Kathryn Reilly (Sinn Fein)

Sinn Féin had sought to seek to amend the original Fianna Fáil motion to include the closure of Garda stations and to deal with some of the terminology and the loose language, that could be seen to undermine the arguments and fails to reflect the situation in the North.

I deplore the amendment put forward by the Government parties. I take offence to the line which mentions the opposition to these decisions for "short-term political advantage". How dare the Government condemn anyone or any group for standing shoulder to shoulder with their local communities, for representing their friends, colleagues and neighbours, like the people in the Visitors Gallery. I went to school with the families of soldiers. I socialise and play sport with them. The Opposition are not the members playing politics with people's lives under the pretext that it is the final diktat of the troika. The Dáil debate on this issue was dominated by the narrative that Ireland has no choice, which is completely and totally untrue. The Government is free to adjust the terms of the bailout agreement on the condition that the final outcome remains the fiscal adjustment to which the agreement commits Ireland. Was it not the Minister's party that campaigned and was elected on a mandate of "we will renegotiate" and "we will get a better deal"? This amendment is really true to form. It is an abdication of responsibility. At what stage will the Government take responsibility for what it is doing? It looks unlikely that it will take responsibility for budget decisions. It seems to be a Government that promises much, even though it has an overwhelming mandate to deliver change, and delivers little. It offers excuses, as we have seen from Senator Coghlan's exchange with Senator Wilson.

The Government is blaming Fianna Fáil for its failed policies, but that can only get it so far. It cannot pretend to be something different when implementing the policies of the previous Government.

On the question of costs and savings, there is no economic gain to be made by closing barracks. There would be immediate costs involved in transferring and redeploying the troops currently based in the barracks. There is no spare capacity in other locations. Closing the barracks would likely involve building and updating facilities. The Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe last week stated in the Dáil:

This is purely a parochial game which simultaneously ignores the national requirement. The Government will not continue the Fianna Fáil habit of wasting taxpayers' money. Rather, its aim is to use that money to get the best possible return for the country as a whole.

What does the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin have to say about his comprehensive spending review, when one looks at the cost of paying extra travelling allowances to approximately 600 people for up to nine months; the substantial capital investments that will be needed in other barracks to accommodate those who are dislocated or the substantial security and maintenance bill for the closed sites? That does not sound like savings to me or the best possible return for the country, not least when the reality is that there will be no financial gain from any potential sale of a closed barracks in the present property market. Will the Minister respond to that or tweet me a response?.

In the vicinity of the Dún Uí Néill barracks in Cavan, the recession in the private sector has left its mark with empty retail sites littered the length of the Dublin Road. Now the Government wants to close the state-of-the-art facility, hitting the area a final knockout blow. As we have already heard, the cost to Cavan town and county is estimated to be €3 million per annum as this money will be taken out of circulation. We have to look at the personal cost to people if these barracks are closed. On foot of the closure of the Monaghan barracks and the earlier closures of Cootehill and Castleblayney barracks, Dun Ui Neill barracks became home to many of those displaced members of the Defence Forces and a further displacement of these soldiers and their families, with all that this entails, is grossly unfair and may force some soldiers to leave. Is the dole queue going to be their only future? What will a serving member who is already in negative equity do? The soldiers bought homes in these towns for record high prices during the boom. Will they and their families be bailed out? These serving soldiers have given service to individuals and their community, struggling to deal with the variety of challenges. The value of the Army's civil support role was not appreciated until very recently when we experienced the severe weather conditions of the last few winters and the Army helped to keep the emergency services in action. What was Deputy Shatter's response last week in the Dáil? He said "...the implication of this motion is that we should conduct the comprehensive review of expenditure on the basis that the taxpayer should continue to invest in something that is not required".