitment is not being reviewed.
Ireland’s peacekeeping activity has now grown to the point where over 140 officers are serving overseas. While this is a laudable contribution on the international stage the Minister has stated that the long-term sustainability of such a level of commitment is open to question.
The Minister, in addressing the conference, indicated that the proportion of officers within the overall UNSAS commitment of 850 would be reviewed in order to ensure that we balance our obligations to Ireland’s foreign policy with our obligation to the other roles of a well-managed Defence Forces. I can assure the Deputy that any rebalancing of ranks within the overall 850 will not reduce the effectiveness of the Defence Forces contribution to Ireland’s foreign policy or international peacekeeping.