asked the Minister for Defence the moneys, if any, which are being made available to provide an increased level of pay for Defence Forces personnel.
6.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Defence Forces Pay and Allowances.
2.
asked the Minister for Defence the names of the inter-departmental committee on the Defence Forces' pay and allowances; their terms of reference; when they will report; to whom they will report; the plans he has to deal with any positive recommendations in the report; when it will be implemented; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
7.
asked the Minister for Defence when it is expected that the top level report on Defence Forces' pay and allowances will be completed.
9.
asked the Minister for Defence the date by which the review body on the Defence Forces' pay and allowances is to report; if no date has been fixed, when he expects to receive such report; and if he intends to publish its findings.
16.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will make a statement indicating the representations which he has received regarding levels of pay in the Defence Forces; and if he will outline his proposals in the matter.
17.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will make a statement on the morale in the Defence Forces.
18.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will outline his proposals for major improvements in pay and conditions of members of the permanent Defence Forces.
19.
asked the Minister for Defence if, in view of the considerable hardship being experienced by members of the Defence Forces and their families due to inadequate rates of pay, he will grant an interim increase in rates of pay, pending receipt of the report of the review committee on pay; the number of occasions on which the committee has met; when it is expected to report; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
20.
asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the high level of dissatisfaction amongst Army personnel and their spouses at their general conditions and pay levels.
22.
asked the Minister for Defence if he has received a request from the Army Spouses Association to meet him to discuss rates of pay for Army personnel; if he intends to meet with the association; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
24.
asked the Minister for Defence the action he proposes to take regarding soldiers pay and conditions particularly in Border areas; if his attention has been drawn to the growing unrest and poor morale in the Army as a result of poor pay and conditions; his views on whether, in light of their sterling service and dedication to duty, a wage commensurate with the risks they take and service they provide is warranted.
26.
asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the continuing discontent in the Defence Forces regarding the level of pay and conditions of service at all ranks; and if he has any plans to set up a tribunal to allow members of the Defence Forces to put forward their grievances regarding pay, allowances, promotions and conditions of service.
27.
asked the Minister for Defence if he will meet with representatives of the National Army Spouses Association to discuss their concern at the low level of pay and conditions for members of the Permanent Defence Force; and when a decision will be made in the matter.
30.
asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the low level of morale among members of the Permanent Defence Force at all ranks due to the (i) restrictions on promotions and recruitment (ii) the low level of pay and allowances and (iii) general conditions of service at present; and the steps he proposes to take to improve the situation.
33.
asked the Minister for Defence when he expects the report of the interdepartmental committee investigating Army pay and conditions; the number of meetings already held by the committee; and the parties which they have met.
34.
asked the Minister for Defence if he has any plans to increase the level of allowances payable to members of the Defence Forces who perform exceptional duties.
40.
asked the Minister for Defence the progress, if any, which is being made by the interdepartmental committee on Army pay and conditions; if he intends to act on the recommendations of the committee; if the proposal is for a higher basic wage, the percentage increase this will be; the period for which it will be retrospective and if he will make a statement on the matter.
43.
asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the great unrest in the Defence Forces regarding pay and conditions; and if he will outline the total number of personnel in the entire Defence Forces who have resigned in 1986 and 1987 and up to 1 October 1988.
102.
asked the Minister for Defence, if he and the pay review body will meet representatives of the Army Wives Association; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
103.
asked the Minister for Defence the action he proposes to take in relation to the awaited report on Army pay and conditions; his views on whether there is an urgent need for a realistic updating of pay and conditions in the Army; if he has examined the report in question; if he can foresee any action to improve pay and conditions for the Army in the near future; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
(Limerick West): I propose to take Questions Nos. 2, 6, 7, 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 26, 27, 30, 33, 34, 40, 43, 102 and 103 together.
Last June I obtained Government approval to set up an interdepartmental committee to examine and report on the pay, allowances and conditions of personnel of the Defence Forces.
The committee is chaired by Deputy Vincent Brady, Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of Defence and is comprised of representatives of the Departments of the Taoiseach, Finance, Labour and Defence. The military authorities were invited to put forward their views in relation to matters coming within the remit of the committee. They have submitted their written proposals to the committee and have had a number of discussions with the committee.
In response to a formal request which I received on 26 October 1988, I arranged that members of the committee would meet representatives of the spouses of military personnel. That meeting took place yesterday.
It is not possible at this stage to indicate when the committee will be in a position to submit its report. The matter is, however, being treated as urgent and will be brought to a conclusion at the earliest possible date. The report of the committee, including its recommendations, will be submitted to the Government as soon as it becomes available.
Following receipt of the report of the committee it will be a matter for me and for my colleagues in the Government to make decisions thereon. It would not be appropriate to try to anticipate decisions regarding any awards or their effective dates at this time. If additional funding is required in 1989 to meet the cost of any increases in pay or allowances such funding will be provided separately.
As regards morale, the position is that the welfare of the Defence Forces at all times has been the special care of successive Governments; pay and conditions of service are kept under constant review. In order to ensure that their pay keeps in step with that of other sections of the public service, the pay of the Defence Forces has been linked traditionally to the pay of civil servants. The benefits of all increases, including appropriate grade increases, in pay and allowances granted to the Civil Service have been passed on to the Defence Forces as a matter of course.
Rates of remuneration are not the only factors affecting morale in the Defence Forces. In that regard I am pleased to say that I have recently secured the agreement of my colleagues in Government to modify, in the case of the Defence Forces the restrictions on promotions and recruitment as applied to the public service generally. The situation regarding promotion will be kept under review on an ongoing basis.
The information sought regarding resignations/discharges in respect of the Permanent Defence Force is in the form of a tabular statement which I propose to circulate in the Official Report.
As regards the strength of the Defence Forces, 500 recruits were enlisted in July and August of this year in addition to the 700 recruits taken on in December 1987 and January 1988. Arrangements are also being made for a further intake of 100 recruits for the Naval Service.
STATEMENT
|
Year |
Officers Voluntary Retirements/ Resignations |
Other Ranks Discharges |
|
1986 |
27 |
837 |
|
1987 |
35 |
973 |
|
1988 (to 1 October) |
30 |
691 |
I am calling first Deputy Connaughton who has two priority questions tabled on this subject matter. I will be calling the other Deputies in the order in which their questions appear on the Order Paper.
The one thing I can say for the Minister is that he has become the best recruiting officer ever——
A question, please, Deputy.
——for the Army. He is the first Minister who brought Army wives to the streets.
The applause from the Gallery is intruding into the business of this House. It must not be permitted. The people in the Gallery will please remain silent. I have asked Deputy Connaughton to put a relevant supplementary question. Will the Deputy please have regard to my statement.
The Minister went the long way round in answering my specific question. Will the Minister say now: how long more does he expect Army personnel to await the result of the report of the interdepartmental committee? I am sick of being told they are meeting. Does not everybody know what is the basic problem? I assume the Minister and the committee know it.
Brevity, please, Deputy. There are many Deputies who have tabled questions on this subject matter and I want to facilitate them all.
A Cheann Comhairle, surely I am entitled to another supplementary because I had two questions tabled for priority?
I want to assist the Deputy to elicit information but he may not make speeches.
I have asked one question about the actual workings of the interdepartmental committee. My other question is this: based on the Estimates in the Book of Estimates for 1989 it appears that the committee, the Minister or somebody in his Department has already decided that the increase cannot be greater than 4 per cent because that is all that is contained there. Will the Minister inform the House from where — if anywhere — this money will emanate because it appears to me that the Government have decided that there will be no increases granted? That is in the Book of Estimates for all to see.
(Limerick West): I am afraid the Deputy must not have been listening to my reply. What I said was — and this is in reply to the Deputy's second question — that if any extra finance was required in 1989 as a result of the recommendations of the pay review committee it will be made available. I gave that information in the course of my reply.
There is no "if" about it at this stage.
(Limerick West): I hope to receive the report of that committee within a very short time.
Would the Minister put a date on it?
(Limerick West): I want to indicate to Deputy Connaughton also that I have no intention of pushing the committee to the detriment of a full and conclusive report and investigation into all aspects of Army pay and conditions.
Rubbish.
I am calling Deputy Deasy.
If, as we expect, the committee recommended a sizeable increase in pay for the Defence Forces — Army, Navy and Air Corps — in 1988, will the Minister provide a Supplementary Estimate to cover that increase? Furthermore, will he also provide a Supplementary Estimate to cover the pay increases we expect for 1989?
(Limerick West): As I indicated in my reply, I am awaiting the report of the interdepartmental committee. When that report is available it will be submitted to Government for decision. As I have already indicated also, if there is extra finance required for 1989 it will be provided.
Will the Minister stand by the findings of the committee's report?
Will they be made public?
Will the Minister do the honourable thing if he does not stand over the recommendations of that report?
I am calling Deputy Bell.
How does the Minister propose to apply the current increase on foot of the present national pay arrangement when, effectively, there is a reduction of over £500,000 in the Estimates for 1989 to cover the normal running costs of the Defence Forces? Will the Minister say by what means the current national increases will be provided within the framework of the Estimates which are down by over £500,000? Will the Minister now inform the House that the Government will introduce a Supplementary Estimate to cover the current increases? Furthermore, in view of that, will he now accept that there is and was a serious problem obtaining within the Defence Forces as a whole, particularly within the Permanent Defence Forces and — contrary to the replies he gave me in the House on previous occasions——
That is a very long question, Deputy.
Having recognised that there is a problem, will the Minister now state that that decision will be taken by him and the Government before 31 December because it is well known——
The Deputy had a good innings, he should now desist as he has made his point.
I had two questions about this matter on the Order Paper.
So had a lot of other Deputies.
On many occasions in this House very few Members had questions on the Order Paper and you know that better than anybody.
I hope Deputy Bell will not be offensive to the Chair as the Chair is seeking to do his job fairly and impartially and will take no nonsense.
Will the Minister now accept the fact that there is — and was — a serious——
The Deputy already made that point, he is repeating himself.
Will the Minister accept that point?
(Limerick West): As far as the 1989 Estimates are concerned, I am satisfied that there is adequate provision for the day-to-day running of the Defence Forces and their pay. I am not too clear in regard to the other questions raised by the Deputy. However, when I get a report from the committee it will be presented to the Government and the Government will take the necessary decision on it.
Is there a deadline?
(Limerick West): Give me an opportunity to answer the question.
Questions have been asked of the Minister and let us be good enough to hear the reply.
(Limerick West): When the report has been presented the Government will then make a decision and, if finance is required, the necessary provision will be made.
Does the Minister accept that there is a serious problem in the Defence Forces in regard to pay and conditions? If the review committee make a recommendation in favour of granting an increase in pay and allowances and improving conditions, will he give an undertaking to the House that that will be implemented?
That is repetition.
(Limerick West): I have already stated that I cannot anticipate the report of the committee, nor can I anticipate the decision of the Government——
What are the Government doing?
(Limerick West): The Government decided on 8 June to set up a pay review committee to look into all aspects of pay and allowances in the Defence Forces long before many of the Deputies here were asking questions about it.
(Interruptions.)
That is not true.
(Limerick West): The last pay review committee was set up in 1979 when Fianna Fáil were also in Government——
It shows how bad conditions are in the Army.
(Limerick West): What did Deputy Connaughton do when his party were in Government in regard to pay and allowances in the Defence Forces——
Will the Minister accept that, for the first time, people have been protesting on the streets about pay and allowances in the Defence Forces? Will the Minister also accept that, as there are so many questions on the Order Paper relating to the Defence Forces, it is an indication of the level of dissatisfaction among serving Defence Force personnel? It is up to him, as Minister for Defence, to rectify that as quickly as possible. Putting it on the long finger and saying that we must wait for a decision by the Government will not make the problem go away; it is merely postponing the day when he will have to do something about it.
(Limerick West): Pay and conditions in the Defence Forces are the responsibility of the Minister for Defence and the Government, and this matter has been looked after by successive Governments——
That means you.
(Limerick West): Because the pay review of the Defence Forces is ongoing — and must be so because of the nature of their role — it must be——
There is a crisis.
(Limerick West): The Government set up the pay review on 8 June to look at all aspects of pay and allowances of the Defence Forces.
Does the Minister intend to publish the findings of the pay review committee? He did not deal with that in his main reply. How often have the review committee met since they were appointed last June? There is a widespread feeling that the appointment of this review committee is a cosmetic exercise to cloud the issue and to save the Government from political embarrassment. He could dispel much of that by telling us how often the committee met. Am I right in assuming that, because the numbers of personnel projected for 1989 will be the lowest for about ten or 15 years in the history of the Defence Forces, it will thereby effect savings to pay any increase that might be sanctioned?
(Limerick West): It is a matter for the Government whether the report will be published. I do not know how often they met——
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Molloy, these interruptions must cease and if they persist I will adjourn Questions altogether for today.
What am I supposed to have done?
I observed the Deputy interrupting.
Deputy Molloy will be court-martialled.
Other Deputies also interrupted. Let us not have a scene.
(Limerick West): In reply to Deputy Cooney, there have been a number of meetings but I cannot give the exact number.
Did they hold 100 meetings?
(Limerick West): The committee met yesterday the representatives of the spouses, so it is an ongoing process.
The chairman of the review committee, Deputy Brady, the Minister of State, is sitting beside the Minister. Perhaps he will whisper in the Minister's ear the number of times the committee have met.
Will the Minister accept that it is his primary responsibility to look after the welfare of those serving in the Permanent Defence Forces and to maintain at all times high morale among serving members? Will he also accept that morale is at the lowest level practically since the foundation of the State, that he is totally negligent in carrying out the duties entrusted to him and which are his primary responsibility as a member of the Cabinet? Will he agree that the level of pay for the duties which the Government have been asking Defence Force personnel to undertake is ludicrous and has resulted in gardaí, prison officers and local authority personnel having to undertake these tasks without proper remuneration?
May I dissuade the Deputy from making a speech?
This has led to a serious drop in morale in the Defence Forces and large numbers are leaving because they are so despondent. Will he consider——
The Deputy has made his point.
(Limerick West): I do not accept that morale in the Defence Forces is low.
Oh, my God.
(Limerick West): The numbers leaving the Defence Forces are no different from the time when Deputy Molloy was Minister for Defence. I have checked the figures and I can give the exact information to the Deputy if he requires it.
There was a recruitment campaign at that time.
I was going to refer to morale but that has been dealt with, although I do not agree with the Minister's answer. He also said that, traditionally, pay in the Army is related to the pay of civil servants. Can he say to what grade of civil servant the pay of privates and NCOs is related? They must be at a very low level of pay. The second question is, in view of the fact that the members of the Army have no organisation or association to speak for them in matters relating to conditions and pay, does the Minister accept that, therefore, he has the responsibility, as he said, for the men under his charge in fighting this case? Is the Minister, therefore, prepared to fight the case of the men in the Army with the Minister for Finance? In view of the fact that there is no other organisation to do so, the Minister himself has accepted it is his responsibility. Can he say here that he will fight their case with the Minister for Finance?
(Limerick West): The result is quite plain, in so far as the Government set up the pay review committee last June just to do that. As I have said, they are meeting continually and I expect to have this report very shortly. The pay and conditions of the Defence Forces are traditionally tied to the public service and where the public service get an increase it is automatically passed on to the Permanent Defence Forces. In addition to that, the Government and I feel that the pay, allowances and conditions of the Defence Forces are ongoing and must be considered on an ongoing basis. That is the purpose of setting up the review committee. The response to the Deputy's question is “yes”.
To what grade?
Deputy Dinny McGinley.
The Minister did not respond to that.
Deputy Dinny McGinley has been called.
Before asking a supplementary to my two questions, perhaps the Minister will convey my personal thanks and the thanks of many people in west Donegal to the Air Corps crews who responded so promptly to a distress call last Sunday morning.
Deputy McGinley, please.
Unfortunately the result was tragic, nevertheless they were there in a short time.
Deputy McGinley is making it very difficult for the Chair.
Is the Minister's personal opinion that the Defence Forces are inadequately paid and their conditions are really inadequate? What would he consider a fair percentage to bring them up to standard, or has he any personal views on this matter?
(Limerick West): The purpose of setting up the pay review committee is to look into all aspects of that, and personnel on that committee are now examining a full report from the military with regard to all aspects of pay, allowances and conditions. They are being examined.
What does the Minister think himself?
(Limerick West): That is the sole purpose of setting up the committee. They in turn will make their recommendations to me and the Government will subsequently make a decision as a result of the report.
My question relates to the National Army Spouses Association. It is my belief that the Minister merely met with them as a matter of course yesterday in advance and expectation of today's exchanges. Could I ask him when his Department first received requests to meet with the association? Will their meetings be ongoing? He says the review is an ongoing matter and it relates not just to wages but to other conditions. Will he confirm that he will meet with them on an ongoing basis to discuss this ongoing review he talks about? What demands were made of him by the national association at the meeting with him or his Department officials, and what was his response to those demands? Finally, in view of the fact that a review is going on, why are he and his Department actively and currently cutting back on some of the more important allowances available to soldiers such as the outpost allowance? Does his——
I understood the Deputy to say "finally". Please let us have finality.
Could I ask the Minister, since I have raised this matter publicly, whether he has now desisted from using the means of interfering with soldiers' pay, of describing military exercises——
I think the Deputy has made his point. There is no need for further elaboration.
(Limerick West): There is no cutback in the allowances.
The Minister has abolished the outpost allowances.
(Limerick West): No——
He has.
(Limerick West):——and there is a question down with regard to that area which I will be answering in due course.
It is public knowledge.
(Limerick West): The Deputy should get his information correctly. I have received correspondence from the spouses' association on 25 October. They had a reply from me that evening saying I had arrangements made for the pay review committee to meet them.
The Minister told us——
(Limerick West): The committee are ongoing. The purpose of setting up the committee is to examine, as the Deputy has outlined, the pay, conditions and allowances of the Defence Forces because the Government and the Minister are responsible for that.
I have two points. First I find the Minister's reply very disappointing, as must the wives of these good men who saw fit to march to this House today to bring feeling to the very serious——
Questions, please.
Would the Minister consider an interim increase pending this report that we are expecting as a gesture of goodwill and appreciation to these men for the work they are doing? Secondly, is the Minister aware that in the Border areas in Counties Cavan and Monaghan which I represent, many of these soldiers are forced into doing tours of duty of 24 hour and 48 hour duration at a time, to bring home so little extra income to their wives and families? Would the Minister not consider that this is not a good exercise for security, because soldiers at the end of a tour of 24 or 48 hours could hardly be expected to be as alert as a soldier starting his day's work early? Would the Minister not consider that this is an undesirable development and that extra personnel and sufficient income will be forthcoming immediately so they will not be put into this position?
(Limerick West): I do not consider an interim increase desirable because there is little point in having decisions on a stop-go basis. This committee being set up are examining the conditions on a comprehensive basis and, as I have said, when their recommendations are made to me the Government in turn will make a decision. If the situation described prevails — and I have my doubts; no soldier is doing a 48 hour tour of duty——
Deputies
They are.
(Limerick West): I said “if”. The very reason the committee were set up was to examine all those points raised by the Deputy. As I said, the military have now made a comprehensive submission to the committee. It is being examined in detail and, as stated already, the meetings are ongoing. Many meetings are being held and many more meetings will be held here before the final decision can be made.
Order. I am calling Question No. 3.
On a point of order——
Order. We have devoted the greater part of Question Time to this subject matter.
On a point of order——
Is this a spurious point of order? I will take a very serious view if it is.
My question was also dealt with.
Deputy Durkan please resume your seat. I will not permit the Deputy to disrupt the proceedings of the House in this manner.
(Interruptions.)
On a point of order——
A Cheann Comhairle——
(Interruptions.)
Resume your seat. Deputy Durkan, this is the second time you have abused the privilege of this House by raising a spurious point of order. If you do not desist I will ask you to leave the House.
I apologise. I do not wish to disrupt the business of the House.
Why then do you persist?
My question was called and I assumed I would get an opportunity to ask supplementary questions. It was incorporated in the reply and I did not get an opportunity. It is Question No. 103.
I have called No. 3. I am not deviating from that position.