Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 8 May 1997

Vol. 479 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - Defence Forces Recruitment.

Mr. Power

I thank the Chair for the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I would like the Minister for Defence to clarify the subject matter of his reply to Parliamentary Question No. 7 on 29 April 1997 concerning recruitment to the Defence Forces.

My difficulty is not with the direct reply but with replies to a supplementary question I asked later. On that occasion I stated:

On 5 March 1996 the Government stated that the savings achieved through the reorganisation of the Defence Forces would be divided between the Department of Finance and the Department of Defence, on a basis to be agreed between the Ministers in those Departments. That decision was to be made within a month, but no decision has yet been made. That, more than anything else, shows the lack of commitment by the Government to reorganise the Defence Forces and is seen by most people in the Defence Forces as nothing but a cost cutting exercise.

In his reply the Minister said:

The Deputy is talking about savings but, as everybody in the Defence Forces is aware, they will not accrue for four years. No commitment was given that the savings would be divided and a decision made after a month.

A letter from the Government secretary, Frank Murray, in the Department of the Taoiseach dated 5 March 1996 states:

I am to refer to the Memorandum, reference P364, dated 28 February 1996 submitted by the Minister for Defence concerning the implementation plan for phase one of the reorganisation of the Defence Forces and to inform you that at a meeting held today the Government (i) approved the draft implementation plan attached as Appendix A to the Memorandum to be effected over three years.

The letter also outlines the terms of the voluntary early retirement scheme for members of the Defence Forces and goes on to state:

The Government has agreed (a) that savings achieved through the reorganisation plan would be divided between the Exchequer and the Department of Defence on a basis to be agreed between the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Defence and (b) that the Minister for Defence would report to the Government by aide memoir within one month on the outcome of his discussions in this regard with the Minister for Finance and that the Interdepartmental Committee on National Security would give further consideration to the position in relation to the Military Police Company at Government Buildings.

I outlined the current position in the House last week, but the Minister disagreed with me. I accept that even good plans must be changed occasionally, but the commitment given early in 1996 has been reneged on. The large number of hearing claims being presented to the Minister for Defence will place great demands on the Exchequer. Following the fresh look of the Department of Finance at its expenditure on Defence matters I am concerned the promises made will not be adhered to. This is unfortunate at a time when we are trying to reorganise the Defence Forces. We have asked them to make sacrifices and put in place a voluntary early retirement scheme, but unless that is matched with expenditure on equipment and infrastructure the reorganisation will fall asunder. I hope the Minister considers the matter with the seriousness it deserves.

Minister for Defence (Mr. Barrett)

When I received notice of the Deputy's request to raise this matter on the Adjournment I was confused as to what he was referring. I note from the blacks of yesterday's Order of Business that I was accused of misleading the Dáil. I did not intend to do that. I also have a copy of the Government decision to which the Deputy referred and there is no conflict in what I said and what is happening. The Government decision states that the savings achieved through the reorganisation plan will be divided between the Exchequer and the Department of Defence on a basis to be agreed between the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Defence. When I said in reply to a supplementary question from the Deputy that "no commitment was given that the savings would be divided and a decision made after a month", I understood the Deputy thought the savings would be divided on a 50:50 basis. That is not what the Government's decision states. It states they will be divided on a basis to be agreed between the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Defence.

Mr. Power

I did not mention a 50:50 basis, the Minister was the only one to mention that.

Mr. Barrett

No commitment was given that the savings would be divided. The Deputy said a decision was to be made within a month, but in May 1997 a decision had not been made. The Government decision requires me to enter negotiations with the Minister for Finance to find an equitable solution to the division of savings which will not accrue until 1999. We will not know the exact split until nearer 1999. I am negotiating the best deal possible for the Department of Defence for the period after 1999. When the Deputy referred to a period of a month I understood him to believe a decision would be made within a month of the Government decision. That is not the position. When I have reached agreement with the Minister for Finance I am obliged to report back to Government within one month on that agreement so that the Government as a body can confirm the decision. I understood from the Deputy's supplementary that he believed I was required to finalise a decision within a month of the Government decision being taken.

Mr. Power

I am not concerned about the one month period, I am talking about the commitment.

Mr. Barrett

There is a commitment. Discussions are ongoing and the precise details are being worked out between the Departments of Defence and Finance. I am obliged to report back to Government within one month of a final decision being taken so that the Government as a body can confirm that agreement. There is no question of not following that commitment or of not conforming with the Government decision taken on 28 February 1996. The misunderstanding may relate to the interpretation of the Government decision. I am having ongoing discussions with the Department of Finance in an effort to achieve an equitable division of the savings that will accrue after 1999.

In the meantime ongoing investment is taking place in the Defence Forces. I can give the Deputy some facts and figures in that regard. The Government's commitment to continue its programme of major investment in equipment and infrastructure for the Defence Forces has been proven. In the three years 1995-7 no less than £29 million was provided in infrastructural investment in military barracks generally. A further indicator of the Government's commitment is that an additional £46 million has been provided in the two years 1996-7 to fund a voluntary early retirement scheme. That is a clear indication the Government does not regard the implementation plan as a mere cost cutting exercise. I am glad to have this opportunity to state there is ongoing investment in the Defence Forces. A sum of £29 million has been spent in a short period and that will continue.

On the savings that will accrue after 1999, I will conform with the decision taken by the Cabinet in February 1996 and will report back to it within one month of the final decision being taken by the Department of Finance and me.

Mr. Power

Has the Minister reached a decision with the Minister for Finance on how the savings will be divided?

Mr. Barrett

A final decision has not been taken because there is a question which must be decided. As I said in reply to a question from the Deputy, the total voluntary early retirement scheme will cost approximately £75 million and we have spent £49 million so far. It is a question of whether part of the savings should go towards the repayment of the £75 million for a stated period and after that I would like if the Defence Forces could look forward to getting 100 per cent of the savings. That is the sort of discussion taking place and the line I would like the military authorities to pursue. It is not a simple question of dividing the savings 50:50 or 60:40.

Mr. Power

I thought the Minister said previously they would be divided 50:50.

Mr. Barrett

That may have been a proposal, but there is the question of how long the savings will be divided 50:50 and on what basis. At no time did I endeavour to mislead the House. I want to once again clarify that the obligation on me is to report back to Government within one month of the agreement I reach with the Minister for Finance so that the Cabinet can confirm that agreement.