Dáil debates
Wednesday, 2 June 2010
Priority Questions
Defence Forces Reserve
1:00 pm
Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Question 21: To ask the Minister for Defence if he will appoint a Brigadier General Director of the Reserve Defence Forces in order that the Reserve Defence Forces have a meaningful voice at general staff level [23665/10]
Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In accordance with the Reserve Defence Forces Review Implementation Plan, the Reserve Defence Forces was re-organised along similar lines to the Permanent Defence Force in October 2005. The reserve now mirrors the Permanent Defence Force with the Army Reserve organised within a three brigade structure and a Reserve Defence Forces Training Authority. In addition there is a Naval Service Reserve.
General officers commanding and the flag officer commanding the Naval Service are brigadier generals and a commodore, respectively. They are in command of both permanent and reserve units within their particular formation. Consequently, all units within formations, both permanent and reserve, are represented at general level and there are no plans to appoint an additional brigadier general specifically for the Reserve Defence Forces.
The strength of the Army and Naval Service Reserve at end April 2010 was 6,304. Recruitment to the reserve recommenced in May 2009 after a temporary suspension. Recruitment is ongoing, subject to an overall strength of 7,671 not being exceeded.
As at 30 April 2010, the strength of the Permanent Defence Force was 9,856. Within the available resources, the Government is committed to maintaining the strength of the Permanent Defence Force at a level of 10,000 all ranks, for which Government approval has been secured in the context of budget 2010. This reflects the reductions in personnel recommended in the Report of the Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure Programmes. This reduced strength requires a flexible and adaptive response in order to maintain the delivery of defence services.
The prevailing economic environment and the associated resource constraints have impacted on the entire defence organisation. The financial situation is such that it is not possible to provide the level of resourcing that was available in recent years. Within the reduced resource envelope, the Department and the Defence Forces are working closely to prioritise the operational requirements of the Defence Forces and I fully support this approach.
The Department and the Defence Forces are currently examining options, including re-organisation, to ensure the continued delivery of defence services to the greatest extent possible. At this stage I have received no recommendation regarding the future of the appointment of the director of reserve forces, or any other appointment. I would expect, however, that any recommendation I receive will take account of the current and future requirements of the Reserve Defence Forces.
Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am disappointed with the Minister's reply. The Reserve Defence Forces is aggrieved that it does not have an adequate dispute resolution mechanism similar to that in place in PDFORRA and RACO in terms of the Permanent Defence Force. The reserve is also of the view, rightly or wrongly, that its director should be a member of RACO in that if a brigadier general was to be appointed director, a brigadier general would not be a member of RACO but would be a member of the general staff.
There are major concerns among the members of the Defence Forces Reserve. The recommendations in the McCarthy report to reduce by two thirds its resources and size has not been implemented. The strength of Defence Forces Reserve is now 6,394 compared to 23,000 in 1960. I am sure the Minister will agree that in the context of its strength members of the reserve are concerned that the reserve is under threat and that we are moving towards a point where its viability could be very much in question.
Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am aware of the points made by Deputy O'Shea regarding concerns the reserve and its representatives have. I had a meeting with them and attended its annual general meeting in the Curragh some weeks back. These issues are ongoing and can be addressed over a period of time.
If I were to look back at the recommendations in the White Paper, produced almost ten years ago, and the plan that was implemented in 2005, it seems that all the key components have been acted on and at this point perhaps we need to look to the future of the reserve in the context of a new White Paper. It seems open to the interpretation that the plan that was implemented and agreed has not been as successful as one might have hoped. That is something we want to resolve. The position of the Reserve Defence Forces is important and one to which we are committed. We want to have the best possible outcomes in that regard.
Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Can the Minister assure us that the issue of the appointment of a director of the Reserve Defence Forces will be part of the discussions on the White Paper, which is in preparation, and the value for money review? In the context of achieving value for money, it could best be achieved if members of the reserve were happy in terms of from where the director of the reserve is appointed, which would improve morale. It is now very low, if not at all time low.
Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As the Deputy will know, in many respects tensions are not always negative. If the effect of them is to impact negatively on morale, that is something worth considering. Work on the White Paper is not yet under way. There will be an opportunity for the reserve and its representatives to have a positive impact in that respect. I have undertaken that account will be taken of its concerns and recommendations prior to the finalisation of the value for money report. There is an acknowledgement that they have concerns and that account will be taken of them.