asked the Minister for Defence if he will state if it is correct that the training officers assigned to F.C.A. units were withdrawn from such units; and, if so, if he will explain the reason for this step.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Training of F.C.A.
It is correct that a number of these officers had to be withdrawn.
This step was unavoidable because of the substantial increase in the Army's strength as a result of last year's recruiting drive and the necessity for giving the recruits the maximum amount of training within the two-year period of their initial engagement.
Can the Minister give any indication whether it is hoped to replace this personnel with the F.C.A. units or whether the withdrawal is of a temporary nature?
It is of a temporary nature because it was necessary to take these people away in order to make them available for the new recruits.
Does the Minister not think that this may lead to a serious consequence in the F.C.A. itself and would he not make some effort to replace these officers forthwith?
I do not think so. We have replaced them with experienced N.C.O.s. but when the opportunity offers we will naturally restore the officers.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will state in regard to the F.C.A. (a) the numbers who were available for training during the year 1952 and (b) the numbers who in fact reported for and completed training during 1952.
I take it that the Deputy is referring to effective members of the F.C.A. and that the type of training he has in mind is continuous or full-time training.
If that is correct, the particulars are as follows:—
Available for training during 1952— 15,106. Reported for and completed training during 1952—9,829.