Skip to main content
Normal View

Defence Forces Recruitment.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 3 November 2005

Thursday, 3 November 2005

Questions (15, 16, 17)

Dan Neville

Question:

10 Mr. Neville asked the Minister for Defence the changes he has made to the terms of enlistment for other ranks who joined from 1994 onwards; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32020/05]

View answer

Michael D. Higgins

Question:

21 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Defence the position regarding the requirement that soldiers in their 30s who wish to renew Army contracts must first prove their level of fitness before being offered a renewal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31997/05]

View answer

Joe Costello

Question:

37 Mr. Costello asked the Minister for Defence if he will account for his decision to relax regulations within the Defence Forces that stipulated that any member failing to win promotion in their first 12 years of service would not be offered a new contract; the reason for this change in regulations; if the new regulations apply to all or contract soldiers only; if those whom the new regulations affect must subsequently agree to serve on overseas missions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31994/05]

View answer

Oral answers (13 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 21 and 37 together.

The unsatisfactory age and fitness profile of the Permanent Defence Force was commented upon by the Gleeson commission in its report in 1990. The age profile was also the subject of severe criticism by PricewaterhouseCoopers which had been engaged by the efficiency audit group, EAG, to conduct an in-depth study of the Defence Forces. One of the key areas identified for urgent action by the EAG was the development of a manpower policy with an emphasis on lowering the age profile of Permanent Defence Force personnel.

In an effort to alleviate the situation, the Government had already decided in 1993, following consultation with the Permanent Defence Force Other Ranks Representative Association, PDFORRA, to enlist personnel on a five-year contract basis with a Reserve Defence Force commitment of seven years. In 1997, agreement was reached with PDFORRA on a new manpower policy for the Defence Forces. This policy, applying to personnel enlisted after 1 January 1994, provided that service for private soldiers would initially be for five years with the option to be extended to a maximum of 12 years in two phases. Extensions from five to nine years and from nine to 12 years were subject to the individual soldiers meeting certain criteria, including standards of medical and physical fitness, conduct and courses attended or period of overseas service.

In 2004, PDFORRA submitted a claim under the conciliation and arbitration scheme for a further review of the terms of service applying to personnel enlisting in the Permanent Defence Force after 1 January 1994. Following detailed and prolonged discussion on this claim, a set of criteria has been agreed. The criteria meet PDFORRA's desire to provide longer careers in the Permanent Defence Force while continuing to address the Government's previously stated objective of having an appropriate age profile to meet the challenges of a modern defence force. The criteria require that any person re-engaging must be able to continue to operate at his or her current level both at home and overseas on an ongoing basis. Re-engagements will be subject to the individual soldiers meeting specified criteria in respect of physical fitness, medical category, successful completion of military courses of instruction, service overseas and conduct ratings. PDFORRA is in the process of balloting its members on the criteria that have been agreed.

I may have missed some of the Minister's response. If new recruits join and meet various criteria, can they stay for 20 years?

They can stay for 21 years.

My inclination is to agree with this as, while there are pros and cons, I know the EAG mentioned after its study of the Defence Forces that the age profile was very high. I agree with the Minister's approach in extending this to 21 years because much expertise has been built up. My only concern relates to the likely impact on recruitment and a turnover of personnel that heretofore took place but now might not. Has this issue been examined?

It will apply to people who came into the new system on and from 1 January 1994. Anyone who is approaching the end of his or her 12 year period will, if he or she satisfies the criteria, be able to continue in service for up to nine years. We have examined the issue of recruitment raised by the Deputy. We must keep a close eye on the age profile for obvious reasons. The current average age of privates serving in the Permanent Defence Force is 31.3 years. In light of this, we must keep the situation under review. The criteria are detailed and I can send them in circular form to Opposition spokespersons if they so wish. We are satisfied that we will be able to keep a defence force that is quite fresh faced from the point of view of the age profile without losing experience and give people proper careers.

Is the Minister aware that the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces has announced that, in future, there would be no place for soldiers who are unwilling to do overseas duties? If he is, can he clarify whether he shares this view?

It has been the law since relevant legislation was introduced in the early 1960s. It is a part of one's contract that if one joins the Defence Forces, one must make oneself available for overseas duties. This was updated in 1993 to include the famous chapter 7 missions as only chapter 6 missions were possible until that time. Recruits must make themselves available. We are glad to say that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, people go as volunteers. They must not be dragooned or press-ganged to go overseas.

If that is the case and it is the law, why did the Chief of Staff state it quite recently?

I have no idea. I am not familiar with that speech by the Chief of Staff. He did not communicate those sentiments to me. Certainly, it is the law that overseas duty is part of their duty.

The Minister mentioned the obligation on all personnel to serve overseas, whether one is pre or post 1993, depending on the type of mission. Does he agree that due to the commitment we have and the fact that approximately 25% of our force is caught up between overseas rotation and preparation, it places a large commitment on the Defence Forces, particularly on technical members? Has the Minister examined the concept of the Reserve Defence Force serving overseas in some technical appointments, such as occurs in many of our European neighbours?

There is no question that it is a very large commitment. Until I came into this job I did not realise how large it was. On the surface it appears small, as 10% of the standing Army is involved, but the Deputy mentioned rotation and two groups are in training to replace one group overseas.

The idea regarding the Reserve Defence Force is good and other countries engaged in peacekeeping allow their reserves to go on overseas duties. It is under active consideration as part of the reorganisation of the Reserve Defence Force. A number of issues must be worked out, such as security of employment so that people will be able to go overseas and return to a secure job. We are engaged in negotiations with employers' representatives on that. We are also examining what type of reserve personnel will be allowed to go overseas, whether we will confine it to technical trained personnel such as engineers, doctors, cooks and drivers or open it up generally. Those matters are still under consideration. Discussions are ongoing between my Department and the representative association of the Reserve Defence Force. It is a good idea and I hope to be able to implement it.

How often are fitness tests carried out on members of the Defence Forces? Is the Minister happy with the levels of fitness among all members of the Defence Forces? The elite Rangers strike me as being quite a fit bunch but perhaps others do not reach the necessary standard.

I had better not get into a discussion with Deputy Gormley on what he bases that observation. Fitness tests are carried out annually and if people are not fit they are told what to do in order to get fit. They must reach the required standard within a certain period of time.

Top
Share