General Election 2016 - debate about defence policy of competing parties

seanaway

Ren2k7 wrote: »

Since SF have never been in govt so you have no way of knowing what a SF govt will entail. Like I said they couldn't be any worse than the fools who've governed Ireland since 1922.
.

Ah now....I'd say they could be and they would be.

Ren2k7

Thanks for the new thread Morpheus. So yeah, let's discuss the actual policies of the main parties:

Fine Gael doesn't have anything in relation to the DF in their manifesto of any kind, preferring to focus on exclusively economic issues. Presumably their proposals for the DF align with the WP.

http://www.finegael.ie/our-plan/the-plan/

Fianna Fáil's manifesto OTOH contains quite a bit more information than the Blueshirts' proposals with plans to reactivate the 4th Western Brigade and increase the number of troops. Of course this is FF who routinely lie through their teeth. They also plan on increasing Garda numbers to 15,000. Fantasy stuff from the Soldiers of Destiny.

(ii) Expand the Defence forces to 10,500 personnel and Reserve Defence Forces (RDF) to 4,000 personnel

We will:
- Restore the Force to the strength of 10,500 personnel across the Army, Air Corps and Naval Service over a five year term at a cost of €22m. This includes the restoration of the Army to a three brigade structure by re-establishing the 4th Western Brigade based in Custume Barracks, Athlone.

- Devolve control of recruitment back to the Reserve Defence Force to increase numbers to 4,000 personnel with a €1.7m investment. We will energetically reinvigorate the Reserve by extending its geographical reach to ensure that all citizens have a Reserve unit within touching distance of their homes.

(iii) Maintain our Neutrality status
Ireland has a long and proud tradition of constructive neutrality that has enabled us to play an important role as peacekeepers across the globe. This has facilitated our ability to spearhead initiatives such as nuclear non-proliferation and the ban on cluster munitions.
- We will maintain our neutrality status as the bedrock of our Foreign Affairs policy.

https://www.fiannafail.ie/download/An-Ireland-for-all-Fianna-FaCC81il-Manifesto.pdf

Labour, like FG have nothing on their website on anything beyond the economy and more social welfare for the working classes. Nice

https://www.labour.ie/policy/overview.html

Sinn Féin, like FF address the subject of the DF by re-enforcing its commitment to neutrality above all else, a policy FF also share incidentally. They'd bring in a constitutional amendment to enshrine neutrality into the constitution, a position actually supported by much of the Irish public. Whatever one thinks of SF on the issue of neutrality they actually are closer to the public line of thinking than the average pro-NATO Blueshirt.

We will ensure that the State adheres to a policy of positive neutrality.

We will oppose the further militarisation of the EU and attempts to create a standing EU army, and we will terminate Ireland’s involvement in EU Battle Groups and the use of Irish airports by foreign armies engaged in war.

We will hold a referendum on inserting neutrality into Bunreacht na hÉireann.

We will continue to support the deployment of Irish troops on UN-mandated peacekeeping missions around the world that enhance our
neutrality.

SF would also continue sending the NS on refugee taxi duties in the Med.

https://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2016/GE2016ElectionManifesto.pdf

So to sum up, the status quo from FG, Lab and SF while FF would increase the size of the army..........






I'm still not voting FFailure!

Ren2k7

seanaway wrote: »

Ah now....I'd say they could be and they would be.

Let me just remind you that it was FG and Lab who disbanded an entire brigade and shut down Ireland's only purpose built army barracks. Now SF might be terrible for the Defence Forces. But let me reiterate.... YOU DON'T KNOW THIS! They've never been in government so no-one knows what their policies towards the DF so the ONLY thing we can go on is their manifesto which is pretty much, as you were.

Manach

I'd not have expected much on the various parties stance on the Military. Shade's of Kipling's Tommy. However given the outgoing's government handling of the issue of deserter parties, I would not believe the FG/Lab care overly much for defence.

sparky42

Ren2k7 wrote: »

Sinn Féin, like FF address the subject of the DF by re-enforcing its commitment to neutrality above all else, a policy FF also share incidentally. They'd bring in a constitutional amendment to enshrine neutrality into the constitution, a position actually supported by much of the Irish public. Whatever one thinks of SF on the issue of neutrality they actually are closer to the public line of thinking than the average pro-NATO Blueshirt.

The average person on the street views Neutrality as what we have now, no capability to even enforce our own sovereignty and have zero interest/will to fund anything that would mean we could control our own airspace/waters and are perfectly happy to let the RAF do so (something you think they are SO outraged about, but barely even made the news). That is what the Irish public view as neutrality, it is not the Swedish version of depth charge unknown subs and maintain a large modern well equipped military with the supporting defence industry.

So I still fail to see how that matches with your idea of SF improving the DF in anyway, shape or form.

Morpheus

SF always wanted to get rid of the SCC, the undermining of the Offences against the state act and to deconstruct the security machinations of this state.

I wonder have you actually read their Positive Neutrality document?
well if not, then you should, because it speaks about reducing our military expenditure and demilitarising the EU and by extension ireland.

We see our commitment to demilitarisation of the EU and universal nuclear disarmament as an extension of our commitment to fully demilitarise the conflict on this island.

It is about actively promoting and participating in conflict resolution, demilitarisation, and making politics work to redress legitimate grievances and achieve needed social changes – at both state and international levels.

Active promotion of demilitarisation of the EU

Such utter and complete BS i have never read before in my life. no alliances, no treaties, they want to break up the arms industry, incidentally worth thousands of jobs and billions to our economy.

• Ending involvement in the arms trade and instituting adequate and fully transparent export controls on dual-use goods

an absolute cluster f**k of a policy and it has no place in the current security climate.

i think... no I am... yes i'm going to be sick.

source:
http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2009/NeutralityDocument.pdf

sparky42

Morpheus wrote: »

Enough of the blueshirt crap - keep it civil and respect others rights to support other parties.

SF always wanted to get rid of the SCC, the undermining of the Offences against the state act and to deconstruct the security machinations of this state.

I wonder have you actually read their Positive Neutrality document?
well if not, then you should, because it speaks about reducing our military expenditure and demilitarising the EU and by extension ireland.

http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2009/NeutralityDocument.pdf

See that's the thing, as I've said their version of Neutrality doesn't track with a Sweden or a Switzerland armed neutrality being able to defend and assert themselves. I have no idea where the idea that their "Positive Neutrality" means any investment in enlarging, improving, enhancing the combat capabilities of the DF.

Ren2k7

sparky42 wrote: »

The average person on the street views Neutrality as what we have now, no capability to even enforce our own sovereignty and have zero interest/will to fund anything that would mean we could control our own airspace/waters and are perfectly happy to let the RAF do so (something you think they are SO outraged about, but barely even made the news). That is what the Irish public view as neutrality, it is not the Swedish version of depth charge unknown subs and maintain a large modern well equipped military with the supporting defence industry.

So I still fail to see how that matches with your idea of SF improving the DF in anyway, shape or form.

You'll note I never said SF would improve the DF, they'd just maintain then status quo, as would the other parties. FF are the only ones claiming they'd increase the size of the Army but.....well, that's quite hard to believe given they've got a seriosu credibility issue.

I'll also remind you that SF's belief in neutrality is the exact same as the other parties. FF also makes clear it supports the present policy of neutrality in its manifesto. In fact all the parties support neutrality. SF go further in advocating an amendment to Bunreacht with a neutrality clause added. Now I don't support such a move myself but if referendum were held tomorrow on a neutrality amendment it would be overwhelmingly backed. SF, and the other three parties are merely advocating what is the general public mood.

Morpheus wrote: »

Enough of the blueshirt crap - keep it civil and respect others rights to support other parties.

Firstly Gaelers themselves use the term 'Blueshirt' to describe themselves, they've taken ownership of the word so there's no malice in its use. But if you're so insistent on it not being used I'll politely ask that you and all the other Gaelers (better?) here stop using the Unionist term "Shinner".

Morpheus wrote: »

SF always wanted to get rid of the SCC, the undermining of the Offences against the state act and to deconstruct the security machinations of this state.

Getting rid of the SCC is an entirely separate issue from defence. I've gone into great detail as to why draconian acts like OATS and the SCC should be done away with. Presumably you also feel Section 31 should be brought back....

Morpheus wrote: »

I wonder have you actually read their Positive Neutrality document?
well if not, then you should, because it speaks about reducing our military expenditure and demilitarising the EU and by extension ireland.

Well obviously I did, I linked to it here when I pointed out ALL parties support neutrality and the status quo for the DF barring FF who supposedly support an increase in the size of the Army.

Morpheus wrote: »

Such utter and complete BS i have never read before in my life. no alliances, no treaties, they want to break up the arms industry, incidentally worth thousands of jobs and billions to our economy.

Er, no. What do you think "demilitarisation of the EU" means? Exactly what it means. They, like the British, don't want a federal EU army, they want a solely economic trading bloc. Ask the Tories or Kipper's if they want the EU to start encroaching on NATO's territory and you'll find the answer is a big no.


[QUOTE=Morpheus;98701922
an absolute cluster f**k of a policy and it has no place in the current security climate.

i think... no I am... yes i'm going to be sick.

source:
http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2009/NeutralityDocument.pdf[/QUOTE]

Well, yes, Ireland already has laws on prohibiting the export of dual use technology. Do you believe SF should be criticised for wanting existing laws to be adequately enforced?

Whether you like it or not Ireland's neutrality is going nowhere. No political party supports an EU army (it's constitutionally impossible for Ireland's to even join a common European defence establishment after Lisbon II) nor does anyone advocate we join NATO. There's a reason why FFGLAB don't attack SF's defence polices, because they themselves hold the very same views.

Ren2k7

sparky42 wrote: »

See that's the thing, as I've said their version of Neutrality doesn't track with a Sweden or a Switzerland armed neutrality being able to defend and assert themselves. I have no idea where the idea that their "Positive Neutrality" means any investment in enlarging, improving, enhancing the combat capabilities of the DF.

Could you perhaps specify in what manner the other parties "version of neutrality" is different from SF's?

tipptom

Morpheus wrote: »

SF always wanted to get rid of the SCC, the undermining of the Offences against the state act and to deconstruct the security machinations of this state.

I wonder have you actually read their Positive Neutrality document?
well if not, then you should, because it speaks about reducing our military expenditure and demilitarising the EU and by extension ireland.







Such utter and complete BS i have never read before in my life. no alliances, no treaties, they want to break up the arms industry, incidentally worth thousands of jobs and billions to our economy.




an absolute cluster f**k of a policy and it has no place in the current security climate.

i think... no I am... yes i'm going to be sick.

source:
http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2009/NeutralityDocument.pdf

Oh God,another Boards mod and the usual buddies fapp fest tirade against SF coming up to the GE,how predictable.


But hey lets pretend its about defence.

Ren2k7

The Green's announced their own manifesto today....

• A national debate to discuss Ireland’s role in today’s international community given our tradition of neutrality and an independent foreign policy.

• A strengthening of the truly pan-European Organisation for Security and co-operation in Europe (OSCE) as well as the United Nations

• An end to the use of Shannon Airport by US military forces involved in wars or any other military forces involved in military action that is not mandated by the above mentioned bodies, or that we consider to be an illegal or unjust action

• To ensure that Ireland is not complicit in the illegal transport of prisoners by the CIA or anyone else

• Increase oversight and reporting requirements for Dual Use Export Licences, including refusing licences to export to countries with questionable human rights records.


• Develop a system whereby all citizens would be encouraged to follow a path of service that contributes to their communities and contributes to the promotion of peace and defence in the world without necessarily making a commitment to full time contracts but through the reserve or civil defence services instead

• Provide PRSI credits to employers who give unpaid leave for training or duty

• Underpin military courses with civilian accreditation from educational bodies, to allow employers to benefit from better qualified staff

http://goo.gl/Rdz9kd

Ren2k7

tipptom wrote: »

Oh God,another Boards mod and the usual buddies fapp fest tirade against SF coming up to the GE,how predictable.


But hey lets pretend its about defence.

Yeah, and let's pretend SF's defence policies are somehow different from FFGLAB. They're pretty much identical in fact, barring SF's support for enshrining neutrality into the constitution. What many on this subforum seem to forget is that the overwhelming majority of Irish people support the current policy of neutrality, as well as opposition to joining NATO or any EU common defence mechanism. The four main parties' support for this is merely a reflection of public opinion.

tipptom

Ren2k7 wrote: »

Yeah, and let's pretend SF's defence policies are somehow different from FFGLAB. They're pretty much identical in fact, barring SF's support for enshrining neutrality into the constitution. What many on this subforum seem to forget is that the overwhelming majority of Irish people support the current policy of neutrality, as well as opposition to joining NATO or any EU common defence mechanism. The four main parties' support for this is merely a reflection of public opinion.

Yep,and they will try to steer you on to the SCC to deflect from the party of law and orders abandonment of the Irish people to savages roaming up and down the country to save money so Abramovich could buy another yacht with money that he thought he had lost.


They decided to just give it them to ingratiate themselves to Merkal and Sarkozy and get Big Phil a well paid job for his incompetence but Enda owedwe pay that price.


They took away the one dedicated car and gardai who were successful in tracking these gangs and closed down Garda stations to save 500k.


The owner of the hotel could not get a reply from emergency services while the shooting was going on despite phoning three times and had to phone a personal friend who was a Garda to report it while another Garda station lay derelict yards up the road.




Now all of a sudden they cant put enough Garda on the streets because there is an election but not when they were murdering and torturing OAPs and torturing parents in front of their children,money needed to be saved to pay junior bondholders.



This is 2016,a jury does not have to be in even the same county as a trial of criminal gangs but just look at the opening post to see who this was all really directed at in the first place.

Negative_G

tipptom wrote: »

Yep,and they will try to steer you on to the SCC to deflect from the party of law and orders abandonment of the Irish people to savages roaming up and down the country to save money so Abramovich could buy another yacht with money that he thought he had lost.


They decided to just give it them to ingratiate themselves to Merkal and Sarkozy and get Big Phil a well paid job for his incompetence but Enda owedwe pay that price.


They took away the one dedicated car and gardai who were successful in tracking these gangs and closed down Garda stations to save 500k.


The owner of the hotel could not get a reply from emergency services while the shooting was going on despite phoning three times and had to phone a personal friend who was a Garda to report it while another Garda station lay derelict yards up the road.




Now all of a sudden they cant put enough Garda on the streets because there is an election but not when they were murdering and torturing OAPs and torturing parents in front of their children,money needed to be saved to pay junior bondholders.



This is 2016,a jury does not have to be in even the same county as a trial of criminal gangs but just look at the opening post to see who this was all really directed at in the first place.

Jesus, give it a rest will you.

tipptom

Negative_G wrote: »

Since when did this become a thread about Sinn Fein defence policy or lack thereof?

There's a valid reason SF haven't been in power since the foundation of the state. That won't change any time soon so discussing their policies, and I use that term extremely loosely, is a complete waste of time.

There has been some interesting discussion generated so far but leave out the SF rubbish.

So you had your anti SF rant and then says leave it out about SF


Now head on back to the opening post from the mod and see who brought SF to the thread or give it a rest yourself or do you not like replys to your anti SF thread.Now have a look further on and see who brought up SF and the SCC?


Now lets see you head back to the opening poster and tell him to give it a rest about SF,he was the one who brought them in from the off?


No didnt think so.

sparky42

tipptom wrote: »

[/B] So you had your anti SF rant and then says leave it out about SF


Now head on back to the opening post from the mod and see who brought SF to the thread or give it a rest yourself or do you not like replys to your anti SF thread.


Now lets see you head back to the opening poster and tell him to give it a rest about SF,he was the one who brought them in from the off?


No didnt think so

His comment was when this was in the Defence of Ireland thread, not when it had been spun off to this.

tipptom

sparky42 wrote: »

His comment was when this was in the Defence of Ireland thread, not when it had been spun off to this.

???

BoJack Horseman

In case anyone is wondering, here is the rather late-night & probably deserted debate on the 2015 white paper in the Dail.

The DefMin & the FF & SF spokesmen make long statements before Mick Wallace & Clare Daly to their stand up routine.

The SF statement outlines their "positive neutrality" thing.

Ren2k7

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

In case anyone is wondering, here is the rather late-night & probably deserted debate on the 2015 white paper in the Dail.

The DefMin & the FF & SF spokesmen make long statements before Mick Wallace & Clare Daly to their stand up routine.

The SF statement outlines their "positive neutrality" thing.

Shameful. Whatever our political outlook and POV I think we can all agree that no party or TD in the Dáil gives a damn about the DF. Not one. Sure they'll respect the forces and claim they deserve credit for all they do. But that'll be the height of their support for the Defence Forces. They need money, equipment and resources, not a slap on the back and told "job well done. Now here's your reduced budget to work with".

FG, FF, Labour, SF, Greens, Renua, Social Democrats, the Mick and Clare Detective Agency..... none of them have any interest in the military. Other countries militaries OTOH...............

Boreas

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

In case anyone is wondering, here is the rather late-night & probably deserted debate on the 2015 white paper in the Dail.

The DefMin & the FF & SF spokesmen make long statements before Mick Wallace & Clare Daly to their stand up routine.

The SF statement outlines their "positive neutrality" thing.

Wallace and Daly really are fantasists, and both guaranteed to be returned to the Dáil.

I hope that if there is a violent Islamist attack in Ireland and Shannon is used as the excuse she accepts her role in hyping the US use of the airport.

Ren2k7

Boreas wrote: »

Wallace and Daly really are fantasists, and both guaranteed to be returned to the Dáil.

I hope that if there is a violent Islamist attack in Ireland and Shannon is used as the excuse she accepts her role in hyping the US use of the airport.

Islamists don't need an excuse to attack Ireland.

Negative_G

tipptom wrote: »

[/B] So you had your anti SF rant and then says leave it out about SF


Now head on back to the opening post from the mod and see who brought SF to the thread or give it a rest yourself or do you not like replys to your anti SF thread.Now have a look further on and see who brought up SF and the SCC?


Now lets see you head back to the opening poster and tell him to give it a rest about SF,he was the one who brought them in from the off?


No didnt think so.

My earlier post was when it was in the military forum. It was since moved. If you took the time to look you would see the moderator in question admitted he was in the wrong to bring the SCC topic up.

Also, it isn't my thread, not sure how you came to that conclusion.

Your post contains nothing but drivel and rhetoric about bond holders and criminals. You didn't mention one single thing about defence or policy. Which is what this thread is about.

There are others here making coherent points. Perhaps you should try the same.

tipptom

Negative_G wrote: »

My earlier post was when it was in the military forum. It was since moved. If you took the time to look you would see the moderator in question admitted he was in the wrong to bring the SCC topic up.

Also, it isn't my thread, not sure how you came to that conclusion.

Your post contains nothing but drivel and rhetoric about bond holders and criminals. You didn't mention one single thing about defence or policy. Which is what this thread is about.

There are others here making coherent points. Perhaps you should try the same.

Your first post in this thread was an anti SF rant"There is a good reason why SF has not been in power since the foundation of the state and never will be",the third post in was another anti SF rant about Kangeroo courts which you thanked and it went on from there and when someone pointed this out you came and ordered me to give it a rest!!


You then have the cheek to say to me that I was off topic in reply to these posts.


You say that the mod apologised for bringing up the SCC,the whole opening post was about SF.


There is a multitude of anti SF threads on boards,go on them and vent your spleen.


I don't want a reply from you,just pointing out the hypocrisy of you telling me about going off topic.

Negative_G

tipptom wrote: »

Your first post in this thread was an anti SF rant"There is a good reason why SF has not been in power since the foundation of the state and never will be",the third post in was another anti SF rant about Kangeroo courts which you thanked and it went on from there and when someone pointed this out you came and ordered me to give it a rest!!


You then have the cheek to say to me that I was off topic in reply to these posts.


You say that the mod apologised for bringing up the SCC,the whole opening post was about SF.


There is a multitude of anti SF threads on boards,go on them and vent your spleen.


I don't want a reply from you,just pointing out the hypocrisy of you telling me about going off topic.

Good man Tipptom, excellent avoidance of what I pointed out to you.

There are plenty of threads on bond holders, abromovich and criminality on boards also. I'm sure your rhetoric will go largely ignored there also.

Any comment on SF defence policy or lack there of, unlike your first drivel ridden post?

Ren2k7

Right, FG's new manifesto has quite a few details in relation to defence......

Equipping the Defence Forces: Fine Gael will provide a significant boost in capital funding for Defence across the 2016-2021 period, with €437m allocated to Defence, under the Capital Plan, within that time frame. The additional funds allocated will allow for
expenditure in equipment and infrastructure across all areas of the Defence Forces:

• Army: The priority is to invest in armoured personnel carriers, armoured logistic vehicles, the modernisation of equipment and refurbishment of barracks.

• Naval Service: The ship replacement program will continue and over the lifetime of the White Paper, Fine Gael will move from an 8- to a 9-ship naval flotilla, to provide for a multi-role vessel. This will allow for continued humanitarian assistance and will enhance Defence capability for maritime security operations.

• Air Corps: Fine Gael will ensure that existing aircraft will be replaced when necessary and invest in Casement Aerodrome Baldonnel.

Army Ranger Wing: FineGael will increase the capacity of the Army Ranger Wing and of special operation forces to assist in meeting emerging challenges in all environments, including land, air, maritime and cyber.

http://www.finegael.ie/__uuid/b5055220-ec96-4f03-b18a-4506e8d3119c/manifesto.pdf

Most of the commitments were already part of the WP but the move to a 9 ship navy is interesting. So vote FF for a bigger army, vote FG for a bigger navy. Interesting choice.

Ren2k7

Right, FG's new manifesto has quite a few details in relation to defence......

Equipping the Defence Forces: Fine Gael will provide a significant boost in capital funding for Defence across the 2016-2021 period, with €437m allocated to Defence, under the Capital Plan, within that time frame. The additional funds allocated will allow for
expenditure in equipment and infrastructure across all areas of the Defence Forces:

• Army: The priority is to invest in armoured personnel carriers, armoured logistic vehicles, the modernisation of equipment and refurbishment of barracks.

• Naval Service: The ship replacement program will continue and over the lifetime of the White Paper, Fine Gael will move from an 8- to a 9-ship naval flotilla, to provide for a multi-role vessel. This will allow for continued humanitarian assistance and will enhance Defence capability for maritime security operations.

• Air Corps: Fine Gael will ensure that existing aircraft will be replaced when necessary and invest in Casement Aerodrome Baldonnel.

• Army Ranger Wing: Fine Gael will increase the capacity of the Army Ranger Wing and of special operation forces to assist in meeting emerging challenges in all environments, including land, air, maritime and cyber.

http://www.finegael.ie/__uuid/b5055220-ec96-4f03-b18a-4506e8d3119c/manifesto.pdf

Most of the commitments were already part of the WP but the move to a 9 ship navy is interesting. So vote FF for a bigger army, vote FG for a bigger navy. Interesting choice.

sparky42

Ren2k7 wrote: »

Right, FG's new manifesto has quite a few details in relation to defence......



http://www.finegael.ie/__uuid/b5055220-ec96-4f03-b18a-4506e8d3119c/manifesto.pdf

Most of the commitments were already part of the WP but the move to a 9 ship navy is interesting. So vote FF for a bigger army, vote FG for a bigger navy. Interesting choice.

Honestly I'd go with increase the navy, a 9 ship force particularly if we move to having the EPV/MPV deployed out of EEZ waters. And frankly I'd like to see the investment in equipment for the Army even if the Army wasn't increased in size. god knows many of the insurgent forces don't care about a UN paint job.

sparky42

So as mentioned in the P60 thread, Coveny has produced more details about the proposal:

The promise is contained in the party’s manifesto, which will be launched in Dublin tomorrow. Defence Minister Simon Coveney has confirmed the detail of the report, seen by this newspaper, which would represent a major boost for Cork.

The manifesto commits to delivering the extra ship within the timeframe of the most recent Defence White Paper which is 10 years, but, Mr Coveney said he expects it to be delivered much sooner than that, most likely in the lifetime of the new government.

The need for the increase in the fleet size is driven by the success of the Irish Navy’s work in the Mediterranean since last year in the rescuing and transportation of refugees.

According to the manifesto, the Government will move “from an eight to a nine-ship flotilla” at an estimated cost of €90m.

As part of a €437m capital investment up until 2021, the party is committing to replacing Defence aircraft as well as a new control tower at Baldonnel aerodrome.

Speaking to this newspaper, Mr Coveney said that the commitment to the Defence Forces is clear in the plan and is a significant investment.

“The additional ship will have implications for Cork harbour and Haulbowline, where the naval service is headquartered,” said Mr Coveney. “Not only will it mean extra personnel but it also means extra engineers. So this is significant.”

There is also mounting speculation that Fine Gael intends restoring defence as a full cabinet ministry after the election, should they be re-elected.

Fine Gael is also promising to develop a new Institute for Peace Support and Leadership Training in the Curragh, starting in 2016. The Peace and Leadership Institute will leverage Ireland’s unique international reputation and relationship with the UN.

It will develop new national and international partnerships with universities and other reputable interested parties and institutions.

Fine Gael will increase the level of female participation in the Defence Forces, with the goal of doubling the rate of participation from the current 6% to 12% in the next five years.

So it does seem to be fallout from the Med deployment last year, looking at it 90 million is most likely personnel increase in the Navy and the hull, so I figure with the timeframe as well, a follow on P60 would be the most likely option.

Ren2k7

Labour's proposal's for the Defence Forces in today's manifesto release:

Labour recognises the incredible work done by our armed servicemen and women in maintaining our excellent humanitarian reputation abroad.

We will continue to support the Irish Defence Forces in the Mediterranean and beyond.

We will also support them at home by allowing their representative association to affiliate to ICTU and take an active role in national pay bargaining. Affiliation to ICTU will be subject to both the representative association and ICTU recognising the unique character of our security services and that their members voluntarily forswear the right to strike or to engage in other industrial action.

We will also work with veterans to create a National Veterans Policy that clearly and respectfully establishes the State’s obligations to those who have served in our armed forces.

https://www.labour.ie/download/pdf/labour_manifesto_2016.pdf - Page 121

So allow DF personnel to unionise. Good Christ! :rolleyes:

sparky42

Ren2k7 wrote: »

Labour's proposal's for the Defence Forces in today's manifesto release:

https://www.labour.ie/download/pdf/labour_manifesto_2016.pdf - Page 121

So allow DF personnel to unionise. Good Christ! :rolleyes:

So, so far FG and FF each have put proposals for some increases of some nature, Labour hasn't really suggested anything and I wouldn't rate SF's plans as being anything positive towards the Defence Forces.