Mr. Patrick Mulley:

On the budgetary allocation, we are down to €2,150,000 in the Estimates for this year. In contrast, that is half the cleaning bill for cleaners engaged by the Defence Forces. When one looks at the phone bill, it is four times what is allocated to ourselves. In that context, it is a straight-line graph which has been going down since 2012.

On fulfilling the numbers in the recruitment, we have a situation now where we are not maintaining the numbers we had originally. Even though we had 150 recruits who crossed the threshold, got in and got a boot on their foot last year, the system that is in place is now very elongated and we are taking nearly 12 months to bring somebody in, from first contact until he or she finally reaches attestation. That is too long for any voluntary organisation.

As regards the reinstatement of the resource allocation, as the financial situation improves in the country, we would be delighted that an allocation would be improved also for the RDF. The bottom line here is that if it is a set allocation, then that is all we can do. We cannot recruit any more. We do not have the clothing for them, we do not have the footwear for them and we will not have the places for them if the allocation is not increased.

The other factor going forward to 2030 would be that the RDF needs a functionality. As the Chairman said on the previous occasion, one cannot be training and then do nothing with the training. We need a framework whereby those who will make decisions at some time in the future at these reviews will set out the functionality. Even if it is only barracks duties or whatever kind of in-house duties we can carry out, that would fulfil some role for a start.

The interesting part is the specialist Reserve that is talked about in the White Paper. We have many specialists. Even in smaller units, we have a range of specialists, from carpenters to scientists. If those reservists were utilised in a role at home before they had any role overseas or anything like that, it would be a step in the right direction. It is difficult for the professional combat soldier commander to turn around and say he or she has 20 RDF members for Friday next. It is difficult for them to get to that point because we all are engaged in our own employment. The fundamental element to address that is employment legislation. If one can guarantee that one can take 20 guys out of their jobs on Friday next for a week and that they will be in their job the following Friday, then there is no problem. That professional soldier will say to himself that he can count on those RDF members, that is where he has a gap and that is how he can fill it. It is not pie in the sky to say that we need employment legislation. The committee members will be well aware at this stage that there are zero contract hours and all sorts of turn-up-when-you-can type contracts. Anybody who is in a job will not risk his job and would be foolish to do so. The more responsible members of the RDF are those who would be in good jobs.

Going back to one of the questions Deputy Ó Fearghaíl asked earlier on the benefits to the personnel themselves, we would see tremendous benefits to the community. We would see tremendous benefits to the personnel themselves. Over the years, very few who have been through the RDF or, as it was previously, the FCA, ever ended up behind bars or anything like that. One or two might have along the way but I can assure the committee that there were very few because we are a little community in ourselves.

In summary, we would see employment legislation, whatever shape that might take at any future date, as essential to reassure members of the Permanent Defence Force that they can call and rely on the RDF to do a job. We would see that the reinstatement of the resource allocation would greatly enhance what we can do within that budget framework.