Imagine if the firefighters threatening industrial action last week were not protesting about pay and conditions, but about the State's policy towards lives threatened in a blaze? A policy that displayed little interest in protection of property or resources, and a policy which left such firefighters understaffed, without adequate equipment, and hampered by a suspicious and paranoid bureaucracy that traced their every public statement?
Imagine the reaction, then, among such a workforce if the politician responsible for them told them to stop whining and make the most of what they still have - even as buildings continued to smoulder throughout the State.
Last month, the Minister for Defence, Michael Smith, took such an approach to a more highly skilled and flexible group of public servants - with all due respect to the Fire Service. In a veiled response to recent media coverage of the current staffing and equipment crises within the Naval Service and Air Corps, the Minister expressed concern that the new £24 million naval patrol ship, which is due for delivery later this year, was being presented by its lucky recipients as a "liability".
As this newspaper reported recently, the staffing crisis within the Naval Service is so acute - at a current attrition rate of 10 personnel, or one per cent, per month - that one of the existing seven ships may have to be tied up to allow for sufficient trained crew for the new vessel. The Flag Officer, who is answerable to the Minister, has denied that this is a possibility.
Both defence force organisations, Representative Association of Commissioned Officers (RACO) and PDFORRA, representing the ranks, have repeatedly expressed concern about the staffing situation. Yet the Minister suggested in Portlaoise in mid-May that the representatives were not speaking for all their members, and criticised those who used "prominent opportunities to make the Defence Forces look as if we are cry babies, with no potential to do the sort of things that we are doing for the country as a whole".
Only two years ago, the same politician was almost moved to tears himself on the issue, when fighting a general election campaign. Then Fianna Fail marine and defence spokesman, Michael Smith spoke eloquently and with great passion about the undeveloped potential of marine resources and the crying need for a larger fleet and more crew. In November 1995, the Fine Gael/Labour/DL coalition had backtracked on a promise by its former marine and defence minister, Hugh Coveney, to buy up to three extra naval patrol ships, and had ordered just one.
The marine potential, and the State's inability to either develop it or protect it for future generations to do so, is a popular soundbite for politicians in opposition. They have plenty of facts at their disposal, such as the estimated £2 billion worth of fish caught by foreign vessels in Europe's second largest sea area; the increasing conflict on such fishing grounds, with rammings now commonplace off the south-west coast; the constant risk of pollution, similar to the 1987 Kowloon Bridge incident; and the responsibilities towards search and rescue, one of the most dramatic in recent years being the Air India disaster.
Perhaps the most alarming fact is the lack of resources for drug interdiction. It has been estimated that traffickers have almost 20 times greater chance of landing contraband undetected in onshore or offshore locations around this coast than anywhere else in Europe. Recent apprehensions, mainly by the Customs and Excise Service and the Garda, are said to reflect only a fraction of the activity in an international trade which is second only to the arms business in size, and which is more lucrative than trade in oil.
As Lieut Cmmdr Mark Mellett noted in a recent contribution to the current An Cosantoir Review, this State has Europe's smallest navy or coastguard. The policing capacity of the Naval Service's seven ships is equivalent to one Garda patrol car for the whole island of Ireland.
The most recent of successive Government reviews, the Price Waterhouse report, has identified such requirements and the need for a multi-skilled Naval Service for non-military functions. It has recommended a £235 million reequipment plan for the Naval Service and Air Corps, and an increase in Naval Service staff to 1,144, with additional crew for the new ship. This additional figure is still being negotiated.
Price Waterhouse, which took an accountants' approach and did not spend considerable time at sea, was largely sympathetic to the current concerns, but laid emphasis on value for money. Lieut Cmmdr Mellett, who has just stepped down as RACO naval committee representative, emphasises that the Naval Service is willing to change, if permitted - and already the taxpayer is being well rewarded for what he or she gets. New sophisticated boarding techniques and technical skills in uncovering hidden holds on fishing vessels are examples of this, he says. Several vessels in the seven-ship fleet have paid for themselves in the amount of fishery fines accrued by the State.
The Government has accepted the plan in principle, but in practice there are already attempts to "cherry pick" it. An implementation plan drawn up by the Naval Service is now lodged in Defence Force headquarters, with no sign of further movement.
Meanwhile, staff continue to leave, taking up offers in various professions including information technology and management, and the service is having difficulty filling posts in the current competitive employment climate. Resignations have outstripped recruitment since 1996, and continue to do so, and some two-thirds of the present strength has been inducted since 1990. A recruitment campaign to fill 168 sanctioned vacancies generated 128 applications, of whom 84 were found suitable at interview. Only 34 have succeeded in the medical and physical training tests to date.
The service is short of some 48 officers, with the most acute area being watchkeepers. Last year the situation was so bad that the service was given permission to use direct entry to attract watchkeepers from outside the State. Of the nine taken in, one has left and one is about to leave.
The Department of Defence has been asked to fund a special advertising campaign, given that most other industries now have to advertise heavily for staff. The department's response is that such expenditure must come from within the overall Defence Force advertising budget.
IF the lack of political commitment, combined with the current economic climate, and a territorial attitude within the Army towards any significant change, are cited as the main reasons for the navy's staffing problems, there is another factor. Those who have opted to leave without availing of full pension rights also cite changing expectations.
"Leisure time is now set at more of a premium," said one. "When I was in the Naval Service, two years at sea was compensated for by the guarantee of two years ashore on rotation. Now that can no longer be depended upon - ironically because of the staffing shortage." Officers will stand in for each other on significant family occasions, but it cannot always be guaranteed.
The view among those still serving and those who have left is that the Naval Service should still be an attractive job.
Significantly, a recent survey carried out by the international Nautical Institute on recruiting and retaining seafarers found that marriage was not a major factor in deck officers quitting the job and coming ashore. The major factor was, and still is, fatigue and stress.
