Vol. 399 No. 11
13 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Defence if, having regard to his decision of January, 1989 that he would give favourable consideration to the retirement of three Air Corps officers over the following 12 months, he has granted retirement/resignation to the officers concerned.
29 Mr. T. O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Defence if he will give details of the number of applications which his Department has received from pilots and engineers in the Air Corps who wish to leave the service; and if there has been a change of policy in this regard.
34 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Defence if he will allow any relaxation in the rules prohibiting aeronautical engineers from leaving the Air Corps at an early stage; his views on whether conditions relating to engineers are different from pilots or air traffic controllers; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
40 Mr. Belton asked the Minister for Defence if, in view of his promise of January, 1989 to review the position regarding the granting of requests for retirement/resignation to officers of the Air Corps, he has carried out that review; and, if so, the decision which he has reached.
I propose to take Question Nos. 13, 29, 34, and 40 together. I have reviewed the situation in regard to applications for retirement by Air Corps officers. As a result two aeronautical engineers have recently been granted permission to retire and I propose that two pilot officers should be granted permission to retire as soon as may be possible after 1 July 1990.
Deputy McGinley's question asks specifically if the Minister's promise of a year ago, that he would grant permission to three Air Corps officers to retire or resign, has been honoured and if they have left the Air Corps.
Three aeronautical engineers have sought and been granted permission to retire. Two of these were granted permission this year. I have also directed that all officers of the Air Corps should be officially informed of the position. The approach I have adopted is to examine each case on its merits. That will remain the position as long as I am in the Department. There is no question of any global barrier.
In January 1989, which is over a year ago, the Minister specifically promised that he would favourably consider the applications of three Air Corps officers for permission to retire but we are now being told that only two of those——
Two of the applications were granted this year while the other was approved in 1989. As I indicated, three aeronautical engineers have sought and been granted permission to retire since 1 January 1988.
The Minister also promised that the matter would be reviewed within 12 months of that time, that would have been January of this year. Can the Minister inform the House as to how many will be released during the coming year?
I will look at each application on its merits and grant the application if I regard it as a valid one and one which I can grant in the circumstances without affecting the levels in the Air Corps.
Is the Minister aware that there is a queue of applicants at this time?
Can the Minister tell us, in the light of his promise to review the matter within 12 months, if he is going to grant permission to any of these applicants?
There are no such applications before me at present. As I said, I have reviewed the situation and as a result two aeronautical engineers have recently been granted permission to retire and I propose that two pilot officers should be granted permission to retire as soon as possible after 1 July 1990. That is the position.
With regard to Question No. 34, which relates to the status and position of aeronautical engineers, would the Minister outline his views on whether conditions relating to engineers are different in some respects from pilots or air traffic controllers, particularly those relating to the cost of their training and the contribution they make to any improvements made in work practices? Can the Minister also say whether these issues will be reviewed in the light of the recommendations of the Gleeson committee?
The Gleeson committee are considering this matter and we will look at it in the light of the recommendations made by the committee. Submissions were made on this aspect to the committee. We expect to have their report within the next month or so and when it comes to hand we will have to examine this area.
I am very pleased that there is not a substantial number of applications before the Minister. Reports in the media seem to suggest that 17 out of the 86 pilots have applied for permission to leave along with several air traffic controllers. Is the Minister aware that Air Corps personnel are angry at the failure to come up with a policy? The Government will have to bring forward a policy not only on this matter but also on recruitment. It seems the Minister, given what he has said this afternoon, has adopted a willy-nilly approach to his matter but that is not the way to deal with this problem.
The only approach I am going to take is to examine each application on its merits but the first requirement and prerequisite is to meet the needs of the Air Corps. Once I am satisfied as to the strength being maintained at pilot level, engineering level or any level, I can consider each case on its merits. The more fundamental problem concerns the term of appointment, terms of service and so on, and the commission have heard submissions about that, and that matter is crucial to this. As of now, they are there under certain terms of service for certain periods of time, and they knew they were being recruited on the basis of their contribution to the Air Corps and they were appointed accordingly. When they apply to leave the strength of the Air Corps is the first consideration, naturally. That is why we make the appointments in the first instance. After that other factors are taken into consideration. I have been taking a flexible view on this, taking all considerations into account, and have allowed certain applications to go through, which is a new departure.
A very brief supplementary arising——
I want to dispose of other questions. Progress is rather slow today in respect of questions to the Minister.
Has the Minister any indication when the Gleeson report is likely to be published?
As the Deputy knows, the end of June was the original target date. I am not the final arbiter here, it is Gleeson himself and his committee, but I hope it will be published at the end of July.
That is the subject matter of the next question, No. 14.
I did not appreciate that.
