Vol. 573 No. 3
126 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Defence if one of the eight Naval Service patrol vessels has been tied up as a result of a shortage of personnel; the steps being taken to ensure sufficient Naval Service personnel to allow optimum use of all vessels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25266/03]
The Naval Service has succeeded in increasing its operational deployment output by over 30% since 2000. This deployment included the extended trade missions by Naval Service vessels to Asia in 2002 and to the United States of America earlier this year. On the basis of its operational deployment to date and the planned deployment for the remainder of this year, it is forecast that the Naval Service will achieve 98.5% of its target in 2003. In its value for money implementation plan, the Naval Service is committed to achieving 95% of the target.
I have already answered this question fully, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I am quite happy to do so again but it was taken in response to an earlier question.
It is getting complicated now because the Minister's previous answers are coming back to haunt him.
I do not mind. I am quite happy to continue and since that is what the Deputy wants, that is what I will do.
The 5% margin is designed to facilitate events which militate against achieving the full target, such as mechanical failure, temporary specialist shortages and other unforeseen occurrences. No Naval Service vessel is tied up as a result of a shortage of personnel. Where planned patrol effort has been affected in the past by unforeseen events, including temporary specialist shortages, the Naval Service has very successfully managed to minimise the consequences of such events. In addition, the Naval Service has undertaken a range of measures to address particular areas such as general recruitment, direct entry schemes, development of training resources and review of training programmes.
The main day-to-day role of the Naval Service, as a component of the Defence Forces, is to provide a fishery protection service in accordance with the State's obligations as a member of the European Union.
As part of the modernisation process, in December 2000 I authorised a new organisation for the Naval Service which saw an increase in personnel numbers from 959 serving at that time to a new establishment of 1,144. Given the specialist nature of many of the additional positions, it was not possible to fill them until such time as personnel had completed the necessary training. It was always accepted that it would take a number of years for all the appointments to be filled by suitably qualified people.
I am aware of the particular difficulties regarding the deployment of ships' engineering staff, especially engine-room artificers and electrical artificers. The position with engine-room artificers is that the number of such appointments in the Naval Service was increased from 76 to 85 following the reorganisation of the service.
A total of 70 engine-room artificers are serving at present and a further eight will complete their naval training later this year. The situation will continue to improve as significant numbers of trainee engine-room artificers complete their training and come on stream over the next four years. In addition to the eight I have already mentioned, a further 29 apprentices-trainee technicians are currently at various stages in the training process. They will all come on stream over the next four years and will meet both the current shortfall and replace any further wastage that may occur.
The position with electrical artificers is that the number of such appointments in the Naval Service was increased from 42 to 48 following the reorganisation of the service. A total of 42 are serving at present. A further 18 are at various stages in the training process and will come on stream in the coming years.
The reorganisation of the Naval Service was designed to ensure that when fully implemented, all personnel would spend alternate periods of two years in a shore-based appointment followed by two years in a ship-based appointment. In this regard, two years in a ship-based appointment does not imply that people spend two years at sea.
While the increased number of specialist appointments for both engine-room artificers and electrical artificers could not all be filled instantly, thus creating some transitional short-term difficulties, I am assured by the military authorities that the arrangements in place to provide suitably trained and qualified personnel will see an early improvement in the situation.
Does it make sense to spend significant sums of capital investment on ships that are lying idle?
It made good sense to purchase these ships, which are very necessary. They have enhanced the capacity of the Naval Service to an extraordinary degree. The military authorities have assured me that no ship has been tied up due to personnel shortages. As I indicated to Deputy Durkan earlier, the recorded output from the Naval Service in the past couple of years has gone up by 30% – one third of increased activity. The service deserves to be complimented on that. I will be visiting Haulbowline in the next week or so to announce more major capital investment, thus enabling the naval base to do whatever is necessary.
Is the Minister saying that no naval vessels have been confined to port as a result of staff shortages?
Absolutely none. Not only have they been able to comply with the fishery protection requirements but also, in 2002, they were on a three-month expedition to China for Enterprise Ireland and this year to Savannah and other places in America to help us to attract industry here. They did a great job and were great ambassadors.
Is it true, or not, that a ship—
Probably not.
Then the Minister will have an opportunity to confirm this. It is either true or untrue that a ship is permanently tied up due to a lack of personnel. Is that a true statement or am I telling a yarn?
The answer is "No", but it is not unusual for the Deputy to tell yarns.
Is a ship tied up at present and has it been tied up for some considerable time? What will the Minister do to ensure that sufficient staff are available to put into operation all the important facilities provided by the Naval Service? There is no use having naval vessels lying idle and gathering barnacles in port.
I am sure the Minister is aware of the difficulties faced by personnel who spend long periods at sea.
Yes.
Does he have any plans to improve that situation, which is causing many difficulties for naval personnel and their families?
As usual, Deputy Stanton has put his finger on a difficulty that is definitely there. The only way it can be addressed is by speeding up training programmes and the direct entry effort. In answering the question, I outlined the numbers of people who are coming on stream. When we reorganised the Naval Service, numbers were increased in a number of areas. At the time, I said it would take a couple of years to fill the positions and that is happening. I accept that there is a certain amount of stress and that we would not have obtained the 30% increase in output and the industrial expeditions without that. I want to help them to remedy the situation as quickly as I can. However, it is false and wrong of Deputy Durkan to say that ships are being tied up, because the Naval Service has told me that is not true.
So it is not true.
The only time a ship is tied up is when something has to be done to it.
They are not being tied up at all.
It is just not true and it is not fair to the navy to say so.
I am criticising the Minister, not the Naval Service. The Minister should take care not to be torpedoed on his watch.
God give me patience.
