DF Commission Report

The DoD, going back as long as I can recall, have always seemed to delight in returning budget at the end of the year, as if its a great thing. But its actually the worst thing to do, because it demonstrates incompetent management.

Yes, the other State bodies would teach them a thing or two, but unfortunately its hard enough to spend current expenditure in that fashion when it comes to Defence, unless somebody raises a Purchase Order for 400 Javelin Missiles and 50 million rounds of 5.56.

As I see it, apart from neutrality and some of the associated red herrings, we are a wealthy country that benefits massively from EU membership and global trade. Accordingly, we need to play our part as good global citizens, be it peacekeeping / enforcement, defence of the EU (cyber, Med Operations, piracy off Africa, drug interdiction, patrol of our territorial seas, [inc. safeguarding what lies beneath e.g. tel/comm link] and policing of our skies). This is way before we even get to discussing boots on the ground to assist neighbours who share our values and interests, or even further again, NATO membership. Make no mistake a safe, stable and prosperous EU and international order is in our vital strategic national interest - anyone who says anything to the contrary is talking unmitigated Bravo Sierra!!

While we will never be a massive military power, nor should we be - talk of taking-on the Russians etc is a completely false equivalence. However, we can afford and should be able to provide some level of self sufficiency to defend our own basic national interests as we seek to define them.

Personally, I can't abide freeloaders or hypocrisy, and I think it is time we displayed some degree of national self respect. I feel most right minded citizens who understand the issues rather than listening to a myopic, insular perspective, would agree.

The only way to ringfence it, is to capitalise it and I explained above what a problem that is.

The exchequer budget is a pretty transparent process (though involved and boring) for a reason. It absolute does not tolerate Empire building or the creation of large discretionary funds.

Like every other Department, Defence has to rely on the political commitment to its resourcing on an ongoing basis. That's where the longterm fight will be.

Not a very exciting slug of money to go a very long way. I remember a mate of mine in the DF said that they called the Mowags "bullet magnets"

The Journal's headline of "€8bn defence proposals" is almost as bad as the comments underneath.

Taken from RTE

"Today's decision should enable the defence forces respond to an attack on Irish sovereignty."

It must be some primary radar if it can not only see but take action. Have i missed something are we getting Gripens?

Make no mistake, the primary concern and priority for improvement is cyber vulnerability and intelligence / counter-espionage.

I would suggest that the next greatest vulnerability is sub-surface.

Bring it on! A nation once again!

All i can say is God Bless Mary Lou and her crew. Thanks to her antics with a motion that was never going to pass all attention was diverted from the increase and will be forgotten tomorrow and defence forces can start to rebuild. Hardly a word in the media a great way to do it

Has there been any specifics on the breakdown of future current expenditure, i.e. what proportion is on pay and what is on capex?

Pay is the only real development here IMO, as the capex is just going to pay for the things (MRV, radar which has gone from 10m to 200m?, Etc) already planned but never actually materialised.

So for the air corps are we looking at in the short term 1 extra 295 for transport and 2 139s. Then long term 8 189s or similar?

Level 4 armour for the army what APC would that be?

An the navy early repacement of niamh and her sister?

Air Corps Code for pints

Thanks. Only one I could come up with was the FW 189!

I'm not impressed at all with the lack of acceptance in the HLAP of the recommended C2 structure and force element parity (labelled as revert to Govt at later stage).

As someone who is a project and change manager by profession, I don't think you can agree civilian appointments immediately for Heads of Transformation and Strategic HR, without so much as a roadmap for achieving the key Chief of Defence, Deputy and Vice Chiefs and Heads of Service to enable operational reorganisation.

Failing to do so, sets up the kind of dysfunction that was seen in An Garda Siochána when the senior civilian administrators landed, without any reform of the Brass and it became a zero buy-in, adversarial environment.

This worries me quite a bit and makes all other physical equipment decisions fairly incidental.

PS - I see a footnote in the implementation table, that The Minister wishes to see these recommendations (collectively the above) implemented sooner. There must have been an almighty tussle at Cabinet or inter-department, if Coveney ended up forcing what amounts to a Minority Report, into the HLAP document.