Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

84. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to a report undertaken under item 40A of the White Paper on Defence implementation programme; his plans to act on this report in view of the ongoing effect on retention; the way in which he plans to implement its findings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47256/21]

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question relates to the so-called post-1994 contract within the Permanent Defence Force. Currently, all privates and corporals recruited post 1994 can continue in service only to the end of December of next year or until they reach the age of 50. Sergeants must retire at the end of next year. I understand there is a review within the Minister's Department on this matter. I would like the Minister to set out clearly today what his policy is on this issue.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Military life places unique demands on individuals and it is necessary that Defence Forces personnel are prepared to meet the challenges of all military operations. To this end, it is vital that the age and health profile of personnel be such to ensure operational capability and effectiveness are not compromised in any way. For this reason, compulsory retirement ages for ranks in the Permanent Defence Force are considerably lower than in other employments.  

The age and fitness profile of the Permanent Defence Force was an issue of serious concern during the 1990s and was the subject of severe criticism in a series of external reports such as those compiled by PricewaterhouseCoopers consultants and the efficiency audit group. A range of policies were introduced to ensure an appropriate age profile and levels of fitness. This includes fixed-term contracts for enlisted personnel of certain ranks. 

The White Paper on Defence from 2015 says retirement ages and upper service limits, or both, of Defence Forces personnel of all ranks will continue to be kept under review and determined in accordance with key considerations such as manpower policy requirements, operational needs and international best practice.

This matter was also referenced in the Public Service Pay Commission's report on recruitment and retention in the Permanent Defence Force. In its report, the commission included in its recommendations the need to consider options to tackle barriers to extended participation in the Permanent Defence Force, including the possibility of extending retirement ages for members of the Permanent Defence Force. A detailed review of contracts of service for all enlisted ranks of the Permanent Defence Force, which commenced under the White Paper process, was subsequently subsumed and progressed through the high-level implementation plan, Strengthening our Defence Forces. The review, which is being conducted by civil and military staff, has also taken into consideration the recommendations from an adjudication in 2015, arising from a claim PDFORRA made through the conciliation and arbitration scheme.

A draft report of the review in relation to enlisted personnel was submitted to me very recently. The report has outlined various options and includes a number of recommendations. These recommendations will require Department of Public Expenditure and Reform consideration from a costs and pensions perspective. Discussions with PDFORRA on the recommendations will take place on receipt of its consideration. I hope to meet PDFORRA on this in the coming weeks.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister. I appreciate the fitness profile is important for the Permanent Defence Force but age is no longer the sole determinant of fitness. In general employment, we are moving away from deciding such matters purely on the basis of age. My understanding is approximately 700 personnel may be required to leave the Permanent Defence Force under this clause at the end of next year. They are entitled to be able to do their planning properly. I understand the Minister spoke on this matter in the Seanad this week. In response to Senator Wall and others he said he hoped to be able to make a decision on the post-1994 contracts "soon". He has not said that to me today. Is it still his position that by the end of this year he will be able to give definitive guidance to all those affected by this matter?

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will give the Deputy the information I have, according to my notes on the actual numbers. I have heard the figure of 700 as well but I am advised by military management that as of 1 May 2021 the number of personnel enlisted post 1994, in terms of privates and corporals, in receipt of tech pay group 2 or less and who will have served 21 years or more by the end of 2022 is 195. There may be others in that category from other ranks and so on. I have said to PDFORRA and also said in the Seanad that I would like to provide clarity on this issue before the end of the year. Of course, we have to work with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform as well. This is not solely my Department's decision. Given that this would impact on people by potentially ending their careers in the Defence Forces in December 2022, there is an obligation on me to try to provide clarity well in advance of that date. That is why we would like to have that clarity provided by the end of this year if we can, and maybe even earlier than that. That is a commitment I have given and I will try to follow through on it.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister was very clear in the other House when he said:

I gave a commitment we would do that before the end of the year. We can do that well in advance of the end of the year - within the next few weeks - to be able to give people certainty quite a long way out before the issue comes to a head ...

That was his commitment which I take it he is giving again. My concern is we are heading into a budget. I have some experience in these matters. If there are financial implications to this, will the agreement of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform be required in order for the Minister to give a definitive position by the end of this year? Will he give the House the commitment he will give absolute clarity to whatever number of personnel is involved, be it short of 200 or up to 700, so they and their families can plan their lives with certainty well in advance of the end of next year?

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is the intention. I have spoken to some of the serving personnel in this category and have asked them to be honest with me about their concerns. I have told them I will do everything I can to provide as much certainty for them as early as I can. I have effectively set myself the date for doing this as the end of the year. We will do it earlier if we can, as I said in the Seanad. If we can do it in the next few weeks, that is great. However, Deputy Howlin knows better than most in this House how the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform works. It has a job to do as well. We can get agreement. I expect no big surprise from the recommendations of that Department but we must go through the appropriate processes and ensure we have taken account of the financial consequences of whatever decision we make. I am confident we can provide clarity on this issue before the end of the year and I will do it as soon as we can. The people affected by the decision deserve to be able to plan for the future with the maximum possible lead-in time.