Cathal Berry (Kildare South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and the Minister of State for their detailed opening statements. I am very grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this debate and I very much welcome the publication of the report. I join with other Deputies in commending the 16 commissioners for their hard work over the past 13 or 14 months. They delivered the report pretty much on time, despite the Covid pandemic. I would also like to thank every single Deputy and every single party in this House. Long before I became a Member of this House, I used to track the debates and it was obvious there was a lot of common ground when it comes to the defensive perspective. Every single party here is very much in favour of our troops from a pay, housing and healthcare point of view, and that has not gone unnoticed.

The third group of people I would like to thank is the wider Defence Forces community for their support in recent years - everybody from those involved in the Respect and Loyalty parades to the wives and partners of the Defence Forces. Much of what they were advocating for is contained in this report. I hope they can recognise their fingerprints on this report when they read it over time, because a lot of what they asked for is already here.

We have a very good blueprint. It is a blueprint to restore the spirit of the Defence Forces to the once proud organisation it was, even just ten years ago, but it must be implemented. What the report has achieved, even already, is that it is now possible to have a normal civilised, courteous, rational debate and discussion on defence and security matters, just like other countries that exist around the world.

I have five points to make. The first relates to levels of ambition, LOAs. The report is quite clear in that it practically compares the Defence Forces to this country’s Swiss army knife, which is very important. There is massive utility in our armed forces. As they displayed quite effectively during the Covid pandemic, there is no end to the skills and talents on display. They can orientate themselves to any threat, whether it is a biological pandemic, a severe weather event or a security event. It identifies three levels of ambition, as the Minister outlined. A good comparison is an insurance policy. Defence forces are not just needed in times of conflict; they are also needed in times of peace in order to provide national resilience.

If Ireland was a car, LOA 1 would be the equivalent of third party-only insurance, LOA 2 would third-party fire and theft insurance and LOA 3 would be a comprehensive insurance policy. One of the key findings of the report is that we have not even reached LOA 1 yet; it is stating that Ireland does not have an insurance policy. If Ireland was a car, I would say that not only we do not have an insurance policy, we do not even have motor tax or an NCT. We have bald tyres and the single driver who is in charge of the vehicle is utterly demoralised and exhausted. Those are the key takeaway points for me.

The second issue I would like to raise is capability development. This report is all about capability development from a land, sea, air and cyber point of view. We will start with the maritime. Only in the past two or three years have we begun to realise that our maritime area of responsibility is about eight times larger than our jurisdiction. There has been an awakening to that, particularly from the point of view of offshore wind energy generation. We need an effective navy for a number of reasons. First, from a search and rescue point of view, our fishers, trawlers and commercial transport ships need to be rescued in times of great crisis. A search and rescue capability is imperative in that regard. Second, we need a deterrent from a smuggling point of view. We know that vulnerable people are being trafficked into this country, that fugitives can come and go as they please and that weapons and drugs are being brought in. In the past 12 months alone, two submarines full of drugs were found in Spain. Those vessels came across the Atlantic from the Amazon. We have no way of detecting whether there are submarines in our maritime area of responsibility. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I was not going to touch on the air perspective but it has been the subject of much public commentary and has been mentioned this evening. It is a peripheral part of the report but the main driver to increase our air policing capability is not the Defence Forces, although they are in favour of it. If one reads its submission, one will see that the Irish Aviation Authority was the main driver because it recognises that being able to have a recognised air picture is really important from a flight safety point of view. We do not have any primary military grade radar and we are the only one of 27 EU countries that does not have that capability. We need to be able to identify aircraft in our airspace that do not have transponders. We know that drugs are being flown in here late at night to small airstrips but we have no way of detecting the planes carrying them.

The air intercept capability is aspirational for 2040. It is only an option for consideration. The report is right to mention it. It is important to say that those involved are not looking to create this service but, rather, to re-establish it. We had this service in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, when the country was much poorer than it is now. The report looks at considering re-establishing it. Again, this is about flight safety. Only last week in a different country, a commercial airliner lost communications and immediately supersonic aircraft were scrambled and vectored to the location to eyeball the cockpit and confirm that the pilots were awake and could re-establish communications and that the aircraft had not been hijacked. That is important from a flight safety point of view.

I like what Deputy Brady mentioned earlier on about the access the Royal Air Force has been granted to Irish airspace in extreme situations. That was brought 20 years ago in the aftermath of 9/11 in just such an emergency, and I can totally understand the context of that. I am not sure what the Minister’s thoughts on that would be but 20 years on it is probably time we had a debate on that matter. We have shown tonight that we can have a mature conversation about these things now. If we require an air policing service the logical question is whether we should provide it ourselves or if we should ask another country to do so. My preference is that we would provide it for ourselves because I am in favour of us becoming a neutral country and not relying on other people. That matter is worthy of debate, perhaps between now and the summer recess. Such a debate would be useful.

I refer to land capability development. This is about increasing our intelligence capability and again this is all about people. Deputy Boyd Barrett said it is important that we have independent analysis capability and that we are not relying on other countries. An intelligence capability would give us that early warning to prevent incidents happening. Special forces capability needs to be improved so we can intervene before an incident happens. Cybersecurity is essential. We have seen the effects of the HSE cyberattack last summer, which were devastating. It is important that we have a resilient, organised and hardened cybersecurity service to make sure the country is properly protected.

People are essential and the report mentions this. A rifle is only as good as the soldier behind it and a plane is only as good as its pilot. As a mariner, the Minister will be aware that a ship is only as good as its crew. We really have to address the personnel issue in our Defence Forces and there is virtual unanimity in the Chamber on that. The pay problem needs to be resolved. Removing the prohibition on Defence Forces representative associations to affiliate with ICTU is a good start. I was hoping that might be announced today but I appreciate that it is appropriate that the representative associations get the courtesy of consultation in advance of that. I understand that should be forthcoming in the next while. The reason the Defence Forces are the poorest-paid public servants is they have been locked out of the pay talks for the past 30 years because they have not been allowed to affiliate with ICTU. I accept that they get the general round increases like every other public servant, but they do not have access to the chairman’s notes or to the lucrative side deals that other sectors get. Over a 30-year period a significant gap has opened between military and normal pay in the country. With the pay talks coming up at the end of this year I would like to think that the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform would have an empathetic and sympathetic ear when it comes to redressing that injustice that has occurred over the last 30 years.

My constituency colleague, Deputy Patricia Ryan, mentioned housing and I agree entirely with what she said in her contribution. We can do more from a housing and accommodation perspective from a Defence Forces point of view. We have a housing crisis and it is appropriate that the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is in the lead but other Departments can support and assist. We know that we can build houses on the Curragh or in Baldonnel without planning permission because it is military property for military families. I would be grateful for the Minister’s thoughts on that because one of the submissions from the commission was from the Wives & Partners of the Defence Forces and it proposed establishing an approved housing body, AHB, within the military. There are dozens of them already but an AHB could be established to take over military accommodation, manage it properly and even draw down funds from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to build more housing and accommodation on the Curragh or in Baldonnel, where there is plenty of space.

I want to make a point about cost. It has been mentioned that the recommended LOA is to increase the budget by €500 million, which is a big sum. I would argue and contend that the cost of doing nothing would be far more. The cost of the HSE cyberattack, which was only a single attack, is €100 million and rising. One can imagine if we had multiple attacks like that over the course of a year. The key thing is to get ahead of these attacks and prevent them from happening in the first place. Following on from that, the report mentions that we should acquire two new helicopters. It is important that these helicopters would be dual purpose and not exclusively be used for a core military function. For instance, at the moment the Air Corps helicopters are providing an air ambulance service and are completely integrated into the health service. They are also providing an air fire brigade service because whenever there is a bush fire or forest fire they are deployed there. They are used for mountain rescue as well. There is dual technology in these helicopters so an investment is not just being made in the Defence Forces but in national resilience as well.

The report will prove worthless unless it is implemented. I would be grateful if the Minister could indicate if he has somebody in mind to be the independent chair of the implementation body. When are we likely to know who that person is? We discussed this matter at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence yesterday and we agreed that the committee is at the Minister’s disposal if he wishes and if he thinks it could make a useful contribution on implementation. For instance we could bring in the implementation body every quarter or six months for an update to make sure we drive home implementation.

I welcome the report. It is a great vehicle for change and progress and I want to emphasise that there is an enthusiasm and willingness for change on behalf of the defence community. There is also an expectation for change and we can deliver that.

If we do not implement this report, the Defence Forces will collapse. That said, I agree with the phrase that every good builder uses, which is that rock bottom is the best foundation. We cannot get any lower than this and the only way from here is up.

See this speech in context