Alan Shatter
Ceist:8 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Defence the plans, if any, he has for the Army Apprentice School; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17946/98]
Other Questions. - Army Apprentice School.
Bernard J. Durkan
Ceist:55 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the plans, if any, he has to replace the facilities at Devoy Barracks, Naas, County Kildare, in a manner which would recognise the tradition of the school, the need for a supply of Army apprentices, the shortage of apprentices generally and the tradition of the town of Naas; and whether he has considered setting up a military academy at Devoy Barracks which could broaden and enhance the facilities previously available there. [17971/98]
Bernard J. Durkan
Ceist:192 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the consideration, if any, he has given to the establishment of a military academy at Devoy Barracks, Naas, County Kildare, his views on the need for this structure within the reorganised Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18229/98]
Bernard J. Durkan
Ceist:193 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the shortage of Army apprentices throughout the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18230/98]
Bernard J. Durkan
Ceist:194 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the plans, if any, he has for the provision of Army apprenticeships following the closure of the apprenticeship school at Devoy Barracks, Naas, County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18231/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 55, 192, 193 and 194 together. As part of the reorganisation of the Defence Forces a National Defence Forces Training Centre is being established at the Curragh. The centre will serve as the main military training centre for the Defence Forces. It is my intention that the apprentices currently in training will complete their course of training at the Curragh and suitable facilities for that purpose are being established.
The ongoing need for apprentices will be reviewed regularly and apprentices will continue to be recruited as required. The number and type of apprentices recruited are determined by the Defence Forces requirement for particular skills. It is intended that in future apprentices will be trained externally and only very specialised apprentice training will take place within the Defence Forces.
The Minister said it is his intention that in future apprentices will be trained externally. Can I take it that is confirmation from the Minister that when the 28 apprentices currently in training finish their course there will be no Army Apprentice School? What does he mean by apprentices being trained externally? Referring to a previous answer, does the Minister seriously expect us to believe that FÁS can provide the type of training the Army Apprentice School provided up to now?
In a number of specialties there is in-house capacity to train apprentices and that will continue to be the case. Regarding the facilities available in FÁS, Deputy Dukes will appreciate a number of important specialist courses are provided for the Naval Service through FÁS. A number of specialised courses are also provided for the Naval Service by Cork University, Galway University, Dublin Institute of Technology colleges and regional colleges. Based on that experience, that the type of specialties required in the Naval Service can be supplied from outside at a much more economic cost, that in-house additions have to come out of our resources and the cost of the apprenticeship scheme as it developed during my term of office, it seemed much more appropriate to look outside to take advantage of the growth in the education and technological sector in terms of enlistment to the Defence Forces. In terms of our experience, particularly in the Naval Service in recent years, I am sure there is no economic argument that would persuade anyone to hold a different view.
It is not the case that there will not be an apprenticeship school in the future, but the courses provided will relate specifically to the specialties we have developed, which will operate from the Curragh.
The Minister did not answer any of the four questions I tabled. Will he explain if he undertook a review of the importance of the contribution of the apprenticeship school in Devoy Barracks to the wider economy outside the Army? Is he aware of the commendations and the general recognition apprentices who graduated from that school have received in the wider community? Did he undertake an evaluation of the negative impact of the loss of such a school, having regard to the high calibre of the apprentices who graduated from it, on a town like Naas which has a military tradition, or did he slavishly follow the findings of the Price Waterhouse report which seemed to be at variance with most of the indications coming from his party colleagues in my constituency?
Independent of the Price Waterhouse review, a military board examined the apprenticeship requirements in the Defence Forces some years ago. Following that report the then chief of staff recommended the closure of the apprenticeship school in Naas. That military decision was not executed on the political side. My examination of costs for the number of apprentices in Naas showed it was not possible, in terms of my responsibility to the taxpayer, to continue an exercise which was leaning towards a cost per apprenticeship of approximately £300,000 over three years. That would be totally unsustainable.
I accept Deputy Durkan's point regarding the calibre of the training and the capacity of the teaching profession there. Everything was perfect in that regard, but the exercise was not sustainable in economic terms. Alternative ways of recruitment and the availability of expertise which has developed in the educational and technological spheres ensures the Defence Forces are capable of providing apprenticeships at a much reduced cost. This allowed me to put the money to much better use in the Defence Forces generally. This course has been chosen, but a number of specialised apprenticeships will continue in the Curragh.
I understand the point about loyalty to local communities in terms of the participation of the Defence Forces. However, that belongs to a different era. It was inherited by the State at its foundation and there was considerable wastage of personnel regarding security, housekeeping and other duties. I have responsibility for collective training and ensuring the best use of resources. The decision was taken on that basis having regard to other considerations. It was not taken lightly.
All the considerations involved led me to the view that the closure of Devoy barracks ultimately would be in the interests of the Defence Forces. The proceeds of the sale of the site when finally arranged will enhance the facilities in the Curragh and address some of the problems there which are unacceptable, including the overall accommodation, the condition of the swimming pool and various other matters. Resources will be now available to deal with these problems without the need to resort to the taxpayer.
Why did the Minister not increase the throughput of apprentices to improve the efficiency of the school? This would have also addressed the argument made by the Minister. Was such a proposal considered? If so, why was it not implemented? Does the Minister agree that if the school was inefficient to that extent, any changes now will not make the procedures more efficient? Did the Minister consider the possibility of increasing the importance of Devoy barracks by establishing an academy to handle apprenticeships and a range of military support activities which may have to be supplied from another source in any event? Did the Minister consider such aspects?
Successive Governments have considered the apprenticeship requirements of the Naval Service. There has been no substantial increase in the number over many years. Even when the number was significantly higher, the economic cost per apprentice of completing courses was totally out of line with what is available in alternative educational and technological institutions. This must be borne in mind. Following its investigation of the position in Devoy, the recommendation from the military authorities, which are responsible for indicating the apprenticeship and training requirements for the future, was to close the barracks.
The military, strategic and economic points of view and the issue of reinvestment in the Curragh, which is dilapidated although it should be one of the primary institutions of the Defence Forces, contributed to the decision. Additional resources are now available to carry out the main tasks without lessening the capacity of the Defence Forces to recruit, train and educate personnel in concert with other educational and technological institutions.
When the Minister addressed public representatives in Naas on the day of the announcement of the closures, he gave the impression that facilities would be made available at the Curragh for the entire apprenticeship school. I have met many tradesmen who trained in the apprenticeship school and subsequently left the Army. They are well able to account for themselves in their respective trades in the private industrial sector. Given that the school was to be retained at the Curragh, I considered that at least all the expertise involved in training personnel would not be lost. However, I am amazed to discover that the goalposts have been moved and that only in special cases will personnel be trained at the Curragh. The impression was given in Naas that the school would move intact to the Curragh and the facility would continue to be used to train all Army apprentices. I am flummoxed to discover that the goalposts have been moved.
I indicated on a number of occasions that the apprenticeship requirements of the Defence Forces is a matter for the military authorities. They must indicate the requirements to me. The military board which considered the retention or otherwise of Devoy barracks decided on the basis of the reduced requirement for apprentices that it should be closed. My concern is to ensure that the future apprenticeship requirements are met through national facilities and in-house strengths that are available at an effective economic cost. This was not the position in the past.
Regarding Deputy Wall's comments, there is no doubt about the calibre of the people who completed their apprenticeships in the school. They can hold their heads high. However, it is clear that it would be possible to train a greater number to the same standard at a lower cost. I must consider average costs in terms of the strata of educational and technological institutions that exist.
Am I correct that the Minister is now saying, contrary to the comments he made when he met public representatives in Naas to which Deputy Wall referred, that the Defence Forces do not have a large enough throughput of persons to be trained to justify the maintenance of an autonomous training institution? Will the Minister confirm that the training provided by a number of third level institutions to Naval Service and other Defence Forces personnel involves training people who have already advanced to a certain point in their skills and trades? The training courses offered in UCG and other institutions are not for basic trainees but people who have already a degree of skill.
When the training unit in the Curragh closes down, which now appears to be in prospect, will the Minister indicate where the Defence Forces will get basic training for their members in mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, radio and radar engineering and maintenance and the simple but important area of ordnance maintenance? From where will the Defence Forces get this expertise? Does any institution elsewhere provide it? If these basic skills are not provided from resources within the Defence Forces, is the Minister suggesting the time will come when the Defence Forces will seek to recruit people who already have skills in these areas which can be built on by the in-house specialities to which he referred?
There is a mixture of the two areas mentioned by the Deputy. In the recruitment of Defence Forces there are opportunities for enlisting people with certain existing specialties. The Deputy will appreciate the general educational standard that is available and the advances that have been made at second level, where the number of participants continues to grow. The opportunities in terms of recruiting people with advanced skills from all sectors of education have grown enormously.
As the Deputy knows from his time in Government, the number of apprentices being trained by the Army has been in decline for a significant time on the advice of the military authorities. There has been no lack in the completion of training or the availability of skills. I am aware of this from visits to United Nations operations and elsewhere. Ireland is able to compete with the best in the context of specialised operations and this will continue. Many of the specialist posts to which the Deputy referred, including radar, will be provided at the Curragh where there are advanced training facilities, the long-term future of which is secure. Ten or 12 of the 28 apprentices will be based there. In regard to apprenticeships in engineering, carpentry and so on, alternative training facilities are available in many colleges and through FÁS. It is much more cost effective to avail of these facilities.
How much will it cost to provide facilities to allow the 28 apprentices from Devoy Barracks to complete their training?
In the case of the specialist posts there is no additional cost involved. As the Deputy is aware, there are advanced training facilities at the Curragh which we will try to enhance as much as possible. In the case of the other posts I do not know what the figure is but I intend to ensure the apprentices concerned complete their training on time. The necessary resources, financial or otherwise, will be made available.