Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I take on board the point that today we want to keep to Army pensions but as the Minister of State's statement today was quite comprehensive, I gather that he anticipated questions on other areas.

I raised the superannuation arrangements for post-January 2013 entrants with the Minister for Finance in the past week and he was quite sympathetic to the anomaly that exists. Since 1995, Defence Forces officers pay a pay related social insurance, PRSI, class A contribution and their pensions are fully eligible for the social welfare system. Those officers fulfilling the agreed criteria are eligible for a supplementary pension provided for by an agreement in 2009. The retirement age for the rank of commandant was increased from 56 to 58 years to facilitate that arrangement. The Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012 came into operation and I gather from the Department and from the Minister of State that it does not provide for pre-existing superannuation arrangements. Therefore, the terms of the 2009 agreement no longer apply to entrants post-January 2013. The implication of this is that a new entrant to the Defence Forces as an officer from 1 January 2013 who is mandatorily retired at 58 or 60 will have a final benefit pension less the value of the contributory State pension. New entrants will be at the loss of the value of the contributory State pension, which is currently €12,390 until they reach the age of retirement at which that becomes payable.

They are at a loss. It is an anomaly. From what I gather, that issue was not brought up during the negotiations in respect of the 2012 Act. There was an expectation on behalf of the Defence Forces and their representative association that this superannuation arrangement would continue in place, which is no longer the case. This will require funds to fix it, and the Minister of State will be obliged to speak to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Donohoe, to address this issue. An officer who came in post 2013 and who knows that his or her pension will be severely reduced when he or she hits the mandatory retirement age will look to get out earlier. These people will have to find employment at a younger age and start a new career. In light of the retention difficulties we are facing, this is an area that can be addressed with minimal cost. The Minister of State should consider this issue and come back to the committee - and to me personally as Fianna Fáil spokesperson on defence - to give an answer as to how that anomaly is to be addressed.

I want to go through the Minister's statement and the issues raised within it. The main reasons for the shortfall are referred to, and I accept the difficulty in calculating what the pensions are year on year because members can leave voluntarily and at different ages. However, I find it strange that the list of main reasons did not include the issue of retention and the fact that we are losing people at an alarming rate. That is one reason there is a shortfall in the pensions budget. I do not see anything in the Minister of State's statement and still have not seen a physical document that outlines the Department's retention policy. I acknowledge huge effort is being put into recruitment but we are losing people at such an alarming rate that we cannot catch up with ourselves.

In his statement, the Minister of State indicated that the Government is committed to reaching a strength level of 9,500. It is difficult to marry that with the current state of our Defence Forces. They are currently in an extremely poor state. We are losing middle and senior management, that is, experienced people with expertise and skills. Those are the people we need to train the officers and NCOs coming through the recruitment process into which so much effort is being put. Officers who are recruited, go through their cadet school training and come out the other end as second lieutenants still are not fully trained to take up some of the posts they are expected to take up. They do not have the expertise and skills to lean on, in terms of senior personnel to help train them further, to get them to the required level to operate as unit commanders.

On the last page of his statement the Minister of State observed that "continuous recruitment is the lifeblood of the Defence Forces". While I acknowledge this point is not directly related to Army pensions, I must mention the Reserve Defence Force, RDF. If the RDF continues to operate as it does currently, it will cease to exist. It is almost dead and gone. Recruitment continues to be a major issue. While I acknowledge recruitment within the Permanent Defence Force, PDF, is ongoing, the issues concerning RDF recruitment, including getting people through the process of medicals and Garda clearance, have not been rectified. The RDF's strength at the moment is down to just over 1,000 personnel. It pains me to see the organisation struggling to survive as it is. In the near future we will no longer have an RDF unless something is done. I have raised this issue with the Minister of State time and time again. Towards the end of the Minister of State's statement, he noted he is "actively considering the terms and conditions that would allow and encourage former members of the Defence Forces with specialist knowledge ... and expertise to return to service to meet any identified skills gap". We have identified skills gaps. The Air Corps is a clear example of that. We do not have enough pilots or aircraft technicians. We do not have enough members to run a properly functioning Air Corps. The time for actively considering terms and conditions has long passed. That ship has sailed. We need proper, concrete action which will encourage members to stay within the Defence Forces in the Air Corps, Army and Naval Service. We have not seen that to date.

The Minister of State has mentioned that the Government is committed, with the support of the Chief of Staff, to retaining the capacity of the Defence Forces within the resources available. We do not have capacity in the Defence Forces to deliver the service that is required. That is gone and has been lost. It will take years to build up the skills and expertise we have lost. It is a devastating place for the Defence Forces to be. Had this been addressed a number of years ago, we would not be in the position we are in today. We are where we are, however, and still do not have a retention policy. This was made clear to the Minister of State at both the Representative Association of Commissioned Officers, RACO conference and the Permanent Defence Force Other Ranks Representative Association, PDFORRA, conference that took place in recent months. We need a retention policy, and it needs to be implemented immediately.

In the context of the Defence Forces operating effectively, need I mention Rescue 116 and how top cover could not be provided? We could not operate effectively within the Air Corps. We have a new naval ship which we cannot man. We have people in the Army who are double and triple-jobbing.