Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 8: To ask the Minister for Defence the costs to his Department for providing military escorts to banks; the reviews of this practice that are in progress; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12398/05]

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

To aid the civil power is among the roles assigned to the Defence Forces. This means in practice to assist, when requested, the Garda Siochána which has the primary responsibility for law and order, including protection of the internal security of the State. The Defence Forces assist the Garda as required in duties, which include escorting cash deliveries to banks, post offices and other institutions.

The banks pay an annual contribution of €2.86 million for Army escorts. The Department of Finance set this figure in the 1995 budget and it has not been altered since. The contribution from the banks was designed to partially cover the total costs to the State of providing cash escorts. At that time, the contribution covered approximately 72% of the total cost arising to the Defence Forces, including pay and allowances. Based on annual costings by my Department, the relative level of the contribution has fallen in real terms over the years and it now only covers 43% of the total costs.

I have had a number of discussions with the Irish Bankers' Federation on this matter, with a view to increasing the level of contribution by the banks in respect of the costs my Department incurred in the provision of cash escorts. While the ongoing discussions are difficult and the banks put their position robustly, the banks and the IBF have been positive and constructive in their dealings with me. I recently met the IBF on 13 April and we continue to make progress. The Irish Bankers' Federation will soon get back to my Department following further discussions with their members. I hope my officials and officials of the IBF will then be in a position to complete a draft memorandum of understanding between the Department of Defence and the IBF on the financial aspects of the Defence Forces' involvement in cash escorts.

The total cost in the provision by the Defence Forces of assistance to the Garda Siochána in protecting movements of cash in 2003 was in excess of €6.6 million including pay, allowances, transport and aerial surveillance. This is the latest year for which figures are available. This cost related to 2,335 escorts, approximately 80% of which covered deliveries to banks. For the first nine months of 2004, approximately 1,825 escorts took place. In any given month, approximately 1,592 army man-days are expended on duties covering these escorts.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Given the remarkable series of bank raids recently, is the Department of Defence considering increasing the level of Army cover in such raids? Why was the charge not increased since 1995? What is the negotiating position of the banks? Given that the precedent of 72% of the total cost was set in 1995, what possible argument can be given by the banks not to return to that percentage?

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I cannot answer for what has been happening since 1995. I have only been Minister for Defence for the past six months. One of my first acts was to seek an increase in contribution from the banks. I am sorry negotiations have dragged on for so long. I have made it clear to the Irish Bankers' Federation that any agreement will be retrospective to the time I took over as Minister for Defence. I am confident there will be a final agreement on this matter within the next two weeks.

There are two elements to the cost of providing the Army for cash escorts. First, we pay wages to the troops, which we would pay anyway. Second, there is also a security duty allowance, a subsistence allowance, the cost of transport and in some cases, the cost of aerial surveillance. The banks have made the point in negotiations that we would spend the first amount of money in any case, as we would pay the troops even if they were confined to barracks. The banks' position is that the contribution to the Department of Defence covers the extra cost. The position I have taken, which I think the IBF has accepted, is that when we were looking at the level of standing army required, we had to take into account that this was one of the duties of the Army. In other words, we could have fewer troops if we did not have to provide this service. The IBF has largely accepted that view.

There are some outstanding matters on how the cost is divided between the banks and other financial institutions such as An Post. There is also an issue surrounding an escalation clause on how much the fee is to be increased each year. The Department of Finance dealt with the matter centrally, which allocated the initial sum between the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Department of Defence. When I approached the Department of Finance about this, officials wanted to tie both Departments in at the same time. I could not do that as the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform did its own deal last year. The next time I have to answer questions in the House, I am confident that this agreement will be in place.

Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know it is popular to look for funding from the banks, but I feel uneasy with the concept in a democratic society of private industry paying to ensure that we have a secure environment for economic activity. Notwithstanding that, I ask the Minister to look at the concept of military escorts moving cash in a more random fashion. Deputy Sherlock mentioned that no cash escorted by military personnel had been robbed since the practice was initiated in 1978. The escort routes used by the military are well known and I am sure that criminals are aware of this. Will the Minister consider putting military personnel on escorts in a more random fashion, in conjunction with the gardaí, in order to frustrate criminal activity?

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not doing this because it is popular.

Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I accept that.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am doing this because it is right. In 1995, the banks accepted that they should pay almost the full cost of these cash escorts. If it was right back in 1995, then it is right now and I agree with Deputy Ryan on that.

The lead Department on the issue of cash escorts is the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. If cash in excess of a certain amount is being transported, then the banks have to secure a Garda escort. The Garda, in turn, contact the military. The question of random military escorts would, therefore, have to be discussed with the lead Department, but Deputy Timmins has made a useful suggestion. If I stood here three years ago, I would have said there was no need for it, but the idea of robbing large consignments of cash has come back into fashion.

Regarding the point about private industry, the banks are getting a great deal out of this as well. It is useful for a large financial institution making a big profit to have State security escorts, especially the Army, which has proved to be a 100% deterrent to criminals.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

People are concerned that much of the money taken in the robbery in Artane will be invested in drugs. Does the Minister share those concerns? Does the Minister share my concern that there was a lack of professionalism from the security company and the banks, as well as a lack of concern from the State? My final question on charges relates to going after the banks to pay for the services. I agree with Deputy Timmins that the State has a duty to protect its citizens. I am concerned about private industry being involved in providing escorts for banks. Does the Minister accept that if he goes after the banks which, in turn, will face increased costs, they will then screw their customers? That is another concern with which we will have to deal.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's last point could be used as an argument for never imposing any kind of levy on banks or financial institutions.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am saying that the State has a responsibility, so let the State do it.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Sherlock mentioned the figures for bank profits earlier but everyone would agree that what we are asking them to pay, in addition to what they are paying already, will be like a drop in the ocean given their overall profits. I am sure it would cost more to devise some system to take it back from the consumers, given that the cost involved is so little compared to the banks' overall profits.

Of course I share Deputy Finian McGrath's concerns about this money being used to invest in the illegal drugs business. Back in 1978 when this system was first introduced — at the behest of the State — the fear was about large sums of cash falling into the hands of subversives. The subversive threat has receded somewhat, although not completely, since 1978. Currently, the people involved in such crime seem to emanate more from the organised criminal fraternity. There is plenty of intelligence to this effect so there is no doubt that a lot of that money is being robbed precisely for the reason the Deputy mentioned, namely to invest in the drugs trade. Robbing cash transits is regarded as a fairly dangerous activity, whereas it is much less risky to get involved in the drugs trade, particularly if one is at the top of the drugs ring and removed from the action on the ground.

I also agree with Deputy Finian McGrath about the lack of professionalism in the security industry. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform recently expressed grave concerns about that matter. He has met with representatives of the security industry and has given them about four months to get their act together. It is not before time.