Apologies for this session have been received from Deputies Catherine O'Callaghan and Duncan Smith. The select committee is meeting to consider a 2025 Supplementary Estimate for Vote 36 - Defence. I welcome on behalf of the committee the Minister of State at the Department of Defence, Deputy Byrne. He is accompanied by the following officials from the Department of Defence: Ms Aileen Nolan, assistance secretary for corporate affairs, Mr. Tom Hussey, principal officer in the finance branch, and Mr. Cathal Duffy, principal officer in procurement and acquisitions. The format of the meeting is I will invite the Minister of State to make an opening statement. This will be followed by questions from members of the committee. Each member has a five-minute slot to ask questions and for the witnesses to respond.

I advise members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, a member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask any members participating via Microsoft Teams that, prior to making their contribution to the meeting, they formally confirm that they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus.

Both members and witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction. As the witnesses will probably be aware, the committee will publish their opening statements on its website following the meeting.

I invite the Minister of State to make his opening statement.

I thank the committee for the chance to present the 2025 Supplementary Estimate we have asked for on the Defence Vote. The 2025 Estimate provides a gross allocation of €1.021 billion for the Defence Vote. This includes a capital allocation of €215 million, which provides for the necessary procurement and upgrading of defence equipment and infrastructure.

With Ireland assuming the Presidency of the EU from July 2026, there is an urgent operational requirement to prioritise delivery of certain Defence Forces counter unmanned aerial system capabilities that would otherwise be progressed and delivered later and are planned for already as part of the ongoing military radar programme. As a result, I am seeking a substantive capital Supplementary Estimate of €19 million on the Defence Vote.

Subject to negotiation and finalisation of contracts, which I obviously cannot go into, the required capabilities are to be procured in an accelerated manner with planned delivery of counter unmanned aerial system, C-UAS, capability in early 2026.

The development of military radar capabilities will ensure that Ireland can maintain a complete "recognised air picture" and was outlined as a key priority in both the programme for Government and the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. The military radar programme is a programme of work encompassing land-based long-range primary radar; ground-based air defence systems, to include counter unmanned aerial systems; and the maritime shipborne radar. The programme of work is ongoing and good progress is being made.

However, recent events in the European Union whereby Danish authorities observed several drone incursions over military sites, most notably Karup airbase, forcing the temporary closure of airspace to commercial traffic, have put a renewed focus on the delivery of Defence Forces C-UAS capabilities in time for the Presidency next year. Similar events have been reported in Germany, Norway and Lithuania. This adds to a broader pattern of unexplained drone operations across Europe, heightening security concerns. Earlier procurement of this capability - it has been planned; we are just doing it earlier - will allow the Defence Forces to provide aerial protection around Baldonnel and to ensure that the facility can remain open in the event of any potential drone disruption around the time of VIP flights during the Presidency.

It is expected that savings of a similar amount to those outlined will arise in Vote 35 - Army Pensions. That Vote is demand driven, and it is clear that demand in 2025 is significantly less than originally anticipated. This is due mainly to the impact of retention measures, primarily the changes to the mandatory retirement age introduced in late 2024, in addition to the mix of retirees between officers and enlisted personnel. While Votes 35 and 36 combine to form the defence Vote group, the separate Vote structure restricts fund transfers in these scenarios. The savings on the Army pensions Vote will be returned to the Exchequer, resulting in an overall net neutral position between the two Votes. This is really just a transfer between two Votes that we have to come to the Dáil for.

I also need to address the technical supplementary requirement that arises with savings on the pay allocation of €5.1 million being used to offset other cost pressures within Vote 36, with a €3 million requirement for litigation and compensation costs and €2.1 million for discovery costs related to the Defence Forces Tribunal.

As the global landscape grows ever more complex, it is vital that we recognise just how broad and essential the role of our Defence Forces has become. They not only are central to protecting and strengthening Ireland's resilience but also play a key part in supporting international peace and security. With Ireland set to assume the Presidency of the EU next year, it is more important than ever to ensure we have the capabilities, the expertise and the readiness to meet these responsibilities with confidence.

I commend the defence Supplementary Estimate to the committee. I am happy to engage on any issues that may arise.

Thank you, Minister. I will now go to members. As there are three members here, I will allow some leeway of up to seven minutes per Deputy. First is Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire.

The meat of this probably relates to C-UAS. I think we all will welcome and support investment in things that will ensure that the Presidency can go off without any issue and that ensures that our air defence is stronger. We have seen a fair bit of reporting on the threats that are there. They are real threats and it is important that we be prepared to respond to them.

On the financial side of things, is the additional cost of this wholly subsumed by the savings in the Army pension or are there savings from other parts of the defence budget that will allow for this expenditure?

It is likely to be a bit more expensive than that. We do not have exact costs yet because, obviously, the contract negotiations are ongoing. This will be a part payment or we may have to come back. There will be a big down payment on it and the rest will come out of next year's capital budget, basically, so this is money we need this year.

Is the money being spent this year all from Army pension savings?

Yes.

It is, in total.

Yes.

Very good.

There may be other costs next year, but the capital budget on that has already been agreed, I think.

Two more questions arise from that. First, is the Department confident that this will be fully installed and in place, with personnel ready for it, by the start of the Presidency? Second, this arose previously, but do we have the personnel in a position to use this or will additional training be required?

Additional training will of course be required, but I think the personnel we have are well capable of running this and are looking forward to it. I think the issues that arose previously at Dublin Airport, for example, were really of a different order-----

No, I was not referring to that. I appreciate that. We had a discussion previously. Actually, it was in private session so I will not go into that now.

We have known for some time that we will have the Presidency. Issues in relation to Presidencies, drones and so on have arisen probably over the course of the past two years, so it could be argued that this should have been identified as a need at an earlier stage. Why are we coming to it now, maybe not quite at the eleventh hour, but at a relatively late stage and looking for additional funding to purchase this?

This has been a priority since the Commission on the Defence Forces. I am sure the committee has looked at it before. It is a priority in the national development plan. It is in the programme for Government. It is not just about the Presidency. These are what I have described over time as fundamental gaps we have in our security, and we have to address them, Presidency or no Presidency. There is a renewed urgency because of what we have seen, particularly during the Danish Presidency, but this has been planned for some time. The reality is that Baldonnel will be used by quite a number of leaders and probably foreign ministers and we need to make sure that it is fully protected. The Garda is in overall charge of the security for the Presidency. It is doing tremendous work and working with the DAA and other airports, including the airport in the Deputy's constituency, probably. Baldonnel is in the purview of the Defence Forces and we have to make sure it is protected to the greatest extent possible. This has been planned for the past number of years as part of the overall radar situation, but this particular aspect of it has to be put in urgently. That is why we are coming to the committee on it.

The Minister of State mentioned the radar picture. Along with naval capacity, that is probably the crucial, most salient area of investment for the Defence Forces. Can he give us an update on the timescale? I know it is a big project. I think we are, broadly speaking, in the tendering phases of it, but where are we in terms of the timescale for full delivery?

I reiterate that the development of a primary radar capability is one of the key recommendations made in the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. We need to ensure that we can see what is going on and that we have a complete air picture. This has been and continues to be a top priority for the Government. I believe it is anticipated that procurement negotiations will conclude this year. That is our hope. It will be complex to put in as there are different aspects of it. Some of the work in terms of putting in place some aspects of this, including but not limited to what we are talking about at the moment, will start in 2026, and we expect full delivery by the end of 2028.

It is vital. We need to know what is happening in our seas and our skies. I think we are all monitoring the news. We see the situation in Britain with the Russian spy ship going through British waters. Similar things could occur here, and we need to be very mindful of our subsea cables and the things that exist in Irish seas. An element of this investment will include shipborne monitoring as well. It is crucial that we deliver that as soon as possible.

My only other question relates to a fair increase in the litigation costs. Is that off the back of anything in particular? I know that, at the start of the year, there was litigation of settlements in relation to-----

There are two parts to that. One is the discovery costs. There was quite a significant order for discovery at the tribunal.

I am referring to the other part of it.

That is one part of it. The other part of it is that it costs money. All I can say is that there have been a number of cases where litigation was at issue. There have been one or two very significant ones this year.

That is difficult to plan for because it depends on litigation. The State Claims Agency does this on behalf of the Department and the Minister. When cases come in and awards are made, payments must be made. There is no discretion in that. There was one substantial award in the amount of €2 million.

Would I be right in saying it relates to exposure to chemicals in the Air Corps?

My officials have informed me that is the case.

I will not second guess the outcome of litigation but I understand there is a substantial amount ongoing. Would it be wise to budget for a larger amount in this regard?

That is exactly what the Department is doing for next year.

The C-UAS is vital and badly needed. During the Presidency, we must not have circumstances in which security issues arise, so it is vital that the investment be made. I fully support it. It is a wise investment. I imagine that because of the additional expenditure, there will be no defence allocation handed back to the Exchequer.

No. That is why we are moving from one Vote to another.

Very good.

I have no issue at all with the Supplementary Estimate. As was said, it is a paper exercise that involves moving money from one column to another. However, I have a couple of questions about two items. Earlier, the Minister of State mentioned that the Tánaiste had reached an agreement on air traffic controllers and their conditions. I am aware that the Minister of State is very committed to ensuring we have a very successful EU Presidency, and that would include the security arrangements for it. As party spokesperson on justice and from having a Garda perspective, I am of the view that it is really important that there be no hiccups with air traffic control and that it be available 24-7, particularly during the Presidency. We need to be able to scramble the Garda helicopter at all times for domestic purposes, never mind meeting our commitments during the EU Presidency.

We had representatives from the veterans’ associations before us a short time ago. One of the big issues for them relates to housing for veterans. We know from anecdotal evidence that there are issues concerning housing for serving members of the Defence Forces. One witness suggested that we could go back to providing housing within barracks for serving members of the Defence Forces and cited the fact that the Curragh Camp, for example, has been hollowed out. What was proposed may be desirable. Could the Minister of State consider it with departmental officials? This is a serious issue.

The Deputy is absolutely correct that air traffic control is crucial. The informal meetings of the Heads of State of the 27 member states are held adjacent to the European political community meetings, which include another 20 Heads of State and Government. In the event of a crisis back home, a person may have to get on a plane in the middle of the night or whenever. As a result, this is really important.

It is the case that we will see a full return to full operational flight activities from next month, and there are various measures being implemented to ensure that will happen. These include availing of new recruitment opportunities and direct entry opportunities, flexibility in relation to promotion and a contractual agreement with an external service provider to provide flight information services. That is really important. We should have it anyway but, during the Presidency, it will be critical.

I agree with the Deputy on housing. It is definitely a matter that the Minister can examine. The Minister is at the Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels today. The most recent iteration of the investment plan estimated infrastructure requirements to be in the region of €408 million for the coming years. Over the past five years, 45 capital infrastructure projects were completed in Defence Forces installations and barracks. Those projects did not include accommodation in many cases. However, this is an issue that the Department can continue to pursue. I will certainly raise it with the Minister when I see her.

I apologise for arriving late. I have a question on the Reserve Defence Forces and the security duty allowance, which has been changed or reinterpreted so that it does not to cover operational matters and covers training alone. What a training role is has been clarified. Does a person receive compensation only for training positions in respect of training activities as opposed to operational activities? Effectively, is a full volunteer for operational activity. Particularly during the EU Presidency, I anticipate that we will be relying on the reserves to step up and provide cover. Obviously, our forces are below their full capability due to recruitment issues. Are we going to consider this? Are we going to be asking the reserves effectively to work for free, particularly during the Presidency or are we considering amending the provision?

On the specific point, I am going to come back to the Deputy because I do not have the information. The matter is being examined. It is the case that we will need the Reserve Defence Force during the Presidency. The military are not going to be front facing during the Presidency, obviously, but will have a very important role. Gardaí will be more visible on the streets than the military. We are looking into this, but I just do not have an exact answer for the Deputy today. I will make sure the Minister reverts to the Deputy.

I appreciate that. I thank the Minister.

I take this opportunity to congratulate our new Minister, Deputy Helen McEntee, and wish her well in her role. I thank Deputy Simon Harris for his service as Minister. What reassurance can the Minister of State give to the Irish people regarding Russian spy-ships’ intelligence-gathering and mapping of undersea cables? What reassurance can he give them, particularly if the Russian ship enters the European exclusive economic zone. I am aware that there are things the Minister of State cannot say, but can he give the Irish people any reassurance in terms of our readiness to address this?

I am not going to say anything about the specifics, certainly in public. However, we have been aware and saying for some time that there is a serious threat from Russia in various forms. That has been most notable in the context of the land invasion of Ukraine. Russia has been organising hybrid measures, sometimes in co-operation with Belarus. In this regard, consider the illegal migration at various points, the drone issues at various airports and what has been happening in Poland just this week in the context of explosions on train lines. We see Russia as the biggest threat to security across Europe. This should be foremost in our minds. Even before the invasion of Ukraine, we recognised that the Defence Forces needed a massive increase in investment. Delivery on that is starting to happen under this Government. That especially includes knowing what is going on in the sky and in the sea. That is why we have concluded contracts to provide a sonar detection system in the sea. We have announced that. We are in the late stages of procurement negotiations on the radar. These are very basic requirements so we, along with our European colleagues, allies and friends, will know what is going on.

We are not part of a defence relationship with other countries in the form of NATO or that and we are not going to be, but we need to know what is going on in our skies and in the sea around us. Our colleagues need to have that information as well because there are certainly things happening that should not be happening and there are things happening that we do not know about. This will change that. I can give an absolute assurance that the security of the State is the fundamental duty of the Government and the investment we are making in our Defence Forces is about protecting the State and protecting its citizens.

This committee's members disagree on some elements, but on the issue of proper investment in our Defence Forces, we are unanimous, so the Minister of State has our support on that. We will always seek transparency and value for money in how taxpayers' money is spent.

On behalf of the select committee I again thank the Minister of State and the Department of Defence officials for their time and also the material they circulated to the committee in advance of the meeting.