Willie Penrose
Ceist:6 Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Defence if he will make a statement on the publication of the first report of the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces. [21992/07]
Other Questions.
Ombudsman for the Defence Forces.
Willie Penrose
Ceist:14 Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Defence if, in view of the number of complaints made to the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces regarding non-selection of serving members for promotion and overseas service, there are plans to review the procedures governing selection procedures; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21993/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 and 14 together.
The Ombudsman for the Defence Forces, Ms Paulynn Marrinan Quinn SC, launched her first annual report on 15 May last. The report covers the period from December 2005 to December 2006, inclusive.
The creation of the Office of the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces which became operational on 1 December 2005 represented a major historical milestone in the modernisation of the military redress of wrongs process. The publication of the first annual report is a further milestone in this development.
The Act provides that the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces is independent in the performance of her duties and I do not consider it appropriate for me to report on her behalf or to give details in respect of her reports on individual cases. However, I welcome the first report and the work done by Ms Marrinan Quinn in establishing this important new office. The ombudsman has achieved her objective of creating a reputation for impartiality, professionalism and fairness for her office despite the brevity of her time there. I also welcome strongly the response of the Defence Forces to this new office. In this regard, the ombudsman commented that she had found the Defence Forces were open and receptive to the establishment of the office and were willing to recognise the benefits of having an ombudsman.
I welcome the fact that the ombudsman has begun to have a positive impact on military human resources management. In response to recommendations made by the ombudsman, new interim selection procedures for the selection of enlisted personnel for career courses and overseas service were introduced in July 2006. These procedures were introduced in interim form to allow for their evaluation in an operational environment. The Defence Forces are reviewing these procedures with a view to producing a final version in the near future. Furthermore, the procedures for the promotion of non-commissioned officers within the Defence Forces are under review as part of the modernisation agenda. Formal discussions on the proposed system commenced in April 2006 within the conciliation and arbitration forum. The ombudsman has made recommendations on foot of some cases she has investigated which are included as inputs to this review.
I thank the Minister for that reply. Would he consider it strange that none of the cases in the 2006 report of the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces related to bullying, harassment or sexual harassment, and that 21 of the 26 cases related to the issues the Minister mentioned already? It should be noted that these procedures were brought in based on the previous report of the ombudsman. Is it hard to accept that there were no complaints about bullying, harassment or sexual harassment? If so, why are the complaints not coming through at this level? I understand they come through at a different informal level in the Army. Is this a health situation vis-à-vis the ombudsman service?
Obviously I have no control over what sort of cases go to the ombudsman. Deputy O'Shea is correct that only one case out of the 26 cases considered last year related to bullying or sexual harassment. I understand that the ombudsman could not consider that case because it was outside her remit for procedural reasons.
I would look at it the other way. The internal procedures now are so good that matters do not have to go as far as the ombudsman because one only goes to the ombudsman when one has exhausted all internal procedures. There is a raft of internal procedures in place now. There are the direct contact persons, 240 of whom are in place. There is the confidential telephone line. The procedures have been reviewed by the Labour Court. There is a human rights officer in the Army. I would like to think that the reason so many bullying and harassment cases are not reaching the ombudsman is because they are being so effectively dealt with internally.
Have there not been reports that Army personnel prefer going through the informal procedures with complaints of this nature and, for that reason, there are no official accounts of the bullying, harassment and sexual harassment complaints that come through at the informal level? It is difficult for the military authorities or the Department to gain an accurate measure of what comes through the informal system in the Army.
Deputy O'Shea has a point, but there are handbooks, guidelines and strategy statements, there is the A7 personnel directive, and anti-bullying measures are imbedded in all education courses in the Army. The ombudsman is a final, statutorily independent court of appeal if people are not satisfied with how they get on internally. They can make the complaint in a number of ways internally but those who are not satisfied can appeal to the ombudsman. The fact that people are not appealing to the ombudsman so far — it could change — is an indication that they are happy with whatever redress they got internally.
The Minister can interpret it that way. However, it could also be the case that people who go through the formal structures of the Army and then proceed to the ombudsman, which is also a formal structure, have concerns that it can affect their careers or have other negative repercussions. How do we get around that issue?
The terms under which people make informal complaints make specific provision that no one is victimised or intimidated, that his or her career will not suffer, etc. These provisions are written down as part of the regulations that officers investigating complaints must take into account. They must also be taken into account when people are being considered for future promotions. I counted 14 specific anti-bullying measures which are now in place. The ombudsman is now in place.
In response to Deputy Deenihan's earlier question, the Department is undertaking a further comprehensive review. In the context of that comprehensive review, I will ask the group to look specifically at the Deputy's point to see whether there is any evidence and whether we can get figures on the number of informal complaints. Some of the complaints might be about trivial matters which would explain the lack of a record in some cases. I will ask the review group to look at that issue to see whether there is anything further we can do to tighten up on that situation.
Have any complaints been made to the ombudsman in the context of equality legislation, particularly on the matter of gender equality in promotions?
As Deputy Deenihan will be aware, the vast majority of complaints to the ombudsman relate to selecting people for career courses, for overseas service and for promotion. I do not know whether the latter category contained accusations that people were not promoted simply because of their gender. I do not have the details about the complaints. I stated that the ombudsman is statutorily independent and I do not want to come in here and speak in detail about the cases with which she has dealt. I should imagine the ombudsman's report may provide further information in that regard.
Only a small number of cases went to the ombudsman, and the number of cases where terminations were made was smaller still. However, in the latter cases the complaints were upheld. Would that ring any alarm bells with the Minister at this stage?
I possess general figures on the total number of complaints being made but I do not know whether they include informal complaints. For example, 96 complaints of harassment and bullying were made in 2006 and the figure will be higher in 2007. However, the number of complaints getting as far as the ombudsman is still quite small. From that point of view, in the context of the overall situation it does not cause me any undue worry.
Bullying in the Workplace.
Ciaran Lynch
Ceist:7 Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked the Minister for Defence if he is satisfied with the operation of equality and anti-bullying measures in the military. [21985/07]
Thomas P. Broughan
Ceist:11 Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Defence when he will carry out the next review of the operation of the equality and anti-bullying measures in the Army. [21977/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 11 together.
The Defence Forces and the Department have taken a wide variety of initiatives and have devoted extensive resources to this issue since Dr. Eileen Doyle and the external advisory committee presented their original report, The Challenge of a Workplace, in March 2002. This independent report addressed the entire range of interpersonal issues within the Defence Forces. Its contents and recommendations were accepted in full.
An independent monitoring group was established in May 2002 to oversee the implementation of the recommendations of the original Doyle report. The independent monitoring group's own progress report, Response to the Challenge of a Workplace, which was launched by my predecessor, former Deputy Michael Smith, on 24 September 2004, is available on the Defence Forces website and describes in great detail the very significant progress achieved since the publication of the original Doyle report in 2002.
An internal military steering group, chaired by the Assistant Chief of Staff and comprising the director of administration, director of human resources management and director of Defence Forces training, oversees the implementation of all the recommendations of Response to the Challenge of a Workplace.
The ongoing implementation of the recommendations of the Doyle report has been one of the highest priorities for the Defence Forces and the Department since its publication. Policies on equality, dignity and bullying are being constantly communicated to all ranks. I am satisfied that the military authorities are alert and vigilant to this issue and are committed to addressing the matter in a continuing and proactive manner through educational modules on interpersonal relationships which, as I stated earlier, are now embedded in career courses for all ranks.
The independent monitoring group recommended that a professional review of progress within the Defence Forces should take place in 2007 and that it should be published. The report also suggested that a group representative of military management, PDFORRA, RACO, the Department of Defence and external expertise should conduct such a review.
I agree there should be a review of progress. I can confirm that my Department is currently concentrating on the terms of reference for such a review. The next phase, involving the key players, will be launched shortly.
I understand it is the target of the Minister and the Chief of Staff to increase the percentage of females in the Army from 5% to 10%. Has the new minimum height regulation that was introduced in September 2006 had any effect on the number of females seeking to join the Army? In general terms, what timeframe does the Minister believe is realistic to achieve his target of 10% female participation in the Army?
I do not wish to mention timeframes which I will subsequently be asked about in the House. There are some indications the change in the height requirements is having a beneficial effect. As a result of this change, slightly more than 90% of the female population is now eligible to join the Army. That is an increase from the previous level of 65%. Based on research carried out, we will be putting in place a number of other measures. An advertising campaign will be involved, as will visits to schools etc. It is my objective to reach the 10% target I have set as quickly as possible.
As I pointed out previously on Priority Questions, the Minister has already missed the deadline set in the first timeframe to set up the review group. I hope that will not still be the case at the end of October.
Do regular meetings take place between the instructors in all the training centres to help to develop the skills and professionalism of instructors? Who is instructing the instructors? Can the Minister indicate how many instructors are currently in place and whether it is intended to increase their number to ensure people are available at all times in the workplace to implement the recommendations?
The deadline has been missed by a couple of months. I am sorry but this is not a major crisis. What is important is that the recommendations of the Dáil committee are being put in place and are being implemented. I am sure the report will show that.
I am satisfied the Army will inform me if difficulties arise on the training side in terms of the number of instructors or in regard to other issues. I have had no such complaints. I do not know how many instructors are currently in place but I will find out for Deputy Deenihan.
In the Minister's view, is there any substance to the allegations made by the president of PDFORRA in terms of soldiers who put their heads above the parapet by becoming officials of PDFORRA, being denied career opportunities, including overseas service, and frequently having charges brought against them that are subsequently dropped?
I wish PDFORRA would bring these allegations to my attention. I read about this in the newspaper but even though I frequently meet individual members of PDFORRA — I will meet them at the national conference next week — nobody has brought this matter directly to my attention. I say that as a matter of certainty. I see no evidence of it. If something like that is happening, there are plenty of redress mechanisms within the Army, up to and including a statutorily independent ombudsman.
If people want to make a complaint there is a whole raft of internal mechanisms available rather than for them to complain in the manner outlined by the Deputy. I will meet PDFORRA next week in a formal capacity and if anybody wishes to bring any matter to my attention, he or she may do so in either a formal or informal way at a meeting. They are more than welcome to do this.
An allegation is contained in this article that the disciplinary system is used against members of PDFORRA. The implication appears to be that it is difficult to pursue that kind of complaint. I take it from what the Minister said that no formal complaints have reached him and that, equally, he is not aware of any evidence that would sustain or substantiate these allegations.
That is absolutely correct. This has never been brought directly to my attention. I would remember if it had been. I have no evidence to sustain this allegation. The only way one could possibly test it, as it were, would be to go through the list of people against whom disciplinary action was taken and see whether an undue proportion of them are actively involved with PDFORRA.
As far as I know, there are many people in the Army who want to be involved in the Army trade union, PDFORRA. There is no shortage of people willing to join it or become actively involved in it. There is robust competition for places every year when the AGM comes around. I have no evidence they are being singled out in any way.
We have now allocated approximately 235 people within the Army to act as direct contact persons, DCPs, to whom people can go if they have a complaint. That is another form of representation. We set out to have that many DCPs. The Army high command informed me there was no difficulty in recruiting personnel who were able, willing and ready to serve in that capacity.
Commemorative Events.
Jack Wall
Ceist:8 Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Defence the progress made by the committee established to consider proposals for an appropriate commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the 1916 rising in 2016; the number of meetings held to date; when the committee last met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22000/07]
During the lifetime of the 29th Dáil, an all-party Oireachtas consultation group was established for the official preparations for the re-instatement of the traditional military parade at Easter and the commemorative programme to be put in place in coming years for the centenary of the Easter Rising. The group met in November 2006 and March 2007.
I expect invitations will issue soon to all party leaders to once again nominate spokespersons to serve on a successor group during this Dáil. In addition to their consideration of the commemorative initiatives in 2006 and 2007, members of the previous consultation group were invited to consider making nominations to an expert working group that would provide specialist and academic advice on the historic events and the commemorative proposals. This matter was left in abeyance with the dissolution of the Dáil but it is hoped to resume this discussion following the formation of a new Oireachtas group.
Officials of my Department and officers of the Defence Forces are members of an interdepartmental committee, chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach. This committee was originally tasked with the commemorative programme for the 90th anniversary of the Rising and the annual commemorations appropriate for the years until the centenary. The committee has not met since the completion of the commemoration and parade in April 2007. I envisage that the committee will soon commence the preparation and planning in respect of Easter 2008.
A number of long-term projects are currently being pursued as part of the centenary commemorations. The initiative to bring into the public domain the remaining military history archives of the Defence Forces is being progressed. My Department will shortly be placing an advertisement in the national press with regard to the recruitment of archival assistants for this project.
The conservation work on the Asgard is continuing at the National Museum Collins Barracks with a view to completion in 2009. I was particularly satisfied to note earlier this year the generous donation to the National Museum of the letter written to General Maxwell by Pádraig MacPiarais prior to his execution.
I thank the members of the Oireachtas consultation group for the work done to date on the commemorations and their consideration of the centenary programme.
I very much welcome the opening to the public of the military archive. If the commemoration in 2016 is focused mainly on military parades and so on, would that be the best monument to the men and women of 1916 and what they stood for? I put it to the Minister that to have social objectives achieved before 2016 would be a much more fitting monument to the people of 1916. They took a military road because they wanted to achieve something — like the founder of my party, they want to change what is to what ought to be.
As an example, the Government has a target in Towards 2016 to reduce the rate of illiteracy to one in six. How much of a monument is that to the people of 1916? Would it not be preferable if a programme were embarked upon, in conjunction with the other matters, to tackle issues such as the 30% rate of illiteracy in some schools, as well as problems with numeracy and homelessness? It would be best if these social problems were tackled in a focused and effective way so we would have an achievement that would really be a great tribute to those who made that huge sacrifice almost a century ago.
I agree it should not be an exclusively or even predominantly military occasion. That was the case for the 90th anniversary but we were reviving the celebration after it had lapsed for a number of years due to events in Northern Ireland and so on. I am strongly of that view, as was the previous Oireachtas consultation group, and I am sure the same view will be reflected by the new group.
We are appointing an expert committee to come up with ideas. It will be specifically tasked to develop ideas on how we should commemorate our social, economic and cultural progress. It will be a wide-ranging commemoration and while a military parade will be a part of it, it will not be central or predominant.
The Minister will agree that the 90th anniversary commemoration was very successful and that the people were very impressed with what they saw. It was the first time many people actually saw our military in action in a major way and it gave out a very positive message, despite the military nature of the commemoration.
In so far as is possible, our military should be seen and we should be proud of their good discipline and organisation. Whenever an occasion arises to which the military can contribute, it should be encouraged to do so. Óglaigh na hÉireann is the legitimate Irish Army as defined by the Constitution. It is important it should be part of commemorating the Easter Rising, rather than any other so-called armies in this country. I would be well disposed to having the Army and the military more involved in commemorating events and more in public view than they have been.
I agree that the 90th anniversary commemoration was extremely successful. I appreciate the Deputy's kind remarks about the military, which I will communicate to the Chief of Staff.
It is not that we are ashamed of our military; we are very proud of them. My point to Deputy O'Shea is that it will be a wide-ranging commemoration, which will commemorate far more than the fact we have an established, well respected standing Army which has done tremendous work abroad. However, as well as commemorating matters such as our cultural, economic and social progress, we will also take the opportunity to showcase our military.
Does the Minister agree that if the all-party consultation group is to suggest social objectives that would be put in place to honour the men and women of 1916, this needs to be done quickly? Whatever additional resources or personnel are needed to achieve those objectives, the process must start now because to overcome social problems takes time. We have a reasonable timescale but there is no time to waste. Does the Minister agree it is important to establish the new all-party consultation group quickly and impose a time limit for the group to return with recommendations so the work can begin?
I agree the consultation group should be established shortly. I will arrange for invitations to be issued to the various party leaders. My view, for what it is worth, is that we should not confine the group to members of established parties and that we should get the widest range of opinion and perhaps invite one or two non-party members. I am in the hands of the committee. Whatever it collectively wants to do, I will make sure is carried into effect.
With regard to setting timetables, the Deputy is correct that while we have plenty of time, it is just one or two Dáil terms so we might as well get down to it as soon as possible. Invitations will issue to the various party leaders shortly. I would encourage future members of the Oireachtas consultation group to do what their predecessors did not do despite repeated requests, namely, to nominate academic and other specialists and experts to the group, who will then come up with concrete recommendations. I found it difficult — not through any lack of effort on my part — to get personnel nominated to serve on that group.
Naval Service Vessels.
Ruairí Quinn
Ceist:9 Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Defence his plans for the replacement of Naval Service vessels; the expected timetable for the purchase of the three new vessels; the budget available to his Department for this purpose; if tenders have been sought for the new vessels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21994/07]
Brian Hayes
Ceist:48 Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Defence if the goal of a contract for the three new naval vessels, set to be placed by the start of 2008, will be met on time; and if the proposed budget for defence will provide for this purchase. [22093/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 48 together.
The Naval Service provides the maritime element of the Defence Forces and has a general responsibility to meet contingent and actual maritime defence requirements. In the 2000 White Paper on Defence, the Government decided that the Naval Service would be based on an eight-ship flotilla and committed to a modernisation and replacement strategy to maximise the operational capacity of those eight vessels consistent with the roles assigned to the Naval Service.
The White Paper specifically provides that "new vessels will be brought on stream to replace older ones as these fall due for replacement". Naval Service vessels are replaced when they have come to the end of their useful life, which is normally approximately 30 years. Three ships will fall due for replacement over the next three to five years, namely, LE Emer, commissioned in 1978, LE Aoife, commissioned in 1979 and LE Aisling, commissioned in 1980.
Following a detailed examination of the needs of the Naval Service, a vessel replacement strategy has been put in place to cover the period up to 2012. The vessel replacement strategy combined with a continuous process of refurbishment will ensure that the operational capability of the Naval Service is maintained at a very high level.
Following Government approval in July 2007 to go to tender, notice of a competition for the purchase of replacement vessels for the Naval Service was placed in the Official Journal of the European Union on 24 August 2007. The competition is for the purchase of two offshore patrol vessels, with an option on a third, and one extended patrol vessel, with an option on a second. The options provide an effective value-for-money opportunity, at locked in prices, to provide replacements for Naval Service vessels which will reach the end of their service life in the years immediately following the current replacement programme. The competition uses a restricted procedure which comprises two stages — stage one, a request for proposals, and stage two, an invitation to tender.
The closing date for stage one is 26 October next. Following evaluation of proposals a detailed specification will issue to those invited to participate in stage two. The evaluation of stage one proposals and the preparation of the detailed specification for stage two will be carried out between November 2007 and April 2008. Depending on the quality of the proposals received, a maximum of seven companies will be invited to tender. This invitation to tender is expected to issue in May 2008, with tenders due in July or August. Following detailed tender evaluation, it is intended to award a contract in late 2008.
The decision to proceed with the final award of contract to purchase the vessels will be subject to Government approval and agreement on funding, the full requirement for which will not be known until the tender competition has concluded. However, it is expected that the cost of the three new ships will be of the order of €180 million. The funding arrangements for this will be a matter for further consideration, in consultation with my colleague. the Minister for Finance, in the context of the Estimates process.
It is expected that the vessels will be delivered on a phased basis between 2010 and 2012. The Government is committed to continuous investment in the equipment needs of the Naval Service to enable it to carry out the roles assigned to it. The most recent ships purchased for the Naval Service were the LE Róisín commissioned in 1999 and the LE Niamh commissioned in 2001. The total cost of the two ships was approximately €50 million.
Is it intended to procure a vessel that will be 120 m in length, will be able to provide humanitarian relief and troop support in any part of the world and will be designed for fishery protection purposes? In the event that the Department proceeds to procure three ships, is it correct that the other two vessels will be approximately 80 m in length?
Unfortunately, the Naval Service will need to assume a much greater role in intercepting drugs being smuggled into Ireland. Have factors such as speed and the type of search equipment required to perform this function been taken into consideration in determining the type of naval vessel to be procured?
The two or possibly three offshore patrol vessels will be 80m to 90min length. The extended patrol vessel — wemay exercise an option to procure two such vessels — will be between 130m and 140m.These vessels will be able to perform the tasks to which the Deputy referred, including the provision of humanitarian relief. However, we must work out precisely what functions they will perform.
Drug interdiction, one of the functions of the Naval Service, has been taken into account. The prospect of increasingly adverse weather conditions was also considered. Reports from the Meteorological Office and projections for the future indicate that at least one extended vessel would be required to enable the Naval Service to properly perform its functions.
Will the 2008 Estimates make provision for three new vessels? Is the Minister satisfied that the Naval Service is capable of properly policing the coastline with its current complement of ships, especially in terms of drug interception tasks? I understand the Naval Service will only intercept a vessel if directed to do so as part of a security operation and does not actively seek to intercept ships.
The replacement vessels will be considered as part of the 2008 Estimates. In July this year, the Government authorised me to issue an invitation to tender. This decision is indicative of the Government's adherence to its promise in the White Paper to maintain an eight-ship flotilla.
Policing the coastline is a difficult job and I wish we had three or four times more ships to perform this task. Unfortunately, large amounts of drugs enter Europe from the Caribbean and further afield, some of which are landed in Ireland, with the bulk being landed in Portugal and Spain. The naval protection systems in the Iberian countries and the United States have not proved effective in halting the flow of drugs. I do not know of a country with a coastline which has sufficient security to guarantee that drugs will not enter the jurisdiction. The Government is committed to maintaining a flotilla of at least eight ships and carrying out a substantial programme of refurbishment to ensure that ships are operational during their lifetime. We are examining the possibility of acquiring larger ships and better arming new ships to ensure they can do their job in this regard.
As the Naval Service intercepts vessels as part of a joint operation with the Garda Síochána and Customs and Excise, it must receive direction. I understand the customs authorities are examining how this approach works in practice. It is possible that a revision of procedures will take place in the near future.
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Liz McManus
Ceist:10 Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to concerns expressed by the Ombudsman for Children that the Defence Forces may be in breach of a UN convention on children’s rights by allowing under 18s to participate in armed conflict; his views on the concerns expressed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21998/07]
I am aware of the issues raised by the Ombudsman for Children relating to the optional protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflicts. The optional protocol was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in May 2000. Ireland signed the optional protocol on 7 September 2000 and ratified the instrument on 18 November 2002. In doing this, Ireland agreed to take all feasible measures to ensure that members of the armed forces who have not attained 18 years do not take a direct part in hostilities. Ireland is fully compliant with the optional protocol.
All military personnel who are under 18 years of age are specifically precluded from any service abroad under the terms of the policy of the Defence Forces, as enunciated in Defence Forces administrative instructions. The existing measures are fully effective. The position is that members of the Defence Forces must be over 18 years of age before they are deployed abroad on peace support operations.
The only theoretical circumstance in which a person who has not attained the age of 18 years could be exposed to hostilities would be where hostilities had broken out and were occurring within the State. In practical terms, the only foreseeable circumstances where such an eventuality could possibly occur would be an actual armed attack on a military barracks or during the course of the military providing aid to the civil power. An example of the latter would be the provision of armed military back up by the Army to the Garda where the police are escorting cash en route to banks or escorting certain categories of prisoner from prison to court, etc. However, as general service enlistment is immediately followed by a basic training period of several months before the recruit is passed out as an active member of the Permanent Defence Force, there is no real possibility that a person who has not attained the age of 18 years could be exposed to any hostile incident.
As regards the Reserve Defence Force, there are about 350 or so serving members of the Reserve Defence Force aged 17 years. Members of the Reserve are not accepted as being trained to the minimum standard required for Reserve operations until they have completed their three star private course which is conducted in the second year of service. Therefore, as 17 years is the minimum age for Reserve Defence Force entry, Reserve entrants are not eligible for Reserve operations until they are at least of age 18 years.
I understand that a Government position paper states that the possibility of a member of the Defence Forces aged under 18 years being involved in a hostile incident is virtually negligible. The word "virtually" does not completely preclude this possibility. The Minister appears to be completely satisfied that no member of the Defence Forces aged under 18 years will be involved in pursuing the types of duties he described. Will he provide an absolute guarantee in that regard?
I do so gladly. As I indicated, the regulations prohibit members of the Defence Forces being sent abroad until after their 18th birthday. There is a low theoretical possibility that a person aged under 18 years could be involved in hostilities here. I assure the House that, having discussed this matter with the Chief of Staff when the question was submitted, I have been assured that there is no question of any member of the Defence Forces aged under 18 years ever being exposed to hostile action. The reason recruitment commences at 17 years is to enable the Army to explain the benefits of joining the Defence Forces to those completing the leaving certificate examination.
I thank the Minister for his categorical assurance, which puts the issue to rest.
Question No. 11 answered with QuestionNo. 7.
Reserve Defence Force.
Richard Bruton
Ceist:12 Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Defence the progress that has been made on the creation of the integrated reserve as defined in the White Paper on Defence; the number of personnel now serving in the integrated reserve; the target number of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22083/07]
David Stanton
Ceist:27 Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Defence the establishment and the actual appointments filled in the integrated and non-integrated sections of the Reserve Defence Force respectively; the number of each rank who have attended annual training to date in 2007 in both the integrated and non-integrated sections respectively; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22138/07]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 and 27 together.
The White Paper on Defence 2000 and the Reserve Defence Force review implementation plan of 2002 set out the blueprint for the RDF with an implementation plan extending to 2009. The implementation plan is being rolled out on a phased basis and there has been significant progress in implementing its detailed recommendations, such as a new organisational structure implemented with effect from October 2005 and major improvements in clothing, equipment, training and resourcing. The RDF is now structured along similar lines to the Permanent Defence Force, namely, three brigades and the RDF training centre.
The introduction of the integrated element of the reserve is being addressed in the current year as a pilot exercise across all three brigades. The director of Defence Forces training has issued a comprehensive range of syllabi providing for training of the integrated reserve. The outputs from the pilot exercises are currently being reviewed by the military. This will provide the necessary information to plan for the future development of the integration process.
The numbers participating in the pilot integration training schemes are set out in the form of the following tabular statement. A total of 180 personnel have completed the training to date. While the numbers participating in the integrated reserve have been less than anticipated, I am satisfied that the pilot project marks a significant step forward in implementing the plan. The integration project will be reviewed in the light of experience this year with a view to improved participation in subsequent years.
The breakdown by rank of the establishment for the non-integrated reserve and the number of reservists in each rank who attended annual camp up to 30 September 2007 are presented in the following tabular statements. A total of 4,731 reservists attended camp representing approximately 74,743 man days. I am pleased to inform the House that I have approved a publicity and awareness campaign to promote recruitment to the RDF in line with the commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government. This will commence early in 2008. I am pleased that the implementation plan is progressing well. My Department will continue to monitor progress in the remaining period of the plan.
|
Formation |
Numbers Completed training |
|
2 E Bde |
2 Officers, 21 NCOs, 18 Ptes = 41 |
|
1 S Bde |
5 Officers, 39 NCOs, 23 Ptes = 67 |
|
4 W Bde |
7 Officers, 38 NCOs, 27 Ptes = 72 |
|
Total |
14 Officers, 98 NCOs, 68 Ptes = 180 |
|
Rank |
Man Days |
Numbers |
|
Sgt Major |
373 |
17 |
|
B.Q.M.S. |
479 |
22 |
|
Coy. Sgt. |
1,552 |
91 |
|
C.Q.M.S. |
1,481 |
87 |
|
Sergeant |
9,442 |
573 |
|
Corporal |
11,030 |
663 |
|
Private 3 Star |
17,840 |
1,123 |
|
Private 2 Star |
6,209 |
511 |
|
Private Grade 1 |
14,539 |
918 |
|
Comdt. Engineer |
18 |
2 |
|
Capt. Engineer |
11 |
1 |
|
Comdt. Medical |
14 |
1 |
|
Capt. Medical |
16 |
2 |
|
Lieutenant Commander |
56 |
3 |
|
Lieutenant |
160 |
9 |
|
Sub Lt N.S. |
52 |
5 |
|
Ensign |
97 |
5 |
|
Sen. Chief Petty Officer |
45 |
3 |
|
Chief Petty Officer |
136 |
13 |
|
Senior Petty Officer |
26 |
2 |
|
Petty Officer |
232 |
14 |
|
Leading Seaman |
412 |
22 |
|
Able Bodied Seaman |
631 |
34 |
|
Ordinary Seaman |
859 |
50 |
|
Recruit |
697 |
39 |
|
Lt (Med Min) |
7 |
1 |
|
Lt Col |
77 |
4 |
|
Commandant |
1,303 |
85 |
|
Captain |
2,361 |
151 |
|
Lieutenant |
3,265 |
201 |
|
2nd Lieutenant |
1,323 |
79 |
|
Totals |
74,743 |
4,731 |
|
Lt-Col |
Comdt |
Capt |
Lt |
2/Lt |
Tot Offrs |
SM |
BQ |
CS |
Cq |
Sgt |
Cpl |
Tot NCOs |
Pte |
Grand Total |
|
|
2 E Brigade |
1 |
22 |
57 |
83 |
29 |
192 |
4 |
6 |
32 |
25 |
211 |
286 |
564 |
1,441 |
2,197 |
|
1 S Brigade |
1 |
42 |
68 |
100 |
36 |
247 |
6 |
9 |
46 |
41 |
343 |
497 |
942 |
2,398 |
3,587 |
|
4 W Brigade |
1 |
29 |
59 |
84 |
22 |
195 |
8 |
4 |
34 |
34 |
269 |
464 |
813 |
1,637 |
2,645 |
|
RDFTA |
1 |
4 |
5 |
11 |
0 |
21 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
8 |
0 |
11 |
0 |
32 |
|
Total Army Reserve |
4 |
97 |
189 |
278 |
87 |
655 |
19 |
19 |
113 |
101 |
831 |
1,247 |
2,330 |
5,476 |
8,461 |
|
Naval Service Reserve |
0 |
3 |
10 |
6 |
5 |
24 |
0 |
4 |
13 |
1 |
21 |
38 |
77 |
230 |
331 |
|
Total Reserve Defence Force Strength |
4 |
100 |
199 |
284 |
92 |
679 |
19 |
23 |
126 |
102 |
852 |
1,285 |
2,407 |
5,706 |
8,792 |
|
Establishment Non-Integrated |
3 |
130 |
274 |
277 |
684 |
18 |
18 |
106 |
133 |
838 |
1,723 |
2,836 |
5,772 |
9,292 |
I will be brief, as Deputy Stanton, a former local defence man, wishes to contribute to the debate. How successful is integration and can the difficulties be resolved? Should more people be volunteering for integration from the first line reserve rather than the second line because the first line, comprising former members of the PDF, has been trained and would be more ready for integration than the second line? What target has the Minister set for numbers in the integrated reserve? Does he hope to see many of its members serving abroad, for example? Have any served abroad to date or are there plans for them to serve in future missions?
As time is running out, Deputy Stanton should contribute.
Regarding the 4,000 people going to camp this year and the expenditure incurred by the RDF, has the Minister plans for the RDF's functions? Given the drugs floating in the sea off west Cork and Kerry, would he take on board the idea that the RDF could act as a coastal watch? Does the Minister agree that members of the RDF are anxious to serve and perform roles other than parading and training?
The Deputies raised a number of issues. As recommended in the White Paper, much work has been done to substantially reorganise the reserve, which now mirrors the structure of the PDF. Extra money has been spent on clothing, training, updating equipment, etc. Now that those changes have been made, the process of integration will begin.
The take-up in the pilot programme is disappointing and a long way short of the target, but I hope matters will improve next year. I agree that there are difficulties, but the military assures me that they can be resolved. It is evaluating the experience of the people who took part in the pilot project and working out ways around the difficulties. Integration is voluntary and reservists cannot be forced into becoming part of the integrated reserve. The Army will develop a number of ideas to improve the situation next year.
We are working towards giving the reserve, in particular the integrated reserve, new functions. Deputy Stanton's idea is a good one and I will discuss it with the appropriate authorities.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.