Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senator Landy for raising this issue. As he will be aware, a value for money review of the Reserve Defence Force, RDF, was recently completed and published. The review was undertaken by a steering committee with an independent chair and had representatives from the Department of Defence, Defence Forces and Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. It found that the current effective strength of the Army Reserve and Naval Service Reserve, at 4,500 personnel, was substantially less than half that of the 9,692 personnel for which the organisational structures were designed. In addition, it found that the low uptake of training within the reserve raised serious questions about its current capacity. For example, during 2011 the number of reservists who met paid and unpaid training targets required for the payment of a gratuity was 2,010 personnel.

The steering committee made a series of recommendations which were aimed at ensuring a viable Reserve Defence Force into the future. In this context, a key recommendation was for a major reorganisation of the reserve, with organisational structures that were sustainable within the current resource envelope. Arising from the reorganisation of the Permanent Defence Force, within a strength level of 9,500 personnel, the number of Permanent Defence Force personnel available to support the Army Reserve in a full-time capacity is being reduced to 48. A cadre of a further nine Permanent Defence Force personnel is assigned to support the Naval Service Reserve.

The steering committee recommended an Army Reserve and Naval Service Reserve based on a total strength ceiling of 4,000 personnel, 3,800 of whom would be Army Reserve and 200 of whom Naval Service Reserve personnel. It recommended the retention of a country-wide geographic spread with units in existing Permanent Defence Force installations and 16 locations outside these installations.

I accepted these recommendations and directed that proposals for new organisational structures be prepared. The chief of staff and Secretary General of my Department submitted a joint report which set out detailed re-organisation proposals, including unit structures and the location of reserve units. Their recommendation was based on a single force concept which differs from the current model of reserve organisation. Army units will have permanent and reserve elements rather than a parallel reserve structure as at present.

This approach offers significant advantages in terms of accessing equipment and training. Under this organisational model, the only Army reserve elements outside Permanent Defence Force installations will be reserve infantry companies. All other Army reserve combat support and combat service support elements will be co-located with their PDF counterparts in PDF installations. This will be in Cork in the case of 1 Brigade. Accordingly, it is no longer feasible to retain reserve cavalry or medical elements in Clonmel. The training and support of reserve elements of defence force units located in PDF installations will be undertaken by the PDF element of those units. The 16 reserve infantry companies outside PDF installations will have additional support from 16 teams of full time PDF personnel.

The Senator will appreciate that the consolidation of existing reserve into a small number of full strength units means it is not possible to retain all existing locations. Clonmel was not selected as a location for one of these 16 infantry companies which are distributed throughout the country. I emphasise that this is not a negative reflection on the quality of participation of the current reservists in Clonmel but reflects the reality that all locations cannot be retained.

All members of the reserve will be afforded the opportunity to apply for positions within the new organisational structure, having regard to their particular needs. The closest reserve infantry companies to Clonmel will be based in Waterford, Kilkenny and Templemore. Personnel will be able to avail of retraining should this be required. The overall travel costs of the new reserve units will not be known for some time but I can confirm that no increase in the overarching reserve budget is anticipated or planned. I am satisfied that given a reduction in direct expenditure on the reserve of ¤11 million in 2013, the new reserve will be significantly more cost-effective than the existing organisation.

Finally, I emphasise that the contribution and commitment of each member of the reserve is valued and appreciated. I sincerely hope all members of the Reserve Defence Force will continue to serve within the new organisation. Unfortunately, I cannot accede to the request made by the Senator that we preserve the reserve in Clonmel or that Clonmel remain a location for reserve training.