Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 13 Dec 2011

Vol. 749 No. 4

Priority Questions

Army Barracks

Dara Calleary

Question:

49 Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Defence the cost saving on a per barrack basis for his decision to close barracks at Mullingar, Clonmel, Cavan and Castlebar; the capital requirements on a per barrack basis for those barracks to which the affected soldiers will be reassigned; the projected costs of securing each of the four barracks when they are empty; the amount of travel allowances that are payable to those affected soldiers; if he will outline any other payments that are payable on foot of his decision to close these barracks; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38808/11]

Jonathan O'Brien

Question:

50 Deputy Jonathan O’Brien asked the Minister for Defence if he has conducted a cost analysis of the closure of Defence Force barracks across the State including the impact of the closure on local communities and additional costs of relocation of Defence Force members; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38905/11]

Mattie McGrath

Question:

51 Deputy Mattie McGrath asked the Minister for Defence the reason a decision was made to close Kickham Barracks, Clonmel, County Tipperary, which is 83 kilometres from Sarsfield Barracks, County Limerick, with no motorway access as opposed to Stephen’s Barracks, County Kilkenny, which is 81 kilometres from the Curragh, County Kildare, with 67 kilometres of that journey being motorway, when both barracks were deemed to be of equal strategic importance; in the event of the closure of Kickham Barracks, the arrangements that are in place to ensure that the existing army reserve units will maintain a training base in Clonmel; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39829/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Defence (Deputy Paul Kehoe)

I apologise on behalf of the Minister for Defence, Deputy Alan Shatter, who is unable to take questions today. He is attending a European Council meeting on behalf of the Department of Justice and Equality.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 49 to 51, inclusive, together.

The consolidation of the Defence Forces formations into a smaller number of locations is a key objective in the ongoing defence modernisation programme and has been recommended in many reports in recent years. This was a key consideration of Government in addressing this issue as releasing personnel from security and support functions enables the operational capacity of the Defence Forces to be maintained notwithstanding the fall in strength.

The savings that will arise in respect of utilities, security duty allowance and maintenance will be approximately €0.4 million in respect of Mullingar, €0.4 million in respect of Clonmel, €0.35 million in respect of Cavan and €0.1 million in respect of Castlebar. In addition to the cost of utilities each barracks requires a security detail and additional further personnel are tied up on purely administrative duties connected to the management of the particular barracks. In addition, because maintaining barrack security can require around the clock cover a much larger pool of personnel is required. Consequently, several hundred additional man years will become available for operational duties. At a minimum, the value of this efficiency gain across the four locations will exceed €5 million per year.

Expenditure at the receiving barracks is an estimated €1 million to provide immediate accommodation, including some temporary measures. A further €3 million to €4 million will be required for permanent works in the next two to three years. In Custume Barracks in Athlone there is sufficient accommodation to provide for personnel relocating from the barracks in Cavan and Mullingar who choose to live in barracks on a single living-in basis. Mess, dining and other welfare facilities will also be available to these personnel from existing facilities at Custume Barracks. Work-related accommodation will also be put in place before personnel relocate. There are no plans for providing extra accommodation in Sarsfield Barracks, Limerick. However, it is expected there will be a requirement for the provision of additional locker facilities at an estimated cost of €50,000. There will be no requirement for expenditure in Stephens Barracks, Kilkenny, as personnel relocating there will be filling existing vacancies. Alternative arrangements for Reserve Defence Force units located at the closing barracks has not yet been finalised but will be put in place before 30 March 2012.

Defence Forces regulations provide for the payment of certain allowances to qualifying personnel on change of station. The allowances payable depend on the individual circumstances of each applicant. In general, prescribed travel allowances may be paid for up to nine months. There is also provision in the regulations to cover certain costs, such as auctioneers' and legal fees incurred by qualifying personnel who purchase a house at their new station. As the allowances payable will be based on individual circumstances it is not possible to say what the final costs will be. However, based on the 2009 barracks closures 326 qualifying personnel in the four locations that closed received some €677,000 in total in change of station allowances, an average of €2,077 per person. It is likely that the average change of station allowance payment per qualifying person will be of the same order on this occasion.

The Department of Defence is arranging for the briefing of personnel in respect of change of station allowance in the coming weeks. The purpose of these briefings is to give an outline of the change of station allowance scheme to the relevant personnel and to address, in so far as possible, any issues of concern that may arise.

Once they become vacant the four barracks being closed will be administered by the Department which will be responsible for security pending disposal. An assessment of the security requirement will be carried out in advance of the closures and appropriate measures put in place. The Deputy will appreciate that I should not go into details at this stage.

Based on the experience of previous closures, it is anticipated the impact on local communities will be negligible. This is based on the experience that most of the personnel serving in these installations live in the areas and will continue to do so in the future.

Deputy Dara Calleary

These closures will have potential savings of just over €1 million in direct costs and what the Minister of State defined as an efficiency gain, for which there is no way of quantifying, of €5 million. The costs of moving the barracks and personnel, on the other hand, will involve €4 million in capital costs required in the other barracks. An allowance for soldiers to move will come to €700,000. This does not include the security costs which I appreciate the Minister of State cannot give in his reply. In the long term, this will come to more than the so-called anticipated efficiencies.

Have any other potential uses for the properties in Cavan, Mullingar, Clonmel and Castlebar been identified? Has the Department been in touch with local authorities in identifying the sites for, say, community uses or as enterprise centres?

What is the timeline for the closure of the barracks in question? Dún Uí Néill in Cavan, Columb in Mullingar and Kickham in Clonmel were worth €22 million combined to their three towns. Of this amount, how much does the Department estimate will be lost to the three towns in question?

Deputy Paul Kehoe

The potential savings are €5 million per year. This is not just about money savings but making the Defence Forces more professional. The number of full-time personnel in the Defence Forces has dropped considerably over the past several years. The Government made a commitment in the programme for Government and in last week's budget that personnel levels will be maintained at 9,500. The closure of these barracks will release some personnel from other duties.

As I stated in my reply, if one wants 24-7 barrack security, it can tie up quite a number of soldiers to perform it in rotation. The redeployment to other barracks will release more man hours and allow for these duties to be performed more efficiently. When personnel levels were at 14,000, it was easy to keep these barracks open. The Government had to make a decision on this and did so.

The Minister for Defence met several delegations prior to the closures, often for up to two hours, on future potential uses of the barrack sites in question. The Minister's priority is not to have these sites left idle. As I said in my reply, most personnel stayed in their existing accommodation when barracks were closed by the Deputy's party in government. I do not believe the closures will result in a huge revenue loss to any town.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

The Minister of State referred to the potential loss to local communities and I take on board his comment that the previous closure of barracks did not result in significant numbers of personnel moving. Regardless of that, the closures will result in additional costs to them and that will have a knock-on effect on local communities. I asked in my question whether a cost benefit analysis had been conducted on the impact of the closures rather than the Government presuming there would not be an impact. Was such an analysis done on the potential losses, for example, to local businesses that supply barracks or to local authorities through lost commercial rates, etc., when local businesses close or following an increase in social welfare claims? Was a document produced that outlined step by step the potential losses to local economies?

Deputy Paul Kehoe

There will be no direct job losses in any barracks; everyone will be relocated.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

I asked about the local economies.

Deputy Paul Kehoe

No Defence Forces personnel will lose jobs because of the barracks closures. I presume people who deliver to a barracks supply other barracks and I presume, for example, food companies do business with other barracks. A barracks cannot be kept open just because there might be a few euro less in the community. I empathise with the business people in each of the towns where barracks closures will happen but none of the barracks closures in recent years led to the closure of local businesses. I do not believe that any business will go to the wall because of a barracks closure.

I stated clearly in my reply that compensation is available for Defence Forces personnel who have to move house and so on. During previous closures, a minimal number of people moved out of the towns in which they lived when they were reassigned to another barracks. They were able to commute on a daily basis to their new posting and they remained where they were. The new postings are within daily commuting distance.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I did not get a satisfactory reply to my questions. The Minister of State is being disingenuous when he says there will be no job losses because many people in Clonmel have chosen to pull out and give up their chosen career, which is valuable to them and to the State. Why was a decision taken to close Clonmel barracks? It is 83 km from Sarsfield Barracks, with no motorway access, whereas St. Stephen's Barracks in Kilkenny is 81 km from the Curragh and 67 km of the journey can be covered by motorway. The Minister of State contradicted himself by saying personnel can travel easily to their new barracks. There is a motorway between Kilkenny and the Curragh but there is 81 km of bad road, the N24, between Clonmel and Limerick.

My question also referred to the Defence Forces Reserve, which has a proud tradition of service all over the country, including in Clonmel and the surrounding district. Members of the reserve want reassurance that if they give up their time to serve the State, they will retain an operational area in Clonmel barracks where they can continue to train. The Minister of State might say it will not affect business. Of course it will affect business. This is a huge body blow to the spirit of the town of Clonmel. The barracks is part of the fabric of the town and has been there since the time Cromwell failed to close it down. It has resisted at all times. It is very involved in the community and throws its doors open to many community services, not to mention all the good work that is done during floods, snow storms, search and rescue operations and everything else. It is a huge psychological blow to the town and it is being resisted.

Deputy Paul Kehoe

The Deputy can be assured that the Minister met PDFORRA as recently as yesterday. He stated that if there are personnel in Clonmel barracks who, for personal reasons or otherwise, want to move to Kilkenny or elsewhere, there are negotiations which can be availed of. The Minister, the Department and the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces are very open to ensuring, in so far as possible, that all personnel will be accommodated in every way.

With regard to the loss of revenue, I did not say businesses would not be affected.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

He said they would not be closed.

Deputy Paul Kehoe

I said they would not go to the wall because of the barracks closing. The Deputy was part of the Government when other barracks closed. I do not believe any business in any of those towns went to the wall because a particular barracks closed.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

Different times.

Deputy Paul Kehoe

The Deputy referred to the reserve forces, which is an issue we are taking into account. The Minister, Deputy Shatter, is very much aware of this matter and of the importance of the work the reserve forces carry out. They will be accommodated when planning is being carried out on the future of the barracks.

The Deputy said it is a huge psychological blow to Clonmel, and there is no doubt that it is, as it is for Cavan and Mullingar and in the case of the other barracks that closed in recent years. However, just because the barracks in Clonmel has closed does not mean the Defence Forces will not be available in emergency cases, such as the flooding Clonmel has been prone to over many years. I assure the Deputy that the Defence Forces are still there to serve on behalf of the community and for the community, and that will continue, not alone in Clonmel but right across the country. During the recent inclement weather in December and January last, although there is only a very small barracks in County Wexford with just ten or 15 personnel, we still got the very same support from the Defence Forces as towns like Clonmel, Mullingar or Cavan, where there were full-time barracks.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

With regard to the compensation the Minister of State said may be available, will this be on an individual basis and depend on each individual's circumstances or will there be a set rate per person? What are the timelines for the closures?

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I asked why the decision was taken to close Clonmel rather than Kilkenny given that they have the same significance, as is acknowledged by the Army itself, and the distances involved were not huge. Why was Clonmel picked out?

Deputy Dara Calleary

First, I want to repeat my question on the timelines. Second, will the Minister of State provide me with the figure in regard to the family income supplement that may be payable because of reductions in pay and the extra burden being put on people travelling?

Deputy Paul Kehoe

While I do not have the figure to hand on income supplement, I can have my officials come back to Deputy Calleary on that. I believe the timeline will be the first half of next year, although I do not have a specific date. In response to Deputy O'Brien, cases will be dealt with on an individual basis because everyone's needs will be different.

Deputy McGrath asked why Clonmel barracks was chosen. Different Defence Forces barracks have totally different operational duties, for example, the Curragh camp is more of a training camp than a barracks. Within the Defence Forces, there were specific reasons different barracks were closed.

I want to highlight a particular point. Everybody will be accommodated in so far as possible. If a person from Clonmel wants to go to the barracks in Kilkenny because of his or her personal circumstances, or if he or she wants to go to Limerick or Athlone, he or she will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. I can assure the House that no one will be left out in the cold.

I understand this can be a sensitive time for members of the Defence Forces and, more importantly, for their families. It puts an extra strain on the families. We are in a space here where we must look after the professionalism of the Defence Forces which we want to keep to a maximum. It is important to us that we do this on a professional basis, and I think that we have.

Defence Forces Review

Dara Calleary

Question:

52 Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Defence the process of consultation he engaged in before his decision to reduce the number of brigades from three to two; the persons or groups with whom he met and when; the input the armed forces had in this decision; the estimated savings associated with this reduction; if he envisages any further barrack closures as a result of the reduction; if he envisages any troop or staff transfers from their current location as a result of this reduction; if so, the number of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39994/11]

Jonathan O'Brien

Question:

53 Deputy Jonathan O’Brien asked the Minister for Defence the consultation process he undertook with representatives of PDFORRA and RACO on the proposed changes to Army brigades. [39953/11]

Deputy Paul Kehoe

I propose to take Questions Nos. 52 and 53 together.

The Government's comprehensive review of expenditure formed the basis for the budgetary decisions necessary to achieve the targets for fiscal consolidation over the period to the end of 2014.

A detailed submission by the Department of Defence formed part of the review process. The submission highlighted the significant reform that has been undertaken in recent years in Defence. It also set out options for Government consideration and highlighted the consequences of alternative courses of action.

I am pleased to say that the Government decided to maintain the strength of the Permanent Defence Force at 9,500 personnel. This recognises the significant modernisation that has been achieved to date and reflects the Government's intention that the Defence Forces retain the capacity to operate effectively across all of the assigned roles within the restricted financial allocation.

In response to this revised strength ceiling of 9,500, there will be a major re-organisation of the Defence Forces encompassing a reduction in the number of Army brigades from three to two. The Chief of Staff was consulted in this regard. I have asked the Chief of Staff and the Secretary General of the Department of Defence to bring forward detailed proposals for the Minister's consideration. This will include proposals regarding territorial areas of responsibility. Further barrack closures are not envisaged as part of this process. The Deputies will appreciate that in advance of receipt of these proposals I will not be in a position to answer detailed questions.

The reduction in the strength of the PDF to 9,500 personnel will deliver sustainable savings. The re-organisation is a response to this reduction and is not intended as a cost saving measure in its own right. The primary focus is to free up the maximum number of military personnel from administrative and support tasks. In short, the re-organisation is about maintaining operational outputs and capabilities to best effect, within a reduced strength.

In accordance with the Croke Park agreement, the representative associations will be fully consulted on all aspects of implementation that fall within the scope of representation. Across Departments, a similar approach is generally taken to implementing high level policy decisions as a result of the CRE.

The Defence organisation has an enviable track record of modernisation and reform. This remains a work in progress. I look forward to working closely with the Chief of Staff and the Secretary General in furthering the reform agenda.

Deputy Dara Calleary

It is unfortunate that the Minister, Deputy Shatter, is not here because my question goes to the very heart of his style of ministry. The Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, spoke of consultation in terms of the Croke Park agreement, but this was announced before anybody in PDFORRA or RACO was told about it and before any Members were told about it.

There are no savings to be made, as Deputy Kehoe stated in his response. I struggle to see where reducing from three brigades to two will result in efficiencies or a better and more efficiently managed Army. It is not as if we had a huge force that would be managed better in two rather than in three brigades.

It would have been far better to have gone into detail with PDFORRA and RACO and, I suspect, with Army management in terms of the ramifications of this decision before announcing it in such a manner.

I will proudly speak in favour of retaining the Western Brigade. It has performed a significant service, at home and abroad, for many years and many of its members are serving as we speak in the Lebanon. Deputy Kehoe saw them off a few weeks ago.

There is no efficiency immediately apparent in this decision. Deputy Kehoe stated it is not a cost decision. It is a bad day's work on the part of the Minister to undermine the morale of the Army and of the brigades in question by making this decision in the manner in which it was made.

Deputy Paul Kehoe

I am aware that the Minister met representatives of both PDFORRA and RACO yesterday on this issue. In response to the previous question, I stated the number of personnel in the Defence Forces is 9,500. In recent years, the number was as high as 12,000 to 14,000. Unfortunately, we do not have enough personnel in the Defence Forces at present to maintain and sustain three brigades.

The Minister consulted the Chief of Staff on this issue. There will be full consultation between the Department and the Defence Forces. Thereafter, a proposal will be made to the Minister. It is a question of consultation, and full consultation will take place over the next while on where the brigades will be placed. The Minister, Deputy Shatter, will make his decision in the not-too-distant future.

I assure the Deputy that it is because of the personnel number in the Defence Forces that we have had to make this decision. From having examined the funding available and the personnel figures, I note the previous Minister for Defence believed the budget would be sufficient to sustain a force of over 9,500, but if he had remained in office there would be a personnel number of 8,000 because there would not be sufficient finances to pay any more. This does not reflect on Deputy Calleary but on the previous Minister.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

The Minister of State referred to consultation and he just confirmed that PDFORRA and RACO were not consulted prior to the decision being announced. Is it putting the cart before the horse to announce reorganisation involving a reduction from three brigades to two before asking the Chief of Staff and Secretary General to bring forward fitting proposals? Surely a consultation process should be about whether a decision is feasible. Will the Minister of State clarify the position on this?

Who actually made the decision? Was it a recommendation that came to the Minister or did the Minister himself decide, based on the figures, budgets and efficiencies, whether it was best to have three or two brigades?

Deputy Paul Kehoe

This is a ministerial decision for the Minister for Defence, Deputy Shatter. He will ask the Department to come up with a proposal. Both the defence and departmental sides would work together and return to the Minister with a proposal for him to make a decision.

There was very little consultation on the decentralisation of the Department of Defence. This is a decision the Minister must make himself. He will consult the Department and Defence Forces before he makes his decision. As the Deputy will understand, the Defence Forces have the knowledge on the ground. The Minister will be open to hearing the views of all parties and none if they have proposals to make.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

The Minister of State is saying the Minister decided to reduce the number from three to two. Having made that decision, did he then consult the Chief of Staff and Secretary General? Alternatively, did the consultation take place prior to the announcement? That is what I am trying to ascertain.

Deputy Paul Kehoe

This is a ministerial decision. The Minister has asked the Department and Chief of Staff to make proposals in this regard. They were consulted on this by the Minister.