I have to begin with an expression of admiration. Courage was always in short supply when it came to taking tough decisions during the wasted years of the Celtic Tiger boom. However, there was one area where the deputies opposite did show a modicum of decisiveness. When in Government, the Deputies opposite presided over the closure of no fewer than ten barracks.
Their justification was based on a perfectly logical and reasonable analysis. The consolidation of barracks into a smaller number of locations was a key objective of the previous Government’s White Paper on Defence. This was recommended in many reports. It remains a key objective of the ongoing Defence modernisation programme to maximise the effectiveness of the Defence Forces.
I accept the previous Government’s analysis. The facts remain the facts, regardless of who is in Government.
However, there is nothing admirable in the sheer brass neck entailed in putting this disingenuous motion before the House. As everyone knows, Fianna Fail led coalitions destroyed the public finances and lead our country into receivership. As a result, we have had to undertake a searching reappraisal of every aspect of public expenditure. The legacy we inherited is so dreadful that no area of expenditure can be excluded from review.
The proposers of tonight’s motion know this. They also know that I cannot exclude barracks from this review. I have said so plainly in reply to questions in this house. I have never resorted to any sort of equivocation on the subject. The exchequer is under extreme pressure and no amount of bluff and bluster will bridge the yawning gap between the Government’s income and current expenditure. More hard decisions will be needed.
There are few opportunities to trim Defence spending without impacting on front line delivery. It is self evident that concentrating personnel in fewer locations provides the potential to protect essential collective training and reduce unnecessary overheads in terms of barrack management, administration, maintenance and security. It also affords me the possibility of maintaining the Defence Forces at their current level of approximately 9,500.
This Government has nothing to apologise for in seeking to effect further efficiencies.
In order to place the glaring inconsistency of the Fianna Fail motion in perspective, I want to place on the record of the House the previous Government’s record in this regard.
In July 1998 the then Government announced the closure of 6 barracks (Ballincollig, Fermoy, Devoy, Magee, Castleblaney and Clancy) with the relocation of 880 personnel.
In the context of the 2009 Budget, the then Government also announced the closure of four barracks, (Monaghan, Lifford, Longford and Rockhill House, Letterkenny) with the relocation of 595 personnel and also St. Bricin’s Hospital in Dublin. The closure of the four barracks has been achieved. However the consolidation of St. Bricin’s is linked to the provision of modern medical facilities within the existing Departmental property portfolio and will take some time to implement.
While the closure of barracks and the sale of the properties has provided funding for investment, it was never the sole driving factor for the consolidation of defence infrastructure.
The primary driver for barrack reorganisation and personnel redeployment is the efficient and effective delivery of military capabilities.
As I have said in response to many questions in this House, Defence Forces properties are kept under constant review in terms of addressing Defence Force requirements and ensuring the most appropriate organisation of the Defence Forces taking account of the operational requirements.
Because of the austerity measures initiated by the previous Government, the strength of the Permanent Defence Force has now reduced to 1970 levels and there is an urgent need to maximise efficiency to mitigate the effects of that reduction. Releasing personnel for operational duties requires that the number of barracks be reviewed. If it transpires that significant efficiencies in manpower usage can be gained by reducing the number of barracks, why should this Government use different criteria to its predecessor? The double-think behind this motion verges on the embarrassing. Do the Deputies opposite think that the public have developed amnesia?
The opportunistic motion tabled by Fianna Fail tonight deserves no credibility coming from the party responsible for the economic cataclysm that has impacted on our people. It starkly confirms that despite that party’s unprecedented defeat in the General Election and the passage of time, no lessons have been learnt. All the more perplexing is that party’s failure to acknowledge that previous progammes of barrack rationalization provided funding that, together with pay savings, provided essential resources required for infrastructure, training-area development and equipment procurement.
Since 1998 a total of €84.98 million has been realised from the disposal of six of the barracks closed by Fianna Fail led Governments. Agreement in principle has been reached to dispose of two more of these.
And notwithstanding the extremely depressed state of the property market it now appears that the round of barrack closures effected by Fianna Fail in 2009 will ultimately yield more than €5m.
It is contradictory for Fianna Fáil deputies to claim the current barrack structure should be maintained given Ireland’s commitment to the United Nations. In practice nothing could be further from the truth. To support our UN contribution, we must avoid spreading our resources too thinly and starving the Defence Forces of the appropriate investment in equipment and training which will allow them to continue to meet the standards necessary to participate in overseas missions.
Let me be quite clear, unless we prioritise the resources available to the Defence Forces into the appropriate areas we will not be able to send troops overseas in the future because they will not have the appropriate equipment and training.
We have to do the best we can within the constrained resource envelope. We can’t have it both ways. If everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. To try to pretend otherwise as deputies on the other side of the house are doing is misleading and the deputies know this.
The standard of financial analysis underpinning tonight’s opposition motion is depressingly familiar. It is the type of analysis that brought us to the brink of financial disaster. The Exchequer receipts have fallen by around a third. And what is their prescription? To reprimand the Government for daring to think about a measure that they applied widely to effect efficiencies while in office.
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 – does that make sense to anyone?
What I want to achieve in the comprehensive review of expenditure is the concentration of our investment in those areas of the Defence Forces which are important to its operational and overseas capabilities, to ensure it is properly equipped and trained and that we do not need to reduce its strength substantially below the current strength of 9,500.
After years of economic gloom, signs of hope are beginning to appear. However, motions such as this are a profound disappointment and a reminder that the Deputies opposite still have very little to contribute towards a solution to our very serious economic situation.