Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 20: To ask the Minister for Defence the impact the reduction in provision for allowances for overseas deployment, as outlined in Budget 2011, will have on the capacity of the Defence Forces to serve overseas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47410/10]

Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In common with all areas of the public service, the Department of Defence and the Defence Forces will operate with reduced funding for 2011. The gross allocation for Defence and Army Pensions combined in 2011 is €933 million, an overall reduction of 4% on the 2010 allocation. Defence spending at €725 million, including capital spending, will be down by €30 million or 4% on the 2010 Estimate. The provision for Army pensions, Vote 37, for 2011 is €208 million. The cost of overseas allowances in a given year is principally a factor of the number of personnel serving overseas and the time spent overseas. While there has been a significant reduction in participation in overseas peace-keeping in 2010, and thus in the expenditure on overseas allowances, this was driven mainly by the unexpected withdrawal from Chad. Since then, civil and military management have been reviewing all available options to identify a suitable overseas mission for the Defence Forces.

Despite the reduced budgetary resources available to the Department generally, Ireland remains open to participation in peace-keeping operations. In that regard, I am glad to be able to advise the House that the Government yesterday approved the deployment of a contingent of the Defence Forces, as part of a joint Finnish/Irish battalion to UNIFIL. Up to 440 personnel could be deployed in the second quarter of next year to this mission. Discussions will now commence with the UN and with Finland on finalising the composition of the contingent and the deployment schedule. Thereafter, I will proceed in the new year to seek Dáil approval for the mission. This will complete the triple lock mechanism of UN, Government and Dáil approval before deploying members of the Defence Forces overseas.

Ireland is currently contributing 137 Defence Forces personnel to 12 different missions throughout the world. The main overseas mission in which Defence Forces personnel are currently deployed is the EU-led operation ALTHEA in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with 43 personnel. Ireland's contribution to this mission will be drawn down in April next as the mission continues to transition to a training and support mission. Once we deploy to UNIFIL it is expected that our total overseas deployment at that stage will amount to just over 500. This is a very significant contribution in the context of the reduced resources available and reflects the Government's continued commitment to international peace-keeping and to the ongoing development of the Defence Forces.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That 440 members of the Defence Forces will go on a UNIFIL mission to Lebanon is welcome, and I compliment the Minister on that. However, the thrust of my question concerned the provision for allowances for overseas deployment. The overall reduction for the Defence Forces in the budget was 20%, or €10.7 million. How will this affect the allowances of those members of the Defence Forces who serve in Lebanon? Will they receive a smaller allowance than those serving in Chad? What exactly will the position be regarding the remuneration of Irish serving members?

Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy and the House will be aware from my answer, there is sufficient provision to meet the cost of the proposed deployment to UNIFIL in 2011. This arises, mainly, because of the reduction in other missions. We made a substantial contribution to KFOR. The Chad mission, because of the nature of the terrain, inaccessibility and the huge cost of transporting equipment, tended to be very expensive. Set-up costs will arise in 2011 with regard to setting up in Lebanon. However, because of the nature of the UN operation there and the fact that it has been there for so long, the set-up costs will be considerably less than they might be in other instances. That will cut into the budget in the way it might in other instances. I strongly believe that we have sufficient to deal with all contingencies that might arise in relation to our commitment to overseas service.

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can I take it that there will be no reduction in overseas allowances for serving members, in spite of the reduction in allowances made in the budget?

Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We need to draw a distinction between the provision in the budgetary process for the overall allocation to the Defence Forces and how that will play out with individual members serving, wherever they might be. One representative association in the Defence Forces has signed up to the Croke Park agreement and the other has not. A complicated process is under way and it would be inappropriate to discuss that or to undermine it. I had a very positive meeting yesterday with RACO and PDFORRA and discussed all the matters of concern to them. In that regard, there are two messages. First, there is a welcome for the fact that a UN deployment is under way for 2011. Second, other issues that arise will be discussed within the processes. One group is within the process and the other currently remains outside.