Matt Carthy
Question:66. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence the establishment figure for the Army, Naval Service and Air Corps; the current number in each; and the number in the years 2020, 2021 and 2022. [29857/23]
Ceisteanna ar Sonraíodh Uain Dóibh - Priority Questions
Defence Forces
I am taking this question on behalf of Deputy Carthy. Will the Tánaiste outline the establishment figure for the Army, the Naval Service and the Air Corps, the current number in each branch and the numbers in the years 2020, 2021 and 2022?
I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. As of 31 May 2023, the strength of the Permanent Defence Force stood at 7,764 personnel while in 2022 it was 7,966, in 2021 it was 8,456 and in 2020 it was 8,568. The current establishment of the Defence Forces is 9,500. I note that the Deputy requested a further breakdown of these figures by branch and I have arranged for a table with these details to be provided to her.
Sanction has recently been received for 100 extra positions to facilitate the implementation of the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. This is in addition to the recently appointed civilian head of transformation and the pending appointment of a civilian head of strategic HR within the Defence Forces.
I have previously acknowledged the staffing difficulties in the Defence Forces and work to counter these is ongoing. The military authorities advise that current Defence Forces recruitment initiatives include ongoing general service and direct entry recruitment, the re-entry schemes and the "Be More" recruitment campaign. As part of a Naval Service-specific recruitment campaign, a Naval Service recruitment advertisement launched last week and will be rolled out across all media platforms in the coming weeks. A contract has recently been awarded to a marine specialist recruitment body to target individuals with the skills and expertise required by the Naval Service. The maximum age of entry was recently increased to 29 years for general service recruits, cadets, Air Corps apprentices and certain specialists. In addition, the Defence Forces have established a joint induction training centre in Gormanston with a view to increasing the throughput of recruits. A range of financial and non-financial retention measures have been introduced by the Government such as service commitment schemes, tax measures and the recent agreement to further extend the service of post-1994 privates, corporals and sergeants, allowing for their continuance in service to the end of 2024.
There has also been significant progress on pay. Current pay rates, including military service allowances for recruits on completion of their training, start at €37,147 in year 1, rising to €38,544 in year 2 and €39,832 in year 3 of service. On commissioning, a school-leaver cadet is paid €41,123. After two years, such cadets are promoted to lieutenant and their pay rises to €46,406. Where a graduate joins, the pay rate on commissioning begins at €46,406.
My immediate focus is on stabilising the numbers of personnel in the Defence Forces and thereafter increasing strength to meet the agreed level of ambition arising from the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces.
The number of personnel in the Permanent Defence Force, PDF, stood at 8,828 in 2019. In March of that year, it was 8,366 while today it stands at what I had understood to be 7,797, although I believe the Tánaiste gave a different number.
It is 7,764.
It is 7,764. I note that in the response to a recent parliamentary question tabled by my comrade, Deputy Carthy, the Tánaiste stated that his immediate focus would be on stabilising the number of personnel in the Defence Forces. I welcome that because retention is the most important thing. We have to retain the military personnel who are already trained and in whom money has been invested. I agree with that. Will the Tánaiste outline the timeframe within which he believes the number of personnel will be stabilised? Will he give me an idea of how long he believes it will take to reach the establishment figure?
For clarification, I have the table here and can be straight up with the Deputy. The strength of the Army in 2023 is 6,305 while that of the Air Corps is 704 and that of the Naval Service is 755. I am extremely concerned. I have been in this position for six months now and I am very worried about the situation in the navy. We have had meetings with the flag officer, the Chief of Staff and Department officials on the matter. Obviously, there is full employment in the country with the unemployment rate at 3.8%. I outlined a range of initiatives we are undertaking earlier. One of the areas to be addressed earlier, as part of an interdepartmental approach, is that of the current retirement age. We have extended that to 2024 but in my view, we need to extend it further. Discussions on that are ongoing because such action would potentially have read-across to members of the Garda and fire brigades with regard to fast accrual pensions. There are issues there but it is one effective route that we can take to retain people within our Defence Forces for longer. As I said earlier, with regard to the navy, we are looking at other measures and at what we can do in respect of specialist positions and disciplines where we are losing personnel. Industry is now offering very high rates to people, particularly trained personnel in the Army. That is a significant phenomenon given the buoyancy of the economy and the skill levels of many within our Defence Forces. Others are seeking those particular skills. This is a matter I keep under active examination. Today, I again met with the Chief of Staff and the Secretary General of the Department to maintain the pressure on this issue.
In April, Lieutenant Colonel Conor King, general secretary of RACO, said that we cannot recruit ourselves out of a retention crisis. He is right because we would just be putting water into a leaky bucket. The figure I have for the number of discharges in 2022 is 891. That was higher than the figure for any year since 2017. The Tánaiste mentioned the working time directive at a recent meeting with PDFORRA.
Can the Tánaiste confirm whether the Defence Forces have begun recording the working time of their personnel as is necessary to progress this? Can he provide any indicative timeframe as to how long it will take to get it to fruition?
I can report that good progress has been made on the working time directive. I asked my officials some time back to engage again with the organisations representing our Defence Forces - PDFORRA and, of course, RACO. Concentrated meetings were held over a period of time in the past number of weeks. I do not have an exact timeline yet, but I am confident-----
Have they been recording the working times?
We have not. That will be part of the broader organisation of the working time directive. I am very clear that we want to introduce the directive. The pressure will be maintained in the discussions under way with the representative organisations. That is a very important factor. It does present some challenges, but that said, it is an important part of not just of the broader culture within the Defence Forces, but also ensuring the wellbeing of members and providing a good environment within workplace that can both facilitate recruitment and retention in the Defence Forces. There are people coming into the Defence Forces all the time. The issue is that we have to get a sufficient number of recruits that is higher than the number of members retiring and leaving.
Defence Forces
Matt Carthy
Question:68. Deputy Matt Carthy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he will outline his intentions regarding the acquisition of primary radar; if the Office of Government Procurement or contracts branch of the Defence Forces are actively working on such; and the process by which locations for related installations will be decided. [29858/23]
I ask the Tánaiste to outline his intentions regarding the acquisition of primary radar; if matters have progressed to the extent that either the Office of Government Procurement or the contracts branch of the Defence Forces are actively working in support of this; and if the Defence Forces have begun the work of identifying suitable locations for installations.
I thank the Deputy for raising the issue. The development of a primary radar capability was one of the key recommendations made in last year's report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. Demonstrating the Government's commitment to implementing this recommendation, one of the early actions identified in the subsequent high-level action plan, published in response to the commission’s report, was to commence planning for military radar capabilities. In response to that, a project team comprising senior civil and military personnel was established, and commenced work on planning for military radar capabilities. This includes ground-based, maritime and primary radar systems.
It must be acknowledged, however, that delivery of primary radar, in particular, is extremely complex and will take some time to deliver. Nevertheless, delivery has been prioritised by Government, and this year's increased capital allocation for defence includes funding to explore the development of this capability. Work that has been carried out to date includes identification of requirements and research into various delivery options, as well as consideration of approaches internationally. This has included a visit to Cyprus to learn from our EU colleagues. However, we are not at the acquisition stage, which would be the final phase in the capability development process, and as such it is premature to speculate on any particular procurement methodology that may be utilised. Likewise, the question of where radar installations may be located is premature at this stage, but this will obviously need to be determined in the context of considering different options for delivery of the overall system. In terms of my intentions, delivery of primary radar is a key capability priority for me, as Minister and Minister for Defence, and I am determined to ensure its delivery within the earliest practicable timeframe.
The figure that is bandied about for the cost of this primary radar is €300 million. The Minister for Finance, Deputy McGrath, referenced the €176 million capital budget for the Defence Forces in budget 2023 and stated that the Government was going to prioritise the development of our primary radar capability. I understand that, as of March, an initial planning team has been established and market research and a foreign visit has taken place. Can the Tánaiste give any more information on that? I ask him to outline how he sees the process developing through the work of the planning team.
I outlined in my reply that there was a visit to Cyprus as part of the research that has been undertaken by the project team that has been established. The Deputy mentioned a figure being bandied about. We need to be careful of reporting any figure. I am a firm believer-----
I heard it in the media and I just thought that maybe------
If we are going to tender at some stage in the future, I do not want those who are tendering thinking that we have a bottom-line price-----
A starting point.
-----because they can inflate the price above that level. I will not give any figure as to what this might or might not cost because we are going to tender some stage and we want competitive tendering. I have discussed the matter with the Secretary General and the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces. It is complex and we have to get it right. We want synergy between all three arms of our Defences Forces, including air, maritime and so forth. It is something that we are absolutely committed to doing and we are going to do it but I do not underestimate the complexity of it. It will be the most challenging and costly defence project in the history of the State. It is crucial, then, that we have thorough planning and consideration of all options. We should carry all of that work out before we speculate on a delivery date. We know from the procurement of many significant projects that proper planning in advance and doing the detailed work is necessary to make sure we get the best value and the right product and outcome that is optimal to our needs.
In the report on the high-level action plan that was published in March of this year, the recommendation regarding primary radar is accepted in principle rather than being accepted, as most of the other recommendations were. Delivering primary radar really is a prerequisite in ensuring the surveillance of Irish-controlled airspace. I have spoken to members of Air Corps. There is a worry about this. I know, as a united Irelander, that it is something that we are going to have to be able to do on our own in the event of the inevitability of a united Ireland. We are going to have to be able to patrol our own airspace. Can the Tánaiste clarify that it is his intention to acquire the primary radar? If not, what alternatives is he considering regarding the optimal approach to meeting the intent of the commission that accepting the recommendation in principle implies? I am a bit worried about the recommendation being accepted in principle, as opposed to being accepted.
I have made it very clear that we are going to do this but it is very complex work. I can confirm, as I said earlier, that the project team has been established, comprising senior civil and military personnel. It has initially focused on looking at identifying the military radar requirements across the land, air and sea domains. It has conducted research into various delivery options across the domains, as well as approaches to provision that are utilised internationally. I understand, as I said earlier, that a visit to another member state - it was Cyprus, in this case - has taken place. It is very difficult at this point in time to clarify where the radar sites are to be located. As I said, we have to have regard to emerging priorities, operational requirements and changes in technology. We have to consider all that in the first instance before getting into detailed planning on site locations. It would be very premature to speculate on that; likewise in terms of capability cost. We will also need specialist external expertise relating to all the issues that I have referenced. Any cost estimates the Deputy is reading or hearing about are totally and purely speculative. It will be an expensive capability to deliver and maintain. Obviously, we will have to go through the full rigour of the public spending code. However, there is no doubt that it is a fundamental prerequisite in terms of what we require and the level of ambition that has been identified in the commission's report and accepted.
Defence Forces
Brendan Howlin
Question:67. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he has finalised the terms of reference for the statutory inquiry into abuse in the Defence Forces; if he has accepted the views put forward by the Women of Honour group; when he expects to present his proposals to the Houses of the Oireachtas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29729/23]
Réada Cronin
Question:69. Deputy Réada Cronin asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence if he is willing to apply the terms of reference provided by the Women of Honour group to the planned statutory inquiry into abuse and bullying in the Defence Forces. [29859/23]
We would appreciate an update on the question of the inquiry into the concerns highlighted by the Women of Honour group and where the process is at.
Is the Tánaiste willing to apply the terms of reference provided by the Women of Honour group to the planned statutory inquiry into abuse and bullying in the Defence Forces?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 67 and 69 together.
The Government has agreed to progress, as a priority, the recommendations in the report of the independent review group. The establishment of a statutory inquiry to investigate whether there have been serious systemic failures in dealing with individual complaints in relation to interpersonal issues, including but not limited to sexual misconduct, is just one of the recommendations that is being implemented. Following Government approval to establish a statutory inquiry, there has been ongoing consultation with the Attorney General and his office in respect of the establishment of the inquiry and his office has assisted in the preparation of the draft terms of reference.
In early May I had meetings with a number of key stakeholders where draft terms of reference for the statutory inquiry were shared. I requested that the groups provide feedback in writing to me so that their observations could be considered in preparing the terms of reference. The draft terms of reference were also shared with a number of interested parties who contacted my office. The Taoiseach and I met the Women of Honour group and its legal representatives on Monday last, 12 June, to discuss the Government's commitment to move ahead with progressing the recommendations of the independent review group's report.
I met the Women of Honour group and its legal representatives again last Wednesday in a further round of engagements with a number of other stakeholders, including PDFORRA and RACO, which are the Defence Forces representative associations, the Defence Forces veterans' associations and the Men and Women of Honour group. In addition, the Secretary General met with Civil Service and civilian unions. The views of all stakeholders are very important and we have listened very carefully to their concerns. I have heard differing views from different groups. I will be reflecting on the feedback received from the various stakeholders, which will be considered in the preparation of the terms of reference for the inquiry.
While consideration is being given to the format of a statutory inquiry, this has not delayed the immediate implementation of some of the recommendations in the independent review group's report. For instance, all allegations of sexual assault by serving members occurring in the State are now being referred directly to An Garda Síochána for investigation and prosecution. Legislative proposals are being finalised to formalise this. The external oversight body recommended in the independent review group's report has been established, initially on a non-statutory basis. Legislation will be brought forward to put this body on a statutory footing.
With the assistance of an external legal firm, extensive work is already under way to ensure the Defence Forces are compatible with the provisions of the relevant equality legislation. The implementation of the recommendations in the independent review group's report, together with the implementation of the recommendations in the report of the Commission on the Defence Forces, particularly in the area of culture, will see a fundamental transformation in Defence Forces culture in line with the acceptable norm in any modern-day employment.
The Tánaiste knows the Women of Honour group is dissatisfied, to say the least, at the narrowness of the proposed terms of reference that were produced. The women have raised this directly with him. They do not believe the terms of reference as they are drafted and the proposal presented to them have sufficient scope to encompass the range of issues they have very bravely and graciously highlighted. Based on the principle that we cannot and should not do anything to them without them, will the Tánaiste engage further with the Women of Honour group?
Does the Tánaiste accept that the framework is far too narrow? It does not encompass all of the areas, specifically the references to and definitions of abuse. The group has provided the Tánaiste with information on 13 areas that can be categorised with regard to abuse in the context of a statutory inquiry. Does the Tánaiste agree that the role and function of the Department of Defence ought to be covered in this, in terms of the knowledge it had about the allegations that have been made to date by the Women of Honour group? How does he intend to approach this? When does the Tánaiste propose to bring to the House the completed terms of reference for the inquiry? Will it be before the end of this Dáil session?
We had a lengthy discussion on this last week with the Women of Honour group and other groups. We also consulted serving members of the Defence Forces, including serving women in the Defence Forces. I do not accept that the terms of reference are too narrow. We took on board some recommendations from various groups, including the Women of Honour group. We then agreed there would be further engagement and we received correspondence today from the legal representatives of the Women of Honour group. There will be further engagement. We have made clear that there will be further engagement, particularly with the Attorney General and the legal representatives of the Women of Honour group, in respect of clarifying some legal issues. It is our view that some of the issues raised by various groups are covered within the terms of reference.
I made the point to all of the groups, and Deputy Nash knows this and we have to be honest, that we are endeavouring to have an inquiry that is reasonably timely. I do not mean that it will be short but that we have had too many inquiries in the past that have simply gone on for far too long. This in itself causes challenges. Very often this is a subject of terms of reference and how we construct them. There is a balance to be struck between an effective and efficient inquiry that goes to the heart of the issues raised by the independent review group. The draft terms of reference we have tabled very much mirror and are based, although not completely, on recommendations from the independent review group. The nature of it is an issue on which we will come back to the groups.
What timeline does the Tánaiste expect for the recommendations?
My aim and objective is to have it done before the summer recess. This gives me only two to three weeks. There will be further engagement with the groups on this. I have made it very clear from the very beginning that the Department would be covered in a statutory inquiry. There is no issue around this. I have made this very clear to the Women of Honour group and every other group.
I understand the Tánaiste has met other stakeholders. I believe we have a particular duty to the Women of Honour group, especially given how the review into the situation of these women used language of a type and depth that I suspect has not been seen in very many other reports that have come to the House. Earlier we spoke about recruitment and retention. I have met these women. Most of them come from military families. They love the Defence Forces and want to make them better. I always say that when we sort things for women, we sort things out for everybody. The number of men who have come forward to talk about sexual abuse in the Defence Forces since the Women of Honour group first spoke out is marked. The women gave these men the courage to come out. When we are speaking about a recruitment and retention crisis, it is important we listen to women who are providing their help and assistance for free to make sure we can all be rightly proud of the Defence Forces.
I agree. I am on record in the House as paying tribute to those in the Women of Honour group who came forward to highlight abuses in the Defence Forces. This led to the establishment of the independent review group, which has had an impact. People may disagree on this but I believe that has had an impact in the public realm in terms of people's reactions to it. I was anxious to implement quickly the recommendations of the independent review group, including in terms of establishing the statutory inquiry.
The Deputy is correct that one of the traits of all those involved is their love of the Defence Forces and their desire to make sure this never happens again. That is why, since I met with those currently serving in the Defence Forces, particularly women, I found their views very helpful all along since the publication of the report IRG. We have to weigh up how best we ensure the fullest of participation in the statutory inquiry. That speaks to the model that we develop. I am open to perspectives on that.
I would not disagree that the IRG was beneficial. I know the Women of Honour were not particularly supportive of it. They wanted it to go further. It cast light on many problems in the Defence Forces. The Opposition would be prepared to work with the Tánaiste on this. We could meet and talk about the terms of reference that would be used in this statutory inquiry and make sure that we do this once and for all, no matter how long it takes. It is extremely important.
The Deputy's views are welcome. In respect of the earlier answer I gave, we need to get his up and running before the summer recess. It will take a lengthy period before there are hearings and so on. There has to be discovery of documents and legal representation has to be worked out for all those participating. Time could go very quickly here. I am giving a minimum time of three years for an inquiry. It could go for longer.
I want to share this with the Deputy. We have to be straight to people. The Deputy used the phrase "no matter how long it takes." How long it takes matters. If people want to say they want to stay at the terms of reference then, believe me, I have been at a range of inquiries in the past that went on for too long. The most recent was Siteserv. We were supposed to do ten modules on the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation. The first one was in 2016 and we only got the report relating to it at the end of 2022. We are not coming near the other nine modules. There is a balance to be struck. We have to get it right. I am just sharing the issues that we have to weigh up to get the right model.
Question No. 69 answered with Question No. 67.