Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

It is on the Order Paper. I very much support the Government counter-motion. The provision of an effective maritime search and rescue service is critical to Ireland as an island nation with a strong maritime sector. The sector depends on the reliability and professionalism of the Irish Coast Guard and all the component parts, including the Coast Guard aviation service, to offer a service that can deploy at a moment's notice to rescue people in distress and bring them to a place of safety. I know full well the benefits of that, coming from a county such as Clare that has a very significant coastline. Tulla, where I live, is on the flight path of the search and rescue aircraft based at Shannon as it heads towards the west Clare area. It flies that route almost daily, either on training or a live mission.

I and others must recognise the debt of gratitude the State owes to the people who put their lives at risk day in, day out to save the lives of others, such as fishermen or people who have been overcome by an accident off the west coast or any other coast. In my opinion, the motion contains factual inaccuracies and some of the information it contains is out of date. It calls for the suspension of the tender process for a new SAR contract. That would leave a significant gap in the availability of a SAR service and that has to be taken into account. The current Coast Guard aviation service contract is due to expire in 2024 and the procurement process for the next contract is now well under way. The reports of the economic and financial evaluation unit and the Comptroller and Auditor General, the accident investigation report on the R116 tragedy and the Frazer-Nash consultancy review of the national search and rescue framework were considered in framing the proposals for the procurement process. Of course, we all rightly share the deep sympathy to the families of those who were lost in the R116 accident. The information around that was harrowing to read in the aftermath of the various reports. I have every expectation, based on what the Government has stated, that the learnings from that event have been taken into consideration in the procurement of the next service. However, for the reasons I have outlined, it would be entirely wrong to shelve the process that is under way.To say that it is just a value-for-money issue is wide of the mark when we consider that we, as Members of the Oireachtas, have access to the Committee of Public Accounts, which will always review matters at a later stage and go through in detail the outcomes of various procurement processes and the spending of money. We should be assured that as the Oireachtas functions, the checks and balances are there.

It is difficult from this vantage point in advance the full procurement process to know what the cost of anything will be. I accept that there are indicative figures that those in the industry will know, but the purpose of having a competitive tendering process is so that those who have the skills, expertise, knowledge and know-how are able to bid to offer a service. It is then up to an evaluation committee to look at it in every respect. It is not just about value for money for me. While I accept that is important, of greater importance are the safety and lives of people who carry out the service and the ability of the service to meet the needs of a diverse area, particularly on the western seaboard where our requirements to travel very considerable distance out into the Atlantic Ocean happens almost daily. It is not just about the cost; it is about the capabilities, experience and wherewithal of the ultimate winner of that contract to meet the needs of the service.

It is also important to recognise the tremendous work that is being done at the four bases. I am very familiar with the one at Shannon and the personnel there. They are people of the highest standards and skills. They deploy at a moment's notice and they deliver a phenomenal service. While they are not State employees, they are under a State contract. They are not part of the Army. Many of them are former members of the Defence Forces and would feel they can deliver a far better service through the company they work for - with the UK model of privatisation of the service through an independent contractor - rather than through a State agency. We should also take those views into account.