Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 44: To ask the Minister for Defence if he will reform the triple lock mechanism which governs the deployment of contingents of the Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23768/06]

Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 56: To ask the Minister for Defence the proposed changes to the law he intends to make to allow Irish troops to participate in purely humanitarian relief operations not the subject of UN Security Council resolutions; the type of operations that would fall under this definition; when he expects to bring forward these changes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23796/06]

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 63: To ask the Minister for Defence the changes which will occur in the level of Ireland's participation in NATO's Partnership for Peace if the legislative impediments to Irish troops training and exercising abroad are removed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24141/06]

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 64: To ask the Minister for Defence the legal status of Defence Forces overseas missions under the Defence Acts; if there is a need for an avoidance of doubt measure to clarify their status under the law; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23787/06]

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 73: To ask the Minister for Defence the changes he is making to the Defence Acts to authorise Defence Forces participation in overseas missions; the reason these changes are required; when it came to his attention that these changes were required; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23786/06]

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 80: To ask the Minister for Defence if there is a legal distinction between UN established and UN authorised military operations in terms of the Defence Acts 1960 and 1993; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24146/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 44, 56, 63, 64, 73 and 80 together.

I established an interdepartmental group made up of representatives from the Department of Defence, the Defence Forces, the Department of An Taoiseach, the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Attorney General's Office, to examine all issues relating to Ireland's potential participation in an EU-led rapid response capability. As part of its study the interdepartmental group recommended changes to current legislation in relation to overseas service. The main elements of these changes concern the updating of the Defence Acts in relation to UN mandated peace support operations, humanitarian operations, overseas training and exercises and a number of avoidance of doubt provisions. The requirement for this amending legislation arises irrespective of our participation in Battle groups.

As Deputies will be aware, Ireland participates in missions either established or authorised by the UN Security Council. The consistent advice of the Attorney General is, and continues to be, that missions established or authorised by the UN Security Council fall within the requirements of the existing Defence Acts. However, there is a question as to whether other terms such as endorses or supports, which are a feature of such resolutions, would pass the test in the current Defence Acts. It would be unacceptable that, as a result of a legal technicality in our Defence Acts, the Permanent Defence Force would be precluded from participating in a legitimate UN peace support operation, solely on the basis of the specific language used in a resolution. As such, I am taking the opportunity in this Bill to put this issue beyond doubt. In doing so, I am also taking the prudent approach of putting beyond question any possible challenge to our participation in missions authorised by the UN. The Triple Lock requirement of UN, Government and Dáil approval will continue to stand.

I can assure the House that there is no question over the legality of Ireland's participation in UNMIL, KFOR, EUFOR or any other peace support mission which is the subject of a UN Security Council Resolution. Participation in all such missions is subject to the advice of the Attorney General on the relevant resolution. As I already stated, the consistent advice of the Attorney General is, and continues to be, that missions established or authorised by the UN Security Council are consistent with the requirements of the existing Defence Acts.

In the Defence Amendment Bill, 2006, I also propose to provide for the participation by Defence Forces personnel in humanitarian operations in response to natural and man-made disasters such as the tsunami in South East Asia or the earthquake in Pakistan. Having regard to the contribution which Defence Forces personnel can play in disaster areas and Ireland's commitment to support disaster relief and humanitarian response, it is important that the Defence Forces can be deployed to such missions in an appropriate manner, under normal military command and control, and with the appropriate safeguards. It is also vital that Government can respond to legitimate and urgent requests for humanitarian relief by affected States involving resources and equipment which may only be available from military means in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, such as, temporary accommodation, tents, water treatment plant, generators, lifting equipment and other capabilities.

The advice of the Attorney General, contained in the Report of the Interdepartmental Group, is that members of the Permanent Defence Forces may only be despatched for service outside the State as part of an International United Nations Force, that is, a force established or authorised by the Security Council or the General Assembly of the United Nations. Under the current Defence Acts, the option to despatch a contingent of the Defence Forces on humanitarian operations is not available to the Government, as such events are not the subject of UN Security Council resolutions. In these cases, Defence Forces personnel must volunteer for service with a civil undertaking (such as an NGO), in the same manner as any ordinary citizen, whereupon the NGO would then deploy them to the disaster area. The provision in the proposed legislation will enable the Government to deploy members of the Permanent Defence Force as Defence Forces personnel under military command in response to a disaster or emergency.

In the case of rapid response, including Battle group commitments, it will probably be necessary to have equipment containerised and despatched, together with personnel, while the UN Security Council resolution is being finalised. In addition, members or contingents of the Permanent Defence Force may have to assemble in the Framework Nation for the Battle group, with their equipment, ready for despatch in advance of the formal adoption of the Resolution. The Defence (Amendment) Bill 2006 is designed to facilitate this type of rapid response deployment, a facility, I might add, that has been welcomed and is strongly supported by the United Nations.

The provision in the Bill in relation to overseas training will include exercises. This is vitally important in the context of interoperability with other forces contributing to international peace support operations, and to rapid response and is an important force protection issue. Currently, in Liberia we are operating jointly as the quick reaction force and in KFOR as part of a multinational task force. However, we can't continue with the current situation where our first joint training is when we are on the ground in a real, live and potentially dangerous environment. In certain situations, we will need to engage in joint training with other countries with whom we will be deployed, so as we can operate from the outset as an effective and cohesive force.

The amendments in relation to training are designed solely to improve Ireland's interoperability with other forces with which it will be operating when deployed on peace support operations on foot of a UN Security Council Resolution. It is a force protection issue, mainly related to our participation in EU Battle groups. There is no connection between this legislative amendment and our participation in PfP.

Alongside these changes, I am also bringing forward a number of avoidance of doubt provisions relating to the deployment of members of the Permanent Defence Forces in international organisations such as the EU and the UN, the deployment of Defence Forces personnel in monitoring and advisory roles, the undertaking of training, reconnaissance and fact finding mission etc., all of which have been a facet of Defence Forces operations for many years.

Having regard to the advice from the Attorney General to the effect that there is no formal basis in the Defence Acts for the despatch of Permanent Defence Force personnel on such duties, I think it important that the matter be put beyond doubt. I am taking the opportunity in the Defence (Amendment Bill) 2006 to do this.

All of these issues are important and have been addressed explicitly in the Bill. With the co-operation of the Oireachtas, I would hope to have this legislation enacted before the summer recess.