JOINT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, DEFENCE AND EQUALITY debate -
Wednesday, 16 May 2012

Review of Reserve Defence Force: Discussion with Minister for Defence

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter)

I welcome this opportunity to brief you on the value for money review, VFM, of the Reserve Defence Force. I understand that the committee may also wish to discuss any developments in the Permanent Defence Force in terms of reducing the number of Army brigades.

A value for money review of the Reserve Defence Forces was one of two value for money reviews approved by Government as part of the 2009-11 round of VFM and policy reviews. The other review focusing on the training of general service recruits in the Permanent Defence Force was scheduled to take place first. However, given the moratorium on recruitment to the Permanent Defence Force, it was decided, in April 2009, to bring forward the review of the Reserve Defence Force to commence in 2010.

In July 2009, the McCarthy report recommended that the strength of the Reserve Defence Force be reduced by two thirds to deliver savings of €5.6 million. Given the fact that a VFM review was scheduled, the Minister for Defence, at the time, did not implement the strength reduction to approximately 2,500 personnel necessary to achieve the savings from Reserve Defence Force pay and allowances as recommended. I understand the savings were found elsewhere in the Vote, including reducing the levels of paid training to members of the Reserve.

In accordance with the appropriate guidelines, a steering committee was established to oversee the review and an independent chairperson, drawn from a panel established for this purpose by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, was appointed. The steering committee commenced its work in February 2010, supported by a working group of civil servants and military personnel. This included a small number of personnel with specialised evaluation expertise. In 2010 priorities arose that required the diversion of these limited resources away from the review of the Reserve Defence Force. First, the implementation of the then Government's National Recovery Plan and subsequently, in 2011, undertaking the comprehensive review of expenditure.

As these reviews encompassed the entire Defence Vote they effectively overtook the review of the Reserve Defence Force and resources were assigned accordingly. Work on data gathering and analysis for the review of the Reserve did continue, where feasible, during 2011 but was not sufficient to require a steering committee meeting. The Chair was kept informed of developments.

It is worth noting that as part of its comprehensive review of expenditure assessment, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform's central evaluation unit recommended abolishing the Reserve Defence Force. The Department of Defence comprehensive review assessment recommended no further cuts to the Reserve pending the outcome of the VFM review. Accordingly, the budget for Reserve training was not reduced in 2012.

Arising from the Government's decision to reduce the strength ceiling of the Permanent Defence Force to 9,500 personnel, I initiated a major re-organisation of the Defence Forces, encompassing a reduction in the number of Permanent Defence Force Army brigades from three to two. I tasked the Secretary General and the Chief of Staff to prepare this re-organisation and work is ongoing in that regard. As the Army Reserve is organised along similar lines to the PDF and supported by PDF personnel, the re-organisation must also have a direct bearing on the Reserve. Had the report of the value for money review been completed before the reorganisation it is likely that the recommendations could have been superseded and rendered outmoded.

The steering committee recommenced its work in 2012 and met in February 2012 where the changing circumstances were discussed and a way forward was decided. Unfortunately, the chairperson was unable to continue in her capacity due to personal circumstances and a member of the steering committee is acting as interim chair pending the appointment of a new independent chair. The steering committee met most recently on 3 May. I am informed that good progress is being made and that drafting of the report is well under way. The steering committee is aware that its recommendations must have due regard to the broader reorganisation of the Defence Forces. On completion of the report the procedure is for the chairperson to forward a copy to myself and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. In advance of publication, I will bring forward a memorandum to Government outlining the key findings and actions to be undertaken. Value for money reviews are subsequently laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas and published on the Department's website.

Ideally, this review would be completed by now but circumstances have conspired to extend the period of preparation. I have asked the interim chair and members of the steering committee and working group to progress the review as quickly as possible and I anticipate its completion by end September

Senator Denis Landy

I thank the Minister for his report. I declare a particular interest in this area about which I have spoken to the Minister in the Seanad. As a former member of the Reserve Defence Force for many years it is interesting to note that the last item on the agenda was on the Lebanon. For many years Army barracks across the country were kept open and personnel were substituted from the Reserve Defence Force because of the numbers of personnel overseas and on Border duty. Thankfully, Border duty is no longer an issue.

I am concerned at some of the items which have featured in the Minister's report on the matter. In his report, Mr. McCarthy expressed strong views on the abolition of manyareas to save money, many of which have since been analysed and have proven not to be feasible and some have been proven to be unrealistic. I note that the Reserve Defence Force strength reduction proposed was 2,500 personnel, which is two thirds of its present strength. I understand the strength of the Reserve Defence Force is 5,200 personnel, not 7,500. I am aware there is continuing leakage in terms of people who are not re-signing on annually due to low morale. Some 2,000 personnel have been lost to the Reserve Defence Force since 2009 and recruitment is limited to 400 per annum. If the trend was to continue, the Reserve Defence Force would not exist as we know it by 2018. That is the reality.

I welcome the fact that the Minister saw fit to provide funding in 2012 for the training of staff in the Reserve Defence Force. Some people may not be aware of the work of the Reserve. One of its most important functions for many years is that it provides weekend cover for the Permanent Defence Force, particularly at officer level, across the country. It is clear the force does not have enough officers to perform the duties required at weekends. It also provides support in areas, such as my area in south Tipperary, which has experienced flooding problems. It may not be in the front line but it is covering for the soldiers who are performing external duties outside the Army barracks.

In a recent Adjournment debate concerning the provision of premises in Clonmel and Mullingar for the Reserve Defence Force, the Minister for Arts, Heritage and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Deenihan, admitted that one of his regrets was that he never joined the Reserve Defence Force as it is a character building career for young men and women where one learns how to polish shoes and so on.

I urge caution when dealing with the report. The abolition of the Reserve Defence Force is not a good move. It has much good work to do. I accept there will have to be change. Changes have already taken place in the Permanent Defence Force and in the number of brigades. While the members of the Reserve Defence Force are not immune to change, the abolition of the Reserve is not the way forward.

Happily, in Ireland we live in peaceful times. If that position was to change internally - we saw from activities in recent days north of the Border there is always that potential - we need to be able to rely on the Reserve Defence Force to bolster the number of personnel in view of the reduction in the Permanent Defence Force. I would appreciate the Minister's response to those issues.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I was not a member of the Reserve Defence Force, RDF, so I bow to the Minister's and Senator Landy's knowledge. However, I have met a number of members - informally because they are not permitted to meet us officially - and I have always been struck by the pride FCA members have in serving. In the course of the past year, I met a number of them throughout the country and I was struck by the fact that morale has collapsed. They feel this process has been ongoing for some time and they do not know where they stand. Therefore, I am glad the Minister has given some indication of a timescale in his remarks.

One of the frustrations they have included - following on the publication of the McCarthy report - is that they feel that in making savings of €5.6 million, the budget does not include the costs associated with the Permanent Defence Force, that is the people who manage the RDF, and that the Reserve Defence Force gets lumped with costs that would still be part of the Defence Forces even if there was no RDF. They say that in any analysis of the organisation, more effort and attention should be given to stripping out the associated costs. There is also ongoing frustration within the RDF, I imagine this is the same all over the world, between the reserve, the volunteers and the full-time staff. The same is probably true for political parties. They feel the Permanent Defence Force wants nothing to do with them and would rather they went away. They feel their interests are not being represented and that they are not getting a fair share of budgets or of a potential role.

As Senator Landy mentioned, in terms of labour activation measures, RDF members pick up a skill set such as discipline, coping skills and skills for dealing with issues like flood prevention. Some consideration should be given, therefore, to focusing these skills on labour force activation and using them to help people. I am aware that over the years many people have come through the RDF and picked up skills along the way. Therefore, this is something we should consider in terms of a jobs activation budget.

I welcome the clarification the Minister brought to the broader issue of reorganisation. Is it the intention to have the process finalised and in place - the brigades and Army reorganised - ahead of the next budget or is it likely to be 2013 before it is in place? Obviously, if it is delayed until 2013, the envisaged savings from the reorganisation will not accrue to this year's defence budget? Will there be a need for a Supplementary Estimate to make up for those savings if they do not kick in by the end of 2012?

Deputy Alan Shatter

I will deal with the issues raised by both Senator Landy and Deputy Calleary. It is unfortunate the review of the RDF has taken so long, but that is not the fault of any of my predecessors nor of officials in the Department. Rather, it is a consequence of the fiscal difficulties that have hit us and of the multiple reviews that have been undertaken across a broad range of Departments which had to be given priority. Then when we found ourselves in a position where we were looking at a general reorganisation of the Defence Forces, in the context of moving from three brigades to two, it was important work commenced on that, because issues relating to the RDF could not be addressed in a vacuum separate from the new structure to be put in place.

The role of the reserve is important. However, we must remember that we have, within the Permanent Defence Force, a group of extraordinarily well-trained individuals who, when an issue arises that requires the assistance of the Defence Force domestically, are first called upon. The Reserve Defence Force is as its name describes, a reserve. The last occasion the RDF was required to assist the Permanent Defence Force in the role of assisting the civil power was in 2005. There has not been a recent event in which the RDF was required to engage in any large number. The number of members of the RDF has reduced, but there were substantial numbers who were nominally part of it but who were not engaged in it nor participating in training days. It is important now that we look at the future role of the RDF and its place in the context of the restructuring of the Defence Forces. There is no proposal from the Government to implement the McCarthy proposal at this point in time, nor is there any proposal from it to abolish the RDF. However, we must look at its role and be conscious of the cost of maintaining it and of its relevance at this time. In the context of the future of the RDF, it is important that those engaged in it feel they have a relevant role. All of these issues will be addressed by the review.

With regard to the financial issues, there is a substantial cost attached to the RDF. The 2012 provision for it is €4.386 million, the same sum available in 2011, and some €2.5 million of that goes for paid training days. There is a substantial additional cost to the Permanent Defence Force in the context of the RDF. The Permanent Defence Force cadre pays an employer's PRSI and the 2011 outturn was €16.262 million. The allowances paid to PDF cadre amounted to €2.592 million. The overall cost or outturn, if one takes the supports provided by the PDF to the RDF, together with the funding provided for the RDF itself, was €23 million in 2011. The major portion of that is spent on the PDF support network to maintain the RDF. Therefore, whether issues relating to the RDF are organised to the optimum benefit to ensure efficient use of resources is an issue to which the review will have regard. It is important these issues are considered and addressed and, hopefully, the review will be complete by the end of September.

In the meantime, the move from a three brigade to a two brigade structure is proceeding and engagement is taking place at official level between the Department and the military side, involving the Secretary General, the Chief of Staff and those working immediately below them. They are looking at how we best restructure to ensure that we have as efficient Defence Forces as is possible, which is organised in a manner that brings the optimum benefit for operational capabilities and which utilises the resources and barracks that are available. In the context of barracks, we are in a position where, having closed some barracks, we now know the situation. There are no plans to close any additional barracks and it is not envisaged that the reorganisation will result of any. The reorganisation is internal and switches from a three brigade to a two brigade structure. Sometimes as I move around the country, I hear rumours of closures and people are concerned that this process may result in the closure of a major barracks somewhere. That is not going to happen. That is not part of the process now under way which is to ensure we utilise the numbers to the maximum benefit and that we utilise and recruit the soldiers as are required, that we have the appropriate numbers of Defence Forces officers and that there is not a disproportionate number of officers compared with the number of ordinary members of the Defence Forces. These are all issues of concern to those working in the Defence Forces. I am conscious that those who aspire to or look forward to being promoted may be concerned that their career paths may be affected by the re-organisation. However, one does not have as many officers in a force of 9,500 as in a force of 11,500. These are very important issues to be dealt with. I wish to record my thanks to the Secretary General, to the Chief of Staff and to those working with them for their very important work in this area and which will ensure that the Defence Forces are slim, fit for purpose and resource-maximising in the future, to the benefit of the country and in order to maintain continuing operations such as co-operation with the United Nations and with European Union member states in the battle groups in place from time to time and also meeting the necessary domestic obligations.

Chairman

If I may add some personal comments, I was a member of the Reserve Defence Force - it was called the FCA - for quite a number of years and I resigned my commission when I was elected to the Dáil although it was probably a timely decision on the grounds of age in any case.

This morning we observed the Defence Forces participating at the ceremony for the national day of commemoration. I join with the Minister and other speakers in commending how the Defence Forces carried out their duties in such a professional and responsible manner. I accompanied the Minister to the Lebanon and I was very proud to see the young soldiers in action there. They do us proud, as the Minister said.

I wish to commend the Naval Service which could be termed the fourth brigade. It operates on the high seas often beyond the horizon in extremely difficult conditions of weather and otherwise. When the Minister is re-organising the brigade structure from three brigades to two, it might be no harm to bear in mind that we have another brigade at sea. Naval Service ships could perhaps be used as accommodation in future operations by the Army where conditions on land may not be suitable for the billeting of soldiers. I suggest that we could consider having a contingent of marines, soldiers who travel on ships, who could be deployed on peacekeeping missions and be based on ships.

The Minister has visited the Naval Service headquarters in Cork and the committee members hope to visit soon. I refer also to the work of the Irish Maritime and Energy Resource Centre, IMERC.

Over the years we have noted the commitment of the members of the Reserve Defence Force and their desire to serve their country. Thankfully, there has not been a call on its service since 2005 but this raises the question of its role. If an organisation does not have a role it loses morale. One suggestion would be to integrate companies of the Reserve Defence Force into the regular battalions so that they would become part of an integrated unit.

Senator Landy referred to the character and moral development role of the Reserve Defence Force for young people with an interest in things military. In more difficult times in the past, young men joined the reserve because of their interest in military life.

It may be opportune to consider the role of Civil Defence. If the Reserve Defence Force is to be down-sized, perhaps Civil Defence could provide an opportunity for people to become involved in those activities which are of a similar nature but are not of a military nature. This committee looks forward to considering the report when it is available. I join with the Minister in expressing concern at the length of time it has taken to produce this report but it is hoped to see it completed before too long. I wished to make those comments because I have strong views in this regard.

I thank the Minister and his officials for their attendance and for working with the committee in this marathon session. We look forward to other such sessions in the future.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.45 p.m. and adjourned at 4.55 p.m. until 10 a.m. on Thursday, 17 May 2012.