I wish to share my time with Deputy Dermot Ahern.
Private Members' Business. - Defence Forces Policy: Motion.
Carlow-Kilkenny): Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move:
That Dáil Éireann condemns the Minister for Defence for his failure to articulate a coherent policy on Defence matters particularly in regard to the following:
—the reduction in numbers serving in the Defence Forces, having regard to security requirements in the Border areas, United Nations and elsewhere;
—the necessity to strengthen the Air Corps and Navy to deal more effectively with fishery protection and drug interdiction;
—ignoring the concerns expressed by Army wives in relation to conditions for soldiers serving in the Border areas;
—failure to be honest about barracks closure;
—lack of concern for spouses and children of deceased soldiers who did not opt for the Spouses and Children's Pension Scheme;
—delay in recruitment and changes in the scheme with regard to age qualification and lack of recognition for the contribution made by young FCA members; and
—confusion in the VER Scheme and failure to review the five year contract scheme.
It is almost unprecedented to be back here in a short few months with a further Private Members' motion on defence matters. The Minister has managed to reduce the morale of the Defence Forces to its lowest ebb for many years and to have created raging uncertainty. He has raised the spectacle once again of having Army wives back on the streets to try to serve their husbands' interests. There is untold frustration in the Navy and in the Air Corps and the voluntary early retirement scheme is in unbelievable confusion. I said here a few months ago that the public sometimes takes security and peace for granted and think it is permanent but it is often fragile, therefore it is crucially important that we always have a Defence Force which has a high morale, is efficient and effective, believes in what it is doing and works to a national strategic plan.
An Army cannot be cobbled together. It takes many years to achieve the required standard of training and morale and to ensure that sufficient finance is available and is spent wisely. At its present strength the Defence Forces cannot discharge its main role. It is not possible to do this unless a well organised plan is implemented over a period. Chopping and changing Defence recommendations and allocations of finance each year makes any effort to carry out a Defence plan an extremely frustrating exercise. The morale of any Army is the most important factor in developing and maintaining the highest standards of training, efficiency and general behaviour among all ranks.
The strategic plan should cover the full ten year period of the reform programme, with full details of the exact phasing in of the arrangements. The actions to be taken during each phase should be sketched out and made public. There should be an integrated plan with action on each of the main areas — structures, personnel, equipment and infrastructure. Each phase of the plan should show its target. We simply do not have that strategic plan. I call on the Government once again to state its ultimate plan.
Fianna Fáil in Government will produce a White Paper on Defence at the end of its first year in office. We will engage in real and meaningful consultations with the representative associations and with the military professionals who care deeply about the Defence Forces and their future. Valuable contributions can be made by members who have wide experience in military matters, who have won over years of work in 20 countries worldwide respect in peacekeeping and in other activities. I have no doubt from the discussions I have had with military personnel that they desperately want to eradicate the serious organisational and other weaknesses in the Force. They want the Defence Forces to be a vibrant, well equipped, efficient and effective organisation, and that is what we want to achieve also.
To solve the problems which have been created over many years will be costly in terms of time and money. The failure of the Government to produce an overall strategic plan has added greatly to the uncertainty which, regrettably, pervades every section of the Defence Forces. Fianna Fáil will have a more all-embracing analysis. The impact of change and the future shape of the Defence Forces must take account of the wider State and community interests. The major decisions which must be taken relating to the Defence Forces, including the facilities they occupy, are clearly of national strategic importance and require a large number of inputs.
The military tradition of the State is one of integration of the Forces into the community and that will be maintained. We therefore must have a mission statement. That is even more important in a time of dramatic change. For most of us change is difficult. In the Army it can put solidarity under strain. It can create new anxieties between colleagues and gloom about the future. Truly effective organisational change needs to preserve the best traditions of the organisation while achieving the work in different technological socio-economic and structural conditions. The preservation of tradition is important to morale; a tradition once lost may take a long time to re-establish. Successful military operations cannot be reduced only to skills, to information processing and intelligence. There are intangibles, such as traditions and expectations, which profoundly influence behaviour. These traditions and expectations are embedded in the organisation's culture and the way to solve them is through the participative approach — involving people, discussing the problems openly and making sure they understand the target. Mr. Jim Brady, President of PDFORRA, speaking at the recent annual delegate conference on the voluntary early retirement scheme said:
Nobody knows for certain what they would be entitled to. There are cases of four people with similar service records being offered completely different terms. One man could receive all his leave plus his entitlements and his Voluntary Early Retirement package in contrast to his colleague with the exact same service who receives no money, no leave and no entitlements for two and a half months. The tooth-fairy arrived in August and left £1.5 million under the pillow for a select few. And finally to confuse matters even more if you had already received an order now you could switch to the tooth-fairy offer but there was a hitch — you lost all your leave and entitlements...
And now we wonder are they making it up as they go along. Morale in the Defence Forces is at an all time low. There is great uncertainty. People are worried. They are asking questions.
It is no wonder that we are here this evening discussing these problems. Morale, confidence and enthusiasm must be generated in the Defence Forces and these questions must be answered. Nowhere is that more necessary, after we solve the problems relating to the voluntary early retirement scheme, than on the question of recruitment. The Defence Forces have been starved of recruitment.
We need to deal with the five year contract. Fianna Fáil in office will review the contract. We will look to a blend of youth and experience to lead the Army forward into the future. We must get a reasonable return on the investment made in time and training for young people in the Army. Five years is not sufficient enough to achieve this. The present scheme fails to differentiate line privates from specialists with non-trade skills, such as cooks, drivers, information technology specialists and paramedics. That is clearly a serious flaw which needs to be rectified. Privates who work in a unit where no vacancies occur, regardless of their capacity or how good they are lose out to other in units where vacancies occur.
Fianna Fáil will develop a career structure for enlisted personnel. It is crucially important for the morale of the Force that terms of pay, conditions of service, career development and social needs are protected and developed. Career development under the proposed manpower policy must be realistic, reward people for effort and be capable of fulfilling their career aspirations. Under Fianna Fáil the criteria for promotion and extension of service will be changed. We will ensure people who enter the service will have a much better idea of what will happen in the future as distinct from the raging uncertainty which prevails at present.
Nowhere is that uncertainty more greatly emphasised than in the stance of this open, transparent and accountable Government on barracks closures. There has been statement after statement clearly indicating there will be no closures in the first phase. This is a ten year plan. We expect greater honesty about what will happen after the first three of those ten years. As sure as night follows day, when one reduces the number in the Defence Forces one has two choices: closing some of the barracks or transferring more personnel from field and general military operations into administration. The Government has shrunk from telling us its plans. It has also shied away from understanding the social and economic effects of barracks closures in certain areas.
My colleague, Deputy Dermot Ahern, will deal in greater detail with the problems in the Border areas. However, at our recent meetings with Army wives the spectre was again raised of those women having to take to the streets to get across to this Government what is happening in Border areas. They want to help their husbands in this crisis.
There have also been letters to the newspapers from individual soldiers serving in the Border areas. One stated:
I am a driver and to drive for those hours, that is, six or seven hours, and then go back out at 3 a.m. to drive for another six hours, and it is not uncommon to clock up 200 to 300 miles in a duty, increases the fatigue factor. On a few occasions I had to ask the gardaí to stop because I was so tired. I was becoming a danger to myself, my passengers and other road users.
That young soldier was so frustrated that he felt it necessary to write to an editor to ask him to highlight the problems faced by him and his colleagues which are totally disregarded by the Minister and his Department and are being vehemently denied.
The president of PDFORRA stated in relation to the Border area:
Our members read about the use of the Army for BSE patrols on the Border and they wonder why the Irish Farmers' Association knows about this before they are told. They ask why the people affected are not told first. Soldiers have found themselves working in difficult conditions with no additional resources. The handling of the BSE Border patrols is symptomatic of the mismanagement of the restructuring plans in the Defence Forces.
Is it too much to ask that all soldiers serving on the Border are treated with some dignity and rewarded for their service? These are men and women who have in the past few months taken on additional duties in order to safeguard the economy of this State. Many have been forced to work up to a 72 hour week to ensure there is adequate cover along the Border. For the pleasure of patrolling the Border they receive 30p per hour after tax.
Their wives, and others, in their representations to us have clearly indicated that the allowances and the understanding by the Minister for Defence and his Department of what is involved here are considerably less than we would expect in this day and age.
While I have harsh words to say about the Minister, I will now say some harsh words about the military authorities. I would not like to be responsible for building a resentment towards the institution in which a person had worked for 23 years. A sergeant who had served in the Army for 23 years, was never on sick leave and served in the Lebanon, developed a serious illness. We understood no changes would be made immediately prior to the introduction of the voluntary early retirement scheme which would injure the rights of those individuals. Two months before the voluntary early retirement scheme was introduced, that young sergeant was transferred from "C" to "E", leaving him in no position to qualify for the retirement scheme and, of course, facing immediate discharge. It was not enough for him to have to face the future with this illness — which never kept him a day away from work — in circumstances where his young family and his wife were worried about him, he also had to be deprived of his right.
This cries out for immediate action by the Minister. It is inhuman and immoral. It belongs to an age when workers were trodden on by their employers. I had no idea it could happen in 1996. I had less of an idea it could happen to someone who served for 23 years without a blemish on his record or without losing a day's work. Somebody somewhere made sure he could not qualify for the voluntary early retirement scheme.
I mentioned that example because it is tied into the representations made by a soldier in relation to his plight on the Border, the hours he was required to drive and the difficulties he faced. It is also tied into the representations made to us by the wives of Army personnel on the Border who spoke about their difficulties and the way in which they are treated.
We on this side of the House have no wish to make that difficulty any worse. We ask the Minister, his Department and his colleagues to look at what is happening and to do something about it rather than ignore the plight which has been directly brought to their attention tonight and in many other ways, and to come forward with solid proposals. We do not need the spectacle of those ladies trying to fight for their husbands in this way. We do not need to see the Army, of which our people are proud, made to face those difficulties without an understanding of what is involved. One of those ladies asked me to ask them to come and see where the Border is. That is how they feel about the way in which they are being treated.
I will now turn to the Air Corps and the Navy. Last week when Deputy Power and I expressed concern about understaffing in the Naval Service the Minister told us everything was all right. Brian O'Keeffe, a RACO representative, was forced to appear on television last night to highlight the problems being experienced by his organisation.
The tasks carried out by the Naval Service include fishery protection, drugs and arms interdiction, search and rescue and pollution control and monitoring. The role of the Service in many of these areas has been expanded significantly in recent years due to developments, such as the relaxation of the Irish Box restrictions and access by Spain to the Box from last January. This has resulted in a requirement for an increased level of boarding. The role of the Naval Service in respect of drugs interdiction, criminal justice matters — under the Criminal Justice Act — and pollution control — under the dumping at sea legislation — will be further expanded and formalised in the future. We have been told that over-fishing has led to a decline in fish stocks in Irish waters. This will require greater policing and enforcement of the law in the future.
The primary area of operation of the Naval Service includes the Irish sector of the European economic zone, commonly referred to as the 200 mile limit. This area, which covers 132 square miles, constitutes 16 per cent of Union waters. Within this zone the areas of particular focus include the Irish territorial sea, the 12 mile limit and the Irish Box, an area of approximately 35 square miles designated by the EU as a sensitive area. Some insight into the scale of the task facing the Naval Service can be gained from the realisation that within the EU only Great Britain has more territorial waters than Ireland.
The Naval Service has an aging fleet and an insufficient number of ships, while the number of personnel has been reduced from the required 1,300 to approximately 1,000. Is it true that EU funds to support the purchase of ships by the Naval Service will not be made available because the European Commission believes that the manpower is incapable of running the present fleet of seven ships?
The fishery protection task has become more complex in recent years due to the raft of technical measures which must be enforced. In the 1980s the boarding and inspection of a fishing vessel rarely took longer than 30 minutes whereas today this operation can take hours. The increased surveillance capability of the Air Corps does not alter the situation in terms of enforcement of the law by the Naval Service at sea. Aircraft are an invaluable asset in terms of locating vessels but the vast majority of offences can only be detected by the physical boarding and inspection of vessels by Naval Service personnel.
A decision must be taken on the optimum fleet size for the Naval Service in the medium and long term. Following that decision, a strategic plan incorporating the procurement of the required additional ships should be developed. It is of critical importance that future Government decisions on the procurement of ships include authority to recruit the additional personnel required to crew them. In the past the Naval Service, on receiving a new vessel, was not given additional personnel either for crewing or for increased shore support. This has contributed to the difficulties being experienced by the Service.
While the difficulties in respect of overall numbers have been repeatedly identified, no serious effort has been made to address them. As I said last week, the Minister is ignoring the problem. Since the publication of the Price Waterhouse report in 1994 overall numbers in the Service have decreased through natural wastage and the voluntary early retirement scheme while the number of tasks has increased. The lack of personnel in the Naval Service is a critical problem. The current overall strength is 155 below the authorised strength, which is only 85 per cent of the established figure.
The time for talking is over. The Naval Service has been given new powers and is required to carry out new and different tasks. Hundreds of millions of pounds are being lost to the economy through the illegal fishing of our waters by foreign vessels. The Government must recruit new personnel to the Service. The total number of people expected to leave the Service last year and this year is 150. Many personnel are unable to take leave and they regard the Service as a sinking ship. I plead with the Minister to increase the number of personnel he proposes to recruit in 1997 so that a reasonable number of the present intake will have an opportunity to join the Service.
I wish to refer to the FCA, another area where the Government has managed to create an all time low in terms of confidence. When it returns to Government, Fianna Fáil will ensure that the number of personnel in the FCA is maintained at its present level and that the proposal in the Price Waterhouse report of a massive reduction in the number of personnel is not entertained. We have an opportunity to give young men and women who want to serve in the FCA and An Slua Muirí the training and encouragement they deserve. Most countries the same size as Ireland have a first and second line reserve with a greater number of personnel than we are asking the Minister to recruit. By not rejecting the proposals in the Price Waterhouse the Minister has reduced the level of morale in the FCA. People from all areas serve in the FCA and in some cases they can be used to support the Army and carry out certain functions.
I thank my colleague for sharing his time with me. I compliment him and Deputy Power on putting down this timely motion. The amendment to the motion speaks volumes about the behind-the-scenes efforts being made by the Government to downgrade the Defence Forces. The amendment refers to a balanced programme of reform which is another way of saying that the Defence Forces will be downgraded. During difficult times the Department of Defence suffers from a lack of resources. However, despite the so-called economic boom, the Government seems hell bent on reducing the number of personnel and barracks. The Government amendment does not refer to some of the key issues raised in the motion. For example, apart from referring to a programme of reform, it has remained silent on the closure of barracks.
On the issue of morale, which is at an all time low, especially in the Border areas, events over the past couple of months have effectively amounted to the straw that broke the camel's back. My party leader, deputy leader, the two spokespersons and I attended a meeting in Dundalk with Army spouses in the Border areas. They expressed their grave concern, not only for the morale of the Army and the personnel in the 27th Infantry Battalion in Dundalk, but also for their marriages because of the difficulties arising from excessive workloads placed on soldiers due to recent changes and difficulties along the Border, especially with regard to BSE.
The Army wives accept that members of the Garda Síochána were rightly paid for their magnificent work in preventing the spread of BSE across the Border. However, the Government introduced changes and effectively removed gardaí from BSE Border patrols. Consequently this work has fallen on the line of least resistance, members of the Army, those who are invariably brought out to deal with emergencies, such as forest fires in the Ravensdale mountains overlooking Dundalk. It is time that the Government and the public became aware that the Army cannot be taken for granted. It is a matter they ignore at their peril.
The Army wives who met us pointed out that they had formed NASA, the National Army Spouses' Association, which went into abeyance following the establishment of PDFORRA in 1990. However, in view of the problems that have arisen along the Border because of BSE, they have decided to reactivate themselves to highlight what they consider to be inequities in this area.
The BSE enforcement regulations, which came into force in March this year, was the straw that broke the camel's back. Army personnel — mostly men — are being asked to work a 70 to 80 hour week, effectively on an empty stomach. On Question Time last week the Minister said he would be very annoyed if people were taking up duty without hot meals. However, according to representations made to us, these people work for prolonged periods, in some instances without proper sustenance.
The subsistence with regard to duty made to the civil power is no longer in being, but there is an allowance payable to personnel on duty. They get £7.12 for up to five hours' work, £15 for nine hours and over £20 for 15 hours. In addition, they receive a Border allowance of £43.81 per week. Normal deductions, such as tax and PRSI, must be made from this. The allowance of £43.81 per week contrasts with the allowance of £44 before deductions payable to Army personnel who work 24 hours on a Sunday.
A solider on 24 hour duty must do two six hour shifts on the Border and two six hour shifts on stand-by in the barracks. His day begins on standby before 9 o'clock in the morning when he works along the Border for six hours, up to 3 o'clock in the afternoon. He remains in the barracks from 3 o'clock until 9 o'clock in the evening when he returns to the Border, travelling huge distances in some instances. He then returns to barracks at 3 o'clock in the morning and stays there for five or six hours, until 8 o'clock or 9 o'clock the next morning. Another shift dovetails into this to ensure a shift is on the road when another is in barracks and vice versa. According to representations we have received, soldiers get sandwiches and a litre of milk between three persons before they go on the road. Meals are supplied in the barracks.
There are considerable periods when these people are on duty for 24 hours. Their main bone of contention is that they have been asked to do what members of the Garda Síochána — nobody suggests that they should not have been paid — have been doing over the last number of months but they are not being paid any special allowances or receiving any recognition. In addition, it is putting a huge strain on their families because by the time a soldier returns home he requires 24 hours sleep to recover from an exhausting 24 hour stint on the Border.
The Minister should not disregard this issue. It will build up and it is one on which people are already organising. This side of the House agrees that proper recognition should be given to men and women doing sterling duty on the Border to ensure that not only does BSE not come into the State, but that the paramilitary threat from the northern side of the Border is kept at bay. He should give due regard to and not turn his back on them.
Morale is at an all time low in the Aiken Barracks because of this issue. That attitude is replicated along the Border. This is a vital issue if the Minister is to maintain a sense of loyalty and duty in our Army. If he disregards that he will do so at his peril.
1 move amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "that" and substitute the following: "Dáil Eireann commends the Minister for Defence and the Government for the substantial progress achieved to date in implementing a balanced programme of reform in the Defence Forces; for the Minister's personal commitment to a process of full consultation with the military representative associations; notes the Government's commitment to the recruitment of 1,000 persons to the Defence Forces over a three year period commencing in 1996 in order to address the age profile problem; notes the introduction of the VER in 1996 at a cost of £16 million following consultation with the representative associations; and pledges its continuing support for the Minister's policy of a partnership approach to developing the Army, Naval Service and Air Corps with a view to enhancing operational capability."
I am delighted to have this opportunity to address some of the issues the Opposition has raised this evening. In tabling this motion in Private Members' time the Opposition succeeded in rehashing a mixed bag of well worn criticisms which are wilting at this point. This motion is long on negative criticisms but short on positive proposals. The Minister and I have dealt with all these issues on many occasions. I will gladly deal with them again here to demonstrate for the House the progress this Government has made with the much needed reform of the Defence Forces.
It is acknowledged by all concerned that reform of the Defence Forces is necessary. When in Government the Opposition presided over the examination of the Defence Forces by the consultants engaged by the Efficiency Audit Group. Members will recall how the selective leaking of that report, beginning in July 1994, gave rise to much rumour and unhelpful speculation about a number of issues. These rumours served only to fuel the fears and anxieties of members of the Defence Forces and their families — fears and anxieties that had no basis or foundation in fact.
This Government has taken the reform process in hand. A comprehensive implementation plan for the reorganisation of the Defence Forces was speedily drawn up. With the full involvement of the military authorities and the representative bodies all the cards were laid on the table so that all participants in the process are now working in full knowledge of the ultimate objective. That objective is a Defence Forces structure and organisation tailored to the roles laid down for it by the Government in 1993. It will be a leaner, fitter organisation with an enhanced operational capability. It will be an organisation of which military personnel can be justifiably proud.
The increased level of public awareness of the Defence Forces and its problems dates from the late 1980s when there was considerable agitation about the establishment of representative associations for the personnel of the Permanent Defence Forces. This issue was successfully addressed in the Defence (Amendment) Act, 1990 under which both the Representative Association of Commissioned Officers and the Permanent Defence Force Other Ranks Representative Association were established. When that legislation was being processed the Commission on Remuneration and Conditions of Service in the Defence Forces — the Gleeson Commission — examined conditions of service in the Defence Forces and made recommendations. The Gleeson Commission also identified a number of serious organisational problems facing the Defence Forces primarily in the area of manpower policy. Such was the concern raised by this report that further scrutinies were undertaken by the Efficiency Audit Group at the instance of the Government. In the last of its three reviews the Efficiency Audit Group employed Price Waterhouse consultants to undertake a root and branch examination of the Defence Forces. These consultants employed the expert services of a number of retired high ranking Canadian military officers to assist them in their research. Their report was completed in July 1994.
The Efficiency Audit Group report contained a penetrating analysis of the most important problems facing the Defence Forces and made recommendations for their solution. It has fallen to this Government to act on that report. Thus, in July 1995 the Government announced that it had accepted in principle the conclusions of the Efficiency Audit Group on the need for major reform in the structures and organisation of the Defence Forces. Deputy Smith called for a clear mission statement. Our objectives include properly structured well equipped Defence Forces capable of fulfilling their role in the most effective and efficient way, with the capacity and flexibility to adapt to a changing environment; Defence Forces that provide a challenging and rewarding career; and management organisation and operation of the Defence Forces in accordance with best practice.
The Government was particularly conscious of criticisms by the Efficiency Audit Group to the effect that the age profile of the Permanent Defence Force was too high, its top management structure was inappropriate to modern conditions, its operational effectiveness was impaired by ineffective geographical disposition with many military personnel engaged on administrative duties which could be undertaken by civilians and too many medically unfit personnel. This resulted in a shortage of operational personnel occasioned by inefficiency and not by a general shortage of manpower and there was an inappropriate ratio of pay to nonpay expenditure with insufficient funds for equipment, buildings and training.
Conscious of the very serious position indicated by the EAG report, this Government moved immediately. An implementation group, led by Mr. A.D. Barry, was commissioned to draw up a specific three year plan to identify which of the recommendations of the Price Waterhouse consultants could be put into effect in the short term. The Government specifically tasked the implementation group with preparing a plan which would address the reorganisation of the Permanent Defence Force on a three brigade structure with a manpower level of around 11,500. I draw Deputies' attention to the fact that the three brigade structure and the target strength of 11,500 are based on proposals drawn up by the military authorities.
The programme of reform of the Defence Forces this Government is implementing is the most far-reaching and widest ranging reform or change the Defence Forces have seen since their foundation. Clearly this is a most complex process and one which cuts across every area of military life. It does not take a great deal of insight to appreciate that in any organisation there will be certain resistance to change. Voices will be raised in protest when certain interests are perceived as being threatened. The Government is anxious to handle the reform of the Defence Forces in a sensitive and humane way. For this reason it has placed consultation with the representative associations at the head of its priorities in the reorganisation of the Defence Forces. Before detailing the steps the Government has taken in this regard I will outline a number of key areas where reform has already begun and is well in progress.
The high age profile of the Permanent Defence Force has already been adverted to as a very serious problem. Specifically, the Government has approved a number of policy initiatives designed to address this problem, chief among which is the introduction of a voluntary early retirement scheme about which I will say more later. In addition, the Government is committed to recruiting some 1,000 new entrants into the Permanent Defence Force in the three year life of the plan. The plan also provides for the induction of recruits into the Permanent Defence Force for a five year fixed term contract, following which their continuance in service will be determined by criteria drawn up following consultations with PDFORRA. Advertisements were placed in the national newspapers recently and the selection process has already commenced. On completion of this process it is intended that 200 recruits will be enlisted on 30 December.
High among the Government's priorities will be the position of those who do not wish to make a long-term career in the Defence Forces, but who wish to acquire skills and training that will benefit them when they seek employment on the job market. These include office management, IT skills, driving, cooking, stores management and security work. The plan also suggests that more opportunities for young non-commissioned officers to achieve commissioned rank should be developed. This is something to which the Government is committed. In relation to manpower policy for commissioned officers there are proposals, which will also be the subject of consultation with RACO, for a reduction in retiring ages or a capping of years which may be served on promotion to a higher rank. A study will also be undertaken to examine the feasibility of introducing short service commissions to address the perennial problem of a shortage of junior officers.
Matters are already in train to reorganise the Defence Forces around a three brigade infantry organisation. The Air Corps and the Naval Service will remain as service corps of the Permanent Defence Force. The infantry brigade group will be the main operational element of the Army and its basic military formation with a conventional all arms capability. In tandem with the reorganisation of the Permanent Defence Force structures there will be rationalisation of the command control and top management arrangements.
As I said earlier, the Government has been most anxious to ensure that the personnel of the Permanent Defence Force take ownership of the entire reform process and are at one with it. Towards this end the Government has striven to ensure that RACO and PDFORRA and the personnel whom they represent are kept fully informed of all developments as they happen. The Minister has met representatives of both representative associations on eight separate occasions in the past year or so to hear their opinions and discuss with them his views and those of the Government. It is of great importance that the representative associations and the personnel of the Defence Forces regard the entire process of reform as a positive opportunity for the Defence Forces rather than as something which has been imposed upon them.
Participation in the process of change by the representative associations is vital to the successful implementation of the reorganisation and reform process. Thus, the representative associations have been repeatedly consulted on all aspects of the implementation plan. These consultations and discussions have taken place under the auspices of the Defence Forces conciliation council. This is the most appropriate forum in which to deal with the various issues either side may wish to raise. The associations have been told on a number of occasions that there is a degree of flexibility in the way in which the implementation plan will be given effect and I am happy to reiterate this assurance.
While it would be preferable to reach agreement with the associations on every issue we must be realistic enough to appreciate that such a scenario is unlikely. As I stated previously, an extensive process of reform, such as the one we have undertaken, will involve a degree of resistance from certain interests. Thus, the representative associations will pursue their own agenda and continue to represent their members to the best of their abilities. It would be wrong, therefore, to pretend that if both sides have examined an issue from every conceivable angle but have not been able to reach a mutually acceptable compromise the Government can abdicate its responsibility to make decisions in the national interest. Hard decisions may have to be made down the road but the Government is confident that it will be possible to reach an accommodation with the representative associations on a wide range of issues. In this way, the process of reform when it has been the subject of extensive consultations will come to be seen not as a threat but a challenging opportunity to the Permanent Defence Force.
The first part of the restructuring process is concentrating on the structures and organisation of the Permanent Defence Force. However, during the three year implementation plan, the reserve Defence Forces will be the subject of a special study by my Department. The Minister has already met members of the Reserve Defence Force Representative Association and explained and discussed aspects of the EAG review with them. As we progress at a later stage to a more detailed examination of the reserve there will be ample opportunity for full consultation with the association.
I am trying to adopt a positive approach to this debate in outlining the measures which have been initiated by the Government in relation to the reform of the Defence Forces. However, I take issue with the Opposition Deputies' motion which suggests that the Government has failed to articulate a coherent policy on defence matters. I take a completely contrary view. Such a comprehensive and detailed policy programme in relation to the Defence Forces has never been stated by any previous Government. All major aspects of Defence Forces reform for the next three years are contained in the 133 pages of the Defence Forces review implementation plan. This has received the widest circulation throughout the Defence Forces.
For the first time military personnel have available to them a comprehensive and detailed written statement of Government intentions in regard to their future and I disclaim any allegation that nobody knows what is happening. At the same time they now have, and have had for a number of years, a sophisticated machinery for articulating their views and concerns through their representative associations. It is fair that Deputies should recall the remarkable transformation which has taken place in military affairs in the past seven years. Prior to the introduction of representation military personnel had no effective voice with which to articulate the way they felt about their remuneration and conditions of service. Now, following the successful introduction of the representative associations, they have a regular input into the formation of departmental policy through the consultative process and — something which Governments may not always like — a high media profile to give voice to their concerns.
The voluntary early retirement scheme for members of the Defence Forces was introduced as part of the implementation plan. The first charge which must be refuted is that there is any confusion concerning the voluntary early retirement scheme — known as the VER scheme — for the Defence Forces. Deputy Smith claimed a member of the organisation said they do not know what is happening. However, there is no confusion concerning the VER——
He was the president of the association.
——unless we are talking about the obvious confusion of Deputy Power and Deputy Smith. There is no confusion on the part of the forces so I do not know to whom the Deputies are talking. It is important to understand and repeat——
The Minister must listen to them before he would be aware of it.
——that this is an entirely voluntary scheme and no member of the Defence Forces is being made to leave compulsorily or against their wishes. I stress that no member of the Defence Forces is being forced to avail of VER. Anyone who says otherwise is being mischievous and raising unnecessary concern and confusion.
The Government's main concerns have been to ensure that the scheme makes sense in relation to the needs of the Defence Forces so that we create the type of Defence Forces this country needs and to ensure that the scheme makes sense from the point of view of the taxpayer who is footing the bill. Initially the VER scheme was targeted at personnel in categories where it was expected that the level of take up would be reasonably high. These included: personnel aged 50 and over on 31 December 1996; medical category C personnel; Naval Service personnel who suffer from chronic sea sickness, and members of what is often described as "the hump", namely, members of the 46th to 53rd cadet classes and third potential officers course.
When discussing the VER scheme we should remember that we are talking about taxpayers' money. This year alone the taxpayer will be required to provide an additional £16 million to fund the scheme. Over the three year life of the plan this figure will be in the order of £50 million. It is obvious, therefore, that the VER scheme must achieve its objectives. We must also remember that the VER scheme involves management spending additional money, that is, money over and above the normal allocation, in order to achieve savings in the long-term. VER is not being funded to provide a windfall for the fortunate few. It is a management tool and its success or value will be judged by management criteria.
By any standard, the VER scheme is attractive. This is borne out by the number of personnel who applied. The number of applications received was over twice the number of places available. The terms of the scheme are generous and Deputies will be interested in some examples of the type of financial package available. A commandant aged 39 years will receive a VER gratuity of £38,173 in addition to his normal retirement gratuity of £21,052. That is a total tax free lump sum of £59,225. He will also receive a pension of £9,858 per annum payable immediately and for the rest of his life. A sergeant with 21 years service will receive a VER gratuity of £26,643 in addition to his normal retirement gratuity of £8,540. That is a total tax free lump sum of £35,183. He will also receive a pension of £125.45 per week payable immediately and for the rest of his life. These figures speak for themselves.
The VER scheme was introduced following the most exhaustive and detailed planning. The composition and presentation of VER schemes in other public service organisations were studied to ensure that my Department's scheme incorporated all of the necessary features to make it clear, unambiguous and easy to understand and avail of.
With the assistance of outside consultants a comprehensive information booklet was prepared which explained the VER scheme in simple and lucid terms and gave detailed advice on such matters as eligibility, how the lump sum and pension would be calculated, social welfare and other entitlements and how to apply for VER.
Before the scheme was launched command service advisory teams were selected, trained and established in each of the commands and in the Naval Service and Air Corps. Those teams were specially trained in all aspects of the VER scheme and were able to provide pre-decision counselling and advice on topics such as social welfare entitlements, taxation, insurance, health insurance, timeframe of the scheme, as well as providing detailed information on the terms and conditions of the scheme and assistance in filling out the application forms. Personnel management units in each location provided additional support. At all times the approach was one of adopting best practice.
Applications for VER were evaluated by a board especially established for this purpose. It comprised military personnel including an NCO, a representative of the Department of Defence and an outside civilian with experience in this area. Following evaluation by the board, successful applicants were given 14 days to indicate their acceptance or otherwise of the offer of VER. Pressure was not put on VER applicants. This scheme was and is entirely voluntary and no one was, at any stage, coerced or compelled to apply for VER. Once the formal offer was accepted by the applicant, the decision became irrevocable.
The scheme was oversubscribed and, therefore, it was not possible to offer VER to everyone who applied for it this year. As an exceptional measure in response to approaches by both representative associations, members of the Defence Forces who wanted to leave the force in the short term were facilitated by allowing them to avail of unpaid pre-retirement support leave. Personnel who availed of that concession will receive their full VER and pension gratuities in January 1997. This concession was intended primarily to facilitate the small number of personnel who, it had been represented by the Representative Associations, were in a position to take up alternative employment immediately. It was not thought that the concession would be of interest or of benefit to the majority of personnel who could not be accommodated by this year's scheme. Some 20 officers and 99 NCOs and privates availed of the concession. Personnel who did not avail of it did not prejudice their right to apply for or be considered for next year's VER scheme.
Deputy Dermot Ahern accused the Government of not addressing the issue of barrack closures in its amendment. That issue, which is one of the Opposition's hoary old chestnuts, does not arise. It will conveniently grab a headline because it is an emotive issue. Those who continue to raise it show scant regard for the concerns and worries of members of the Defence Forces and their families. The Minister and I have made it abundantly clear at every available opportunity that the question of barrack closures does not, and never has, formed part of the implementation plan. Barrack closures is simply not on the agenda.
I will deal specifically with the issue of pensions which has been raised here. Provision for the payment of pensions by the Department of Defence to the widows and children of deceased soldiers was first made in 1978 when a contributory pension scheme for those dependants was introduced. Soldiers serving at the time were included as members of the scheme unless they opted in writing not to become members. The widows of soldiers who opted out receive the same PRSI pension as widows generally. In other words, there is no question of widows being left without anything.
In 1985 a second opportunity to make provision for their dependants was granted when all soldiers — as well as pensioners and the representatives of deceased soldiers — who had opted out of the scheme in 1978 were again invited to reconsider their decision and to join a revised scheme. Unfortunately, only a relatively small number availed of that option.
At this stage, all soldiers who were serving when the original scheme was introduced in 1978 have had two opportunities to join the scheme. Only the widows of those soldiers who chose on the two occasions not to become members of the contributory scheme are ineligible for supplementary pensions under the scheme. While the position of these widows has been sympathetically considered, I regret to say that, for a variety of reasons, it has not been found possible to make any concession.
While I have every concern for the spouses and children of deceased soldiers who consciously opted out of the contributory pension scheme, I regret I cannot make any concession to them. This issue was raised with the Opposition when in it was in Government and it was forced by the same facts to reach the same conclusion.
The Naval Service and Air Corps perform some of the tasks central to the redefined roles of the Defence Forces. The Government has already given a firm commitment that we will not leave the Naval Service or the Air Corps without adequate manpower to run and maintain ships and aircraft.
Over the past 20 years a growing appreciation of the value of our marine resources has coincided with a period of growth and development for the Naval Service and Air Corps. The extension of our exclusive fishery limit to 200 miles offshore marked a turning point in our appreciation of the importance of the sea as an economic asset. As a result the Naval Service and the Air Corps have seen considerable growth and development. Some time ago we reached agreement on the new EU fisheries surveillance five year package, which, for the first time, includes an element of funding for operational costs for Ireland. As part of that package Ireland has been granted funding to ensure the implementation of the new entry-exit arrangements which came into force on I January this year. In relation to the programme for 1997, Ireland's application, which has been submitted, provides for a downpayment for a new patrol vessel.
The continuing success of the Naval Service in fishery protection, in search and rescue and its important role in dealing with pollution threats have resulted in a much more widespread appreciation of its outstanding work. The Air Corps perform vitally important functions in search and rescue, air ambulance, security operations and, from time to time, assist in nonmilitary operations such as the relief of distress in emergency situations arising from natural disasters.
Responsibility for preventing the illegal importation of drugs rests primarily with the Garda Síochána and the Revenue Commissioners. The Defence Forces, including the Naval Service and the Air Corps, respond to requests from the civil authorities for assistance. The designation of Naval Service personnel as enforcement officers under the Criminal Justice Act, 1994 will increase the role and effectiveness of the Naval Service in combating the illegal importation of drugs. Furthermore, a joint task force involving the Garda, the Customs Service and the Naval Service has been established by the Government.
Recognising the diversity of tasks performed by the Naval Service and the Air Corps, the Government decided that, as an integral part of the process of implementing the recommendations of the efficiency audit group, separate in-depth studies should be carried out on their structure and organisation. Those studies are being done by consultants on behalf of the efficiency audit group. The consultants have experts in maritime and aviation matters on their teams. I understand that the studies will be completed around the end of this month.
I acknowledge that the incidence of duty along the Border has increased due to BSE patrolling. However, where a person is required to work additional hours in any given week, compensatory time off is provided. To ease the burden in this regard 50 additional personnel reported to the 27th Infantry Battalion recently to assist in the performance of BSE patrol duty. Additional support from non-Border commands is planned for the near future.
In 1972 Border duty allowance was introduced for those personnel engaged on duties on the Border. Personnel working in Border units are in receipt of a Border duty allowance of £49.57 per week in the case of officers and £43.81 per week in the case of non-commissioned officers and privates. The allowance is paid, irrespective of the hours worked, on a continuous basis, including during periods of annual leave, sick leave, etc. In addition to Border duty allowance a military service allowance of just over £2,000 per annum is payable to all ranks.
In regard to pay and allowances to members of the Permanent Defence Force, the average gross pay of enlisted personnel at £320 compares very favourably with incomes generally. Considering that the average gross weekly earnings for a male industrial worker, which includes overtime, service pay, shift and other allowances, is £315.15 per week, I do not think military personnel can be bracketed with the poorly paid.
I thank my colleagues on the other side of the House for giving me additional time. I want to make it clear that the very negative impression conveyed by the motion is in stark contrast with my personal experience. In September I witnessed our troops in their peace-keeping role. When the roles of the Defence Forces were restated in 1993 peace-keeping was identified as one of the principal tasks to be carried out. Irish soldiers have built up an enviable reputation world-wide as peace-keepers. Frequently patience and diplomacy may be as necessary as the conventional skills of the soldier. Decades of experience have shown that Irish soldiers have these qualities in abundance and the number of requests the Government receives from the United Nations confirms the high regard in which Irish soldiers are held.
On my recent visit to the Middle East I saw at first-hand the tremendous work being carried out by Irish troops in the cause of peace. I visited Irish troops serving with the United Nations force in Cyprus. The force commander, Brigadier General Vartiainen was loud in his praise and made special mention of Ireland's contribution down the years to UNFICYP. The Chief of Staff of UNFICYP, Colonel Talbot, also commended the Irish involvement.
I also visited the Irish contingent serving with the United Nations interim force in Lebanon. Our single biggest contribution to the United Nations in terms of personnel continues to be the UNIFIL mission. Irish contingents have served with UNIFIL since 1978 and while the mandate has not yet been fulfilled a great deal has been achieved in the intervening years. An important contribution has been made to the lives of thousands of Lebanese people who have been protected from the worst excesses of the conflict and have been allowed to lead a near normal lifestyle. One of the highlights of my visits to South Lebanon was the ceremony for the presentation of medals by the force commander to the Irish troops serving there. The force commander, Major General Wozniak, paid generous tributes to the work carried out by successive Irish battalions. He stated that Irish troops had made an immeasurable contribution to the efforts by the United Nations to fulfil the mandate laid down by the Security Council.
While in the Middle East I took the opportunity to travel to Damascus where I met Irish military observers serving with the United Nations truce supervision organisation. The issue of the Golan Heights, which I visited while in Syria, is crucial to the ultimate success of the Middle East peace process. In Damascus I also met Major General Mustafa Tlass, the Syrian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence. General Tlass expressed his country's appreciation of Ireland's contribution through its involvement in the UNTSO mission to the whole peace process.
Recently the Government approved the participation of the Defence Forces in the United Nations standby arrangements. The concept of stand-by forces for UN peace-keeping missions has been in development since 1990. This system is intended to enhance the United Nations' capacity for a rapid response to emergencies. Member states will specify resources which could be made available within agreed response times for UN peacekeeping operations mandated by the Security Council. These resources may be military personnel or units, civilian police, civilian personnel, equipment or services. Our commitment in terms of military personnel will be up to 850 people. This is indicative of the Government's strong commitment to peacekeeping.
The Government is determined to press ahead with the most comprehensive programme of reform ever been undertaken in the Defence Forces. I have every confidence that the adaptability displayed by members of the Defence Forces down the years will continue. I have no doubt that the organisation and its representative bodies will respond to the challenge which the EAG process presents.
I wish to share my time with Deputy Ned O'Keeffe.
I am sure that is agreed. Agreed.
I compliment the Army and the Minister on the recent historic event where a young lady was taken into the Army Equitation School. I know this young girl and have witnessed her achievements over many years. I compliment Colonel Ringrose who will retire next year — he retired this year as chef d'équipe of the Aga Khan team — for the tremendous job he has done over the years and the great successes he has achieved, despite the fact that successive Governments have given a pittance — £500,000 — to the Army Equitation School. Because the school does not have a transport box, it has to hire transport for its horses, which is ridiculous. I ask the Minister to consider allocating an extra £80,000 or £100,000 to enable the school, which has brought great honour to this country and elsewhere in terms of horse sales, to purchase a transport box.
I wish to raise an issue relating to a woman who visited my clinic last Saturday, a widow with six children who worked for 19 years as a civilian in Kickham Barracks in Clonmel. The woman gave me the last two cheques she received with a notice stating that in future she would receive her cheques per fortnight instead of per month. Her pension, even though it is only £1.20 per month — 30p per week — is to be paid at 60p per fortnight. I sent the cheques back to the Minister for Defence with a letter stating that I cannot understand how anyone who worked for 19 years for the military authorities could receive such a paltry and insulting pension. The cost of issuing the cheque, without taking into account the cost of computerising the payment, is almost half the pension. That woman was ashamed to go to the bank to cash her cheques. The Minister should take up this matter with his senior colleague in the Department who has the audacity not only to pay such a paltry pension but to break it down to a fortnightly payment.
The Minister stated that as a result of consultation matters have never been clearer, but that is not the case. There is total confusion within the Army. Rumours of military barracks closing, whether in Clonmel, Kilkenny, Fermoy, Ballincollig, Limerick or elsewhere, create great uncertainty within the Army. Young men who have bought houses are afraid that if they do not join the voluntary early retirement scheme they will be transferred. There are no assurances in that regard. There is lack of advice to personnel in the Army and the Civil Defence on whether it is more profitable for them to retire or to stay at work.
A number of other issues have to be considered, such as the social issues of whether or not the barracks will close. The real issue of barracks closure as the Minister knows is that if enough people avail of the early retirement scheme there will be no personnel left to service the barracks. It is a clever way of achieving what the Minister wants. The Minister is not closing the barracks; the barracks will close because of the uncertainty in that regard.
I am disappointed that both the Minister and the Department of Defence refused to properly recognise the worthwhile contribution of all battalions of the FCA this year. There was a formal ceremony in Dublin for those in the LDF and the FCA but nothing was organised within the command areas by the Department and the Army. Nothing was done to recognise the people who gave up their free time to serve in the Defence Forces.
The chief of staff said recently that because of the shortage of personnel in the Army, FCA personnel might be required to do military service on a full-time basis. If it is good enough to be considered for that service, the FCA should be recognised before the end of this year in every battalion area and every company area. Those men and women who served in the past and who continue to give their voluntary service should be recognised.
The information available about voluntary retirement is confusing and there is much uncertainty for those who availed of the scheme. They have no incomes. They were not entitled to draw unemployment benefit. They were not entitled to take up a permanent job because they were not sure whether they would be accepted for voluntary early retirement. They could not get unemployment benefit in the local labour exchange. The Minister tells us that this year they will get a payment of between £3,000 and £4,000 in two sums before Christmas. That will not pay the debts they have incurred from either the credit union or banks, if the banks were generous enough to lend money to people in these circumstances. They are not extremely generous in that regard to people serving in the Army or in any industrial job. I would be surprised if the personnel involved do not end up in debt as a result of that uncertainty. I hope to see a far greater social service introduced in the Army so that professional social workers can help personnel and ensure that people are properly informed and advised in the best interests of their careers, their families and their future.
I want the case of a woman who worked in Kickham barracks for 19 years, a widow with six children, to be considered. She is paid a paltry pension of 60p per fortnight. It costs more than half that for the civil servant to put the cheque into an envelope and put a stamp on it. We should ensure that no such disgraceful pensions are paid out. When those cheques arrived on the Minister's desk yesterday morning I hope somebody had a twinge of conscience about them. I hope somebody asked why this lady gets only £1.20 per month at 70 years of age.
The Department had the cheek to tell her it will be made easier for her, that she will be paid once a fortnight. Once a fortnight she will get 60p after 19 years work. Compare that to what is paid out to Army officers. It is not good enough to treat a civilian worker in that fashion. That is not the way to treat a victim of circumstances, a widow who was desperate to get work to support her children and who had a sense of duty towards her family. I will give her name to the Minister after this debate. I want to see that wrong corrected. I want to see the recognition of her plight. In her declining years she should have something more to look forward to than a pittance of 30p per week from the Army.
I support the motion eloquently proposed by my party spokesman on defence, Deputy Smith, and by Deputy Power. We are debating a very important arm of our Constitution. The Army is very stretched because of many problems in our country. We have the BSE problem on the Border and the prospect of a new political situation which I hope will not arise. This creates further problems for the numbers and personnel of the Defence Forces. Side by side with that I understand 700 Irish troops serve with the United Nations every six months which also creates problems.
Due to retirement and the voluntary retirement package, personnel are not being replaced at the required level. Some 300 will take voluntary retirement this year and it is envisaged that 900 will retire in 1997. That will put major strain on the Army. Who will man Army posts around the country? Will the personnel be available? That question remains unanswered.
We have a very effective Air Corps and Naval Service. The latter deals with fisheries protection and drug interception. I congratulate the Naval Service on major seizures of contraband. Were it not for their vigilant approach and watchful eye, much of this material would not come into the hands of the authorities and would be used for illegal purposes. Our Naval Service is not given due recognition for the wonderful work it does in protecting our very valuable fishing industry.
In the years ahead, our fishing industry will become more and more valuable as a natural asset that has been untapped for many years but we will come under greater attack from foreign trawlers from the major fishing countries because of the richness of our seas. If we do not strengthen the Naval Service by giving it the necessary equipment, we will lose much of this rich asset and the fish that are so valuable to our economy.
It has been brought to my attention by a number of Army personnel that the gardaí who go on duty to the Border for a two-month stretch get a sum of approximately £3,000 while Army personnel who go on Border duty come home with £320. There is something wrong there and the situation has to be examined. They are playing a major role on the Border. They are away from home and all they are entitled to is a £45 allowance before tax. After a two-month stint they get approximately £320.
The number of personnel retiring in the next two years will definitely lead to the closure of many barracks. I ask the Minister to be honest with the people in those towns who are dependent on Army personnel for the much needed income to shops and businesses and also to be honest with the members of the Defence Forces. There is no point in hiding behind reports because we are all aware that major changes are taking place. Army barracks are not being maintained. They are being run down and there should be no doubt in anyone's mind about that. They are very seriously run down. One army barracks in my constituency, Fitzgerald Camp near Fermoy, had the first motor squadron. It is in a serious state of decay and in need of urgent repair.
Civilian staff are not being replaced, be they qualified or general operatives. Craftsmen such as carpenters, who are necessary for the maintenance of these camps, are not being replaced.
I hesitate to interrupt the Deputy, but the time has come for other business. The Deputy should move the Adjournment of the debate.
Before moving the Adjournment, I wish to state that, in my constituency, the flagship of the Defence Forces are Fitzgerald and Lynch Camps.
Debate adjourned.