Skip to main content
Normal View

SELECT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, DEFENCE AND EQUALITY debate -
Tuesday, 29 Nov 2011

Vote 37 - Army Pensions (Supplementary)

We are meeting to consider the 2011 Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Defence - Vote 37. I remind members that this is a Supplementary Estimate for Vote 37, Army Pensions, rather than the totality of the Estimates.

Apologies have been received from Deputy Seán Kenny. As we are in public session will everybody switch off mobile phones completely, please?

I thank the Minister for Defence, Deputy Alan Shatter, and his officials for assisting in our consideration of the Supplementary Estimates by providing briefing details which were circulated to members. I propose the following arrangements should apply. The Minister will address the committee and immediately afterwards the Opposition spokesperson will have the opportunity to respond. We will then have an open discussion. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I remind members that we are only considering the Supplementary Estimate and that while members may discuss issues relevant to the individual subheads, they may not recommend increases or decreases in the Supplementary Estimate and there are no votes. I invite the Minister to make his opening statement.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to present for its consideration the 2011 Supplementary Estimate for Vote 37 - Army Pensions, which is for a net sum of €15.6 million. The Army Pensions Vote makes provision for retired pay, pensions, allowances and gratuities payable to or in respect of members of the Defence Forces. The original Estimate provided a net sum of €202 million to cover a total of more than 11,300 pensioners, comprising some 9,200 retired members of the Defence Forces and 1,750 spouses and children of deceased members and some 320 spouses of deceased veterans of the War of Independence. The number of Defence Forces pensioners has continued to increase during the past year but there are now fewer than 260 spouses of deceased old IRA veterans.

Subhead B is the main subhead of the pensions Vote and covers expenditure on all superannuation benefits of former members of the Defence Forces and their dependants. It accounts for over 95% of all Army pension expenditure and is primarily demand led and non-discretionary. The original provision of €198 million for this subhead will be inadequate to meet all requirements. That is, of course, the provision made by the previous Government. The gross shortfall on the Vote is estimated at €15.8 million. A shortfall of €300,000 is also expected in appropriations-in-aid. The overall supplementary requirement will be offset by expected savings of €500,000 in subheads C, D, E and F and, when these are taken into account, the net shortfall is €15.6 million.

The reason for the shortfall is essentially twofold. First, the original approved financial allocation for Vote 37, of which subhead B constitutes the lion's share, was considerably below the funding level that my Department required to cover the projected cost of military pensions for 2011. Second, higher than anticipated numbers retired on pension from the Permanent Defence Force during 2011 and this continues the underlying upward trend over recent years and is in line with the general public service trend. In the period to the end of October 2011, 542 personnel retired from the PDF compared with a total of 534 for all of 2010. It is expected that some 650 personnel in total will retire in 2011. The number of military pensioners under subhead B of Vote 37 is currently 10,776. This Supplementary Estimate will be met by an appropriate adjustment to the Defence Vote This is a technical Supplementary Estimate. There will be no extra demand on the Exchequer over what was initially voted for 2011.

On the specific matter of personnel turnover, the committee may be aware that I have recently clarified that there has been no departure from the terms of the public service recruitment moratorium in the Defence Forces. Rather, the factual position is that limited recruitment is proceeding because the strength is below the ceiling of 9,500 as set by Government. The strength at the end of October this year was 9,393, the lowest since the early 1970s. The Defence Forces have the highest turnover rate in the public service as a matter of policy. The regular recruitment of young soldiers is an absolute necessity to ensure the pool of fit personnel. I hold strongly to my view, as previously articulated on a number of occasions in Dáil Éireann, that the Defence Forces personnel numbers should be maintained at 9,500 to ensure it has the capabilities to meet its international and domestic obligations. The recruitment that is taking place will ensure this. I commend this Supplementary Estimate to the committee.

I thank the Minister and his officials for attending. I have two questions. Will the €15.6 million be found elsewhere in the departmental budget? Will that mean a curtailment of services, as I presume it will have an impact somewhere? My questions relate to the Minister's intention to recruit personnel. I note that, as he promised, he recently advertised vacancies in the medical corps. Will general personnel posts be advertised or is the Minister working off existing applications for the recruitment campaign?

I will take the last question first. We are working off the panels that exist. We require 240 personnel, 40 for the Air Corps, 40 for the Naval Service and the remaining 160 for the Army. That process has already started and that recruitment should be completed over the next couple of months which will ensure that we maintain numbers and that we will have 9,500 personnel as we go through into next year, as is the objective. We do not know with certainty the final numbers of personnel who will retire by the end of the year and the figures we have given are our best estimate from where we now stand.

In the context of €15.6 million, it comes as a result of the efficient use of resources in the Defence Forces. There has been no cutback in services. The Defence Forces are operating efficiently. It has been an unfortunate reality that over past years, the pensions Vote has been underfunded in the annual Estimates. It happened on a series of occasions during the life of the previous Government, and the Department, when granted funding for other purposes, including general paid personnel over the year, had to take account of the reality that the pensions Vote was underfunded. That was factored into the manner in which the Department dealt with its funding efficiently during the course of this year so that we would stay within the overall financial envelope prescribed by Government.

I welcome the Minister and commend the Army on its work internationally and its peacekeeping missions on the international stage.

I wish to raise the issue of the limited recruitment. The Minister states he will ensure that we remain constantly at 9,500 figure. Are we far off that figure at present?

I gave that figure in my speech. Because of retirements-----

-----we are just below 9,400 and the recruitment that is now taking place will take us beyond the 9,500, but in the context of the training in period and the expected further retirements that will take place, it will ensure the numbers are where we want them to be during the first half of next year.

During the first half of next year?

Recruitment is already taking place at this stage. As I understand, some training has already been undertaken.

Does the Minister know how many young people are applying for the positions?

There are a number of young people on panels at present. As I understand it, the 240 have come off the existing panels of people and had been on them for some time. Obviously if the need arises, there will be further advertising. There is an inevitability within the Defence Forces that there will be a certain level of retirement year on year and we will obviously monitor that and ensure that recruitment is dealt with appropriately in that context.

I regularly get queries from constituents, the parents of young people who want to join the Army. They are often concerned that as it is very difficult to get into the Army, these young adults might join other armies internationally. Have our young Irish citizens who want to join the Army a chance of being recruited?

The point I made in my speech is that the numbers in the Army now replicate the numbers in the Defence Forces in the 1970s. We must ensure, like every other Department, that we maintain efficiencies. We are restricted in the numbers we can recruit. In the context of the overall financial envelope that will be available next year, it will be necessary to meet the obligations we have under the EU-IMF agreement. We have been fortunate that we have been successful in the Government accepting that the Defence Forces strength should be maintained at 9,500. Recruitment will largely depend on the numbers of retirements year on year.

It is a reality that some Irish citizens join other forces. We know that some join the British or the American army and I have no doubt that some people will do that. They have done that even at a time when there were very substantial numbers in our Defence Forces. That is a phenomena that occurs but the opportunities to join are largely going to be determined by the number of retirements.

How did the Minister arrive at the figure of 9,500 as the strength of the Army?

There is no magical optimum number. Under the employment control framework, ECF, that was previously set, the Defence Forces were to be reduced to 9,600 by 2014. As a consequence of the way in which things developed, the 2014 reduction was effectively reached this year, three years ahead of time. We had an examination of what was deemed to be the appropriate numbers to ensure the Defence Forces could meet its international obligations and be available to assist the civil power domestically in emergency situations. We had to look at the likely financial envelope that would be available to us. This Minister had to argue persuasively with his colleagues in Government to maintain numbers at 9,500. That has been accepted as Government policy but there is no magic number. From the work we have done and from consultations I have had with the Chief of Staff, we believe that the Defence Forces can meet its international and domestic obligations at this level and it is our objective to maintain numbers at this level.

On the requirement for €15.6 million, the Minister said that saving will be found from an efficient use of resources. Will he give me more detail on those efficiencies?

They have been found. The manner in which the Department has been managed during the course of the year has ensured that those efficiencies were effective. I want personally to thank the Chief of Staff and members of the Defences Forces for the incredible work they have done and for their contribution to ensuring that we effect financial efficiencies. There has been no fall off in any way of the capacity of the Defence Forces to continue to do its duties. While I do not want to introduce unnecessarily the issue of barrack closures into this conversation, the reality is that moneys realised over recent years from barrack closures have facilitated the maintenance of resources and equipment to the highest levels. This was one of the reasons for the barrack closures, to ensure the Army had resources as in past years. The previous Government closed four barracks in 2009. We estimate by next spring that will have generated in the region of €5 million in money to be reinvested in the Defence Forces. Some of that should be available to us next year and a more efficient use of resources facilitates us staying in the financial envelope that exists. I do not think anybody could possibly identify any failure on the part of the Defence Forces as a consequence of any financial issues of any description. This has not been an issue this year.

It was anticipated in the Department that additional funding would be required for the pensions Vote. When I was appointed Minister, I was advised that historically there had been a problem with the Vote and that estimates were made that were publicly acceptable. The position was that the sums allocated to pensions for some years had resulted in the Vote being underfunded and it had to be supplemented from funding essentially designated for pay. This is a practice that is not desirable and one that I do not intend to continue next year.

It will have no impact on capacity.

None at all. The Defence Forces have maintained their full capacity during the course of the year.

Does the Minister have a breakdown of the rank structure of the personnel who have retired this year? How does it compare with other years?

I have that information and it can be circulated to Deputies. I can go through it quickly. In the year 2008, 49 officers retired as well as 530 enlisted personnel, making a total of 579. In 2009, 81 officers and 436 enlisted personnel retired, giving a total of 517 and in 2010, 53 officers and 481 enlisted personnel retired, giving a total of 534. The numbers are reasonably similar. By the time we got to the end of October 2011, total retirements were 542, with 51 officers and 491 enlisted personnel. In my speech I stated the maximum retirements by the end of the year could reach 650, although that number might not be reached.

That is a comparator for numbers in recent years. We will circulate the statistics for Deputies.

The number of pensioners is greater than the number of enlisted men. Because of that, will there be any change to the rank structure and the number of personnel at different levels to reflect the drop in the numbers enlisted?

I want to ensure that we have an adequate and appropriate number of enlisted personnel. There is a proportionality between their number and officers and there are other reforms and efficiencies to ensure that which will be announced in due course.

There is an anomaly in the pension system, where a change in the 1990s meant those who served from a certain point onwards got a service pension and those prior to that did not get it and they feel aggrieved about that. Did the Minister look at that? Some of the personnel had served in the Congo and elsewhere overseas and feel they have been excluded.

That issue was raised with me some time ago. There is a difference and in the current financial climate I do not see any changes taking place. The difference has existed for many years. If there is any additional information, I will write to the Chairman about the matter but my recollection is that I dealt with this issue in a Dáil question some time ago and, unfortunately, in the current financial climate we are not in a position to provide extra funding anywhere. I am pleased we have achieved a situation whereby the Defence Forces will be maintained at the 9,500 level all the way until 2014. That is an important outcome of some of the internal discussions that have taken place in recent weeks. I am not revealing any great confidence about this because I had put on the record my anxiety that numbers be maintained at 9,500. We must live within our financial means next year and the following two years. Unfortunately there is no leeway to provide additional payments to individuals who are currently not entitled to those payments.

I accept that but at the time it was unusual that a line was drawn at a certain point and these people were excluded way back then.

I will write to the Chairman on the issue.

I thank the Minister and his officials for attending today's meeting.

Top
Share