• Full Story

Army facing pressure of deployments

Print

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:00a.m.

file pic

file pic

The army is stretched and not as prepared as it could be for new deployments, a new report shows.

The Controller and Auditor-General has issued a report looking at three years of The Defence Sustainability Initiative. That was the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) programme to use an extra $4.4 billion of operating funds over 10 years. The new government ended the initiative in December but some of its projects continue.

Last year a Defence Force report painted a picture of it hamstrung by a lack of staff and poor equipment.

Today's report said there had been progress but some ongoing problems.

In her overview, Deputy Controller and Auditor-General Phillippa Smith said NZDF had planned to restrain the number of troops away on deployment.

"NZDF needed the deployment rate to be no more than 11.7 percent of regular force personnel... to ensure that resources would be available to achieve the initiative's objectives."

However it deployed 12.4 percent in the first year, 15.8 percent in the second and 17.2 percent in the third year.

"Sustaining these levels of deployment came at a cost; the army was not able to meet its targets for improving preparedness for potential deployments because more of its personnel were deployed."

The air force and navy were largely able to meet targets, because they had fewer resources deployed.

Rising capital and operating costs eroded the value of the initiative's funding and slowed progress in meeting other targets.

But extra funding allowed more staff to be recruited. The army met its target for increasing numbers but the air force and navy missed by 3 percent and 4 percent respectively.

The army was also able to reduce staff attrition by about 4 percent, but the air force losses increased by 1 percent and the navy by 4 percent.

The navy and air force did surveys on attrition.

The air force found top concerns included career development, workload, leadership, pay and housing.

The navy found workload and stress among the top areas of concern, as well as pay, career opportunities and housing.

The report said higher than planned deployments combined with limited progress in reducing attrition were the main reasons slow progress was made in improving numbers and effectiveness of personnel in critical trades and, for the army, in critical ranks.

"Improvements were needed because these trades and ranks are critical to starting and completing missions safely and effectively," it said.

Good progress was made clearing a backlog of minor capital equipment shortages and stock to be held in case of new deployments.

Operating funds were set aside to recruit personnel for the seven new Protector Fleet vessels.

NZDF centralised corporate services reducing jobs by 370 people.

NZPA

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

14 Sep 2009 05:02p.m.

ghostwhowalks wrote:

Get rid of the artillery. Since its only small calibre (105mm) that sort of size shell can be done by heavy mortars in the back of LAVs .

13 Sep 2009 01:52p.m.

JD wrote:

Hard to say what they actually do these days, the PC brigade would rather them act as social workers, peace keepers and plumbers; reality is, our troops should be out there killing the bad guys in order to prevent them killing the good guys first. Warfare is not that difficult.

13 Sep 2009 04:25a.m.

dave wrote:

can anyone tell me what the nz army actually do ?

12 Sep 2009 07:24p.m.

Salmon wrote:

I also hear that defence is cutting trades and personnel because they can no longer afford to pay people. Sad given they have just acheived there goal of increasing numbers.

10 Sep 2009 03:21p.m.

JD wrote:

The sooner we start to integrate with the Aussie defence force the better. Or at the very least, put some pressure on the US to help provide aid in the form of equipment in return for the help we provide in Afghanistan. I'm sure they must have a bit of surplus gear lying about that we could utilise. Then again, don't we spend as much on benefits and welfare each week, as we spend on our countries defence forces over an entire year.