Like Deputy Lipper I would like, on behalf of my party, for which I have the honour of being spokesman for the Department of Defence, to pay tribute to our Defence Forces at home and abroad for their dedication and loyalty. I would like also to take this opportunity of placing on record my appreciation of the courtesy and co-operation I have always received as spokesman for this Department from members of the Defence Forces and officials of the Department. During the time of the very dangerous situation in the Lebanon when I sought information it was very freely given to me. I want to place on record my very deep appreciation of that co-operation.
There are a few points I want to make to the Minister. I take it that the Estimate is geared at providing the full establishment strength of our Defence Forces. As we have not realised the establishment target which, as far as the Defence Forces are concerned, is 17,409 men, there is a saving. This was the establishment figure on 31 March last. As a result of a parliamentary question and information which I received I was told on that occasion that we had 12,623. The figure set by the Minister for the Army is 15,157 during the same period and we have 11,219 officers and men. The indications are, even though there is an increase in the estimate, that there is a saving in relation to that aspect of it. On 30 September 1977 we had 13,412 men in the Army, which is a drop of 2,200 now. During that time we recruited 4,272 men so the net loss in trained men is 6,500. That indicates a trend I am very concerned about. What does the Minister propose to do about this?
I had discussions recently with some of the personnel involved. I tried to ascertain from them and from people who had the experience of what the problems were and why this trend is so obvious. I gather from a remark made to me that there is a change in their duties which have been arduous and long. As somebody put it to me, they were busmen, binmen and bank men and this is a complete change from the purpose for which they joined the Army. Also they have very long hours of duty. This is an area which the Minister could examine and probably improve.
We have a reserve force, the FCA, of approximately 20,000, as was stated in reply to a recent question. This figure would be inflated because a number of them are not active. However, we have a force here whose activities we could extend. We have assigned to the FCA 1,000 officers. I hope they will do a good job and that the Minister will consider the possibility of extending their role and examining the overall situation to find out how they can be employed better.
Under subhead H there is an increase for this year. This is something in which I have some concern. It is in relation to defensive equipment, motor transport vehicles, aircraft, helicopters and ships, all imported. During the past few months I was trying to get information by way of parliamentary question to the Minister to ascertain the situation in relation to the Timoney armoured car and the prospect of having this sort of equipment manufactured at home and so help the serious balance of payments situation. This would be a major contribution. I am afraid that the information I got from the Minister did not get to the root of the situation, but beidh lá eile. Last year the Minister's predecessor stated in the estimates that he had provision for a down payment on a twin-engined helicopter. This would mean that the delivery of this was imminent. I was informed in answer to a parliamentary question that consideration was being given to the leasing of such an aircraft. It takes so long to get this and that is why I am questioning about it. Considering that between leasing, loaning and buying an executive jet such an aircraft can be provided by the Government with all haste, I want to know exactly why it takes so long to provide these other aircraft.
I am glad that an attempt is being made to modernise the Air Corps. Here, as in other areas in the Defence Forces, we have casualties. I take this opportunity to sympathise with the relatives of the pilots who were killed in Gormanston in the course of their duty. The Air Corps are also suffering a loss of manpower, with 650 instead of 1,155, which is the full establishment strength. Here again the trend shows clearly. We are very inadequate as far as long-range rescue aircraft are concerned and over the last year the RAF had to be called on to provide such a service on no less than nine occasions. In the course of that year we had 61 air and sea rescue missions. I put to the Minister that the Army and the Air Corps in that regard provide a very valuable and useful service to the public at large. In their work in, for example, providing services for the health boards, transferring patients from places far removed from central hospitals and so on, they have provided that sort of service. The charge is quite expensive. I think, subject to correction, that it would be somewhere in the region of £160 per hour. Our Defence Forces provide a security service for the banks without charge or fee. That is wrong. Some institutions in this State make huge profits—it was quoted recently that one of them made approximately £40 million in one year—and the State is asked to provide a service for them. I compliment the Army and the Air Corps for the service they are providing to the State in the cases that I have mentioned. They are being paid for it and other organisations in the State have to pay for the security, and the banks do not. I would like the Minister to comment on that because it is difficult to get all the information through parliamentary questions.
When I expressed concern at the dwindling numbers in the Naval Service the Minister said that the numbers were the highest ever. I was glad that, at the launching of a vessel at Haulbowline recently, the Minister at least accepted and realised that there was a problem here, that the numbers are difficult to keep and that it is difficult even to reach the establishment figure. This problem must be attended to immediately. The strength of the Naval Service is well below the establishment figure and the duties have increased since we became members of the EEC. From 11 January 1977 their activities will have taken them over 130,000 square miles, which is about four times the size of this island. The Minister certainly could examine the conditions in this area, their duties, pay and so on. Since the establishment was increased by the Minister since he came into office, what have we achieved? Is there any increase in real terms? As far as the Naval Service is concerned we have not any advanced planning or programme. Due to the technical nature of the Naval Service you cannot walk out on the street and just pluck the people with the technical qualifications and land them into a job. It takes long-term planning rather than instant recruiting of naval personnel. Last year, 1979, the service was 36 officers short. In June of this year what is the improvement in that position? I understand that six officers have been recruited and four have left or retired from the service. Equally serious is the position regarding men. We are 150 short and the Minister recruited 161 this year but in the same period 102 left the service. In addition the Minister has increased the establishment by 240. The gap is getting progressively worse. In 1977 the difference in real terms between the number of personnel we had and the establishment figure was 98.5 per cent. In 1978 it was 81 per cent and in 1979 it was 78 per cent. The point which I am making to the Minister is that that trend goes right through the forces.
The Minister's commitment is shown quite clearly in the number of apprentices he has. The establishment says there should be 72 qualified engine room people. Actually he has 23. As an emergency measure, 26 are being pushed through in the AnCO training centres. I am subject to correction, but I believe the salary paid to one of those qualified engineroom artificers represents an increase of £7 per week. That seems a very small difference in remuneration for somebody who is qualified as against somebody who is not qualified. It takes a considerable length of time to attain the necessary qualifications.
The debate is confined through no fault of anybody. There is an agreement between the Whips. I do not want to go into that in detail. I want to comment on our armed forces and I want to deal specifically with the Army. It was a retrograde step for any Minister to discontinue the ceremonial parades we had and the displays by our Army personnel. If we had something like an Easter parade, we could show our armed forces on the streets and the people would see and realise that this is a noble career. Parents could take their children to see these parades and people would get to know more about the Army and Army life.
The Minister has said this is not possible for security reasons. That could be overcome by the suggestion I made earlier about the FCA and the reserve forces. I am very concerned about this aspect of recruitment. It would do more good than all the advertisements in the papers and on television. Those advertisements are a bit misleading. They do now show exactly what people joined the Army for. They do not show the duties which are assigned to them which they did not join to do.
I should like to pay tribute to the Women's Corps and to wish them success. Progress is slow and that is a difficulty. I should like to have time to pay the tribute to the people in Civil Defence which they deserve. I see a very serious and dangerous trend so far as our Army and our Defence Forces are concerned. People who are being recruited are not staying in the force. The Minister said the attractions of civilian life are too great and people are being attracted out of the Army. If that is the case, the Minister has a duty to make the Army equally as attractive, and to provide careers which will attract young people to join the armed forces. Could I ask the Minister to excuse me? I have to go. I do not intend any reflection on anyone.