Vol. 1030 No. 1
1. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Defence the interaction between the Naval Service and the Air Corps in relation to the new CASA aeroplanes due to be delivered to the Irish Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [58338/22]
Will the Minister outline to the House the interaction between the Naval Service and the Air Corps on the new CASA aeroplanes due to be delivered to the Irish Defence Forces next year?
My priority as Minister for Defence is to ensure that the operational capability of the Defence Forces is maintained to the greatest extent possible so as to enable the Defence Forces to carry out their roles as assigned by the Government. Capability equipment requirements are kept under ongoing review in light of present and expected operational needs.
The White Paper on Defence 2015 provides for the replacement of the two CASA C-235 maritime patrol aircraft with larger more capable aircraft that would enhance maritime surveillance and provide a greater degree of utility for transport and cargo-carrying tasks. The Department of Defence follows a rigorous systematic process to ensure that military equipment that is procured meets the capability requirements as identified by the Defence Forces. As part of the acquisitions process, a number of working groups were set up to consider, assess and make recommendations on the specific capabilities of the replacement aircraft. A maritime working group was established, made up of members of the Air Corps, the Naval Service and the Sea-Fisheries Protection Agency, SFPA, who were involved in identifying and confirming the high-level requirements that the replacement aircraft should deliver. The maritime group made numerous recommendations, including the required range for various activities, surveillance, communication and navigation equipment and ground support facilities. The recommendations of the maritime working group and other stakeholders were taken into consideration in establishing the final high-level requirements for the aircraft.
Following a competitive tender competition, a contract was awarded to Airbus Defence and Space in December 2019 for delivery of two CASA C-295 maritime patrol aircraft in 2023 at a cost of some €228 million, inclusive of VAT. Both aircraft are now at an advanced stage of production with the first aircraft making its first flight in September 2022.
With regard to the operational requirements for maritime patrol aircraft and the requirements of the Naval Service, it is the case that the Naval Service, as the State's principal sea-going agency, is tasked with a variety of defence and other roles. The main day-to-day tasking of the Naval Service is to provide a fishery protection service in accordance with the State's obligations as a member of the European Union. It also carries out a number of other non-fishery related tasks in tandem with maritime surveillance and, as such, any Naval Service patrol should be viewed as a multifaceted activity. In terms of fishery protection, the Naval Service is tasked with patrolling all Irish waters from the shoreline to the outer limits of the exclusive economic zone, EEZ.
We are over time. The Minister will contribute again.
These aeroplanes are due next year. We have been through a long and torturous process to make sure they are right.
The Minister might be aware that the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence recently visited the Air Corps in Baldonnel. I extend my sincere thanks to Brigadier General Rory O'Connor, his staff and Air Corps members for hosting the committee, for the briefings and engagement and for taking the time to speak with us and share their views and ambitions for the future of the Air Corps. It was outlined to us that the new aeroplanes due to be delivered next year will have the capability to see sub-surface to a depth of approximately 20 m, giving the Air Corps the ability to see items and activities of various descriptions in movement or stationary below sea level. As I am sure the Minister will agree, this presents us with significant opportunities. I understand also that there are add-ons available to allow for further depth capability to be incorporated later. There is a duality of benefit to these craft from both the perspective of the Air Corps and the Naval Service. However, I am concerned that the current vacancy rates in the Naval Service and the Air Corps may inhibit our ability to maximise the potential use of these craft.
This are a lot more than the aircraft, if Deputy Clarke knows what I mean. Much of the expense is in kitting out the aircraft with the kind of equipment to which the Deputy referred, for example, a very advanced camera system that has the capacity not only to search the sea surface but also under the surface of the sea to a considerable depth. I have been asked repeatedly if it really costs nearly €230 million to provide two new CASAs, but it is not just the hull of the aeroplanes but the equipment, in particular, the camera equipment and other search and rescue equipment on them, that is so expensive. They will considerably improve our capacity from an Air Corps and a maritime surveillance perspective, as well as giving us medium-range capacity to carry cargo. The hull of these aeroplanes is significantly longer and bigger than the current CASAs.
Given the change in technology outlined by the Minister in the capability of these aeroplanes, is he open to or has he had any discussions on the potential for a co-location site for the Naval Service and Air Corps? The changing capabilities in both areas could provide potential benefits to the State in terms of policing, maritime security, the security of cables, as we have discussed repeatedly in the Chamber, and the importation of contraband, which we all want to see brought to an end. Has the Minister had those conversations with either the Department of Defence or management within the Defence Forces? Is it something he would consider in more detail in the future?
There is, and there needs to be, a lot of interaction between the Air Corps and the Naval Service because they work together daily on maritime surveillance. When a CASA aircraft is in the air, those on board speak to the Naval Service and there is co-ordination in Haulbowline on fisheries protection observation. I do not know if Deputy Clarke has had a chance to visit the fisheries surveillance centre in the naval base in Haulbowline, but it is pretty impressive. The Air Corps and the Naval Service work in tandem on a daily basis in the context of the work they are doing.
We also have a plan to ensure the Army Ranger Wing is expanded in the context of the commission report. In the future, it will have training facilities in both the naval base and in Baldonnel. If I get recommendations from the Defence Forces that we should do more in the area of training interoperability or combined sites for training and so on, of course we will look at those. At the moment, the partnership and co-operation between those two arms of the Defence Forces - the Naval Service and the Air Corps - is working well.
2. Deputy Gino Kenny asked the Minister for Defence if he will provide an update on the progress of the interim report by the independent review group into sexual abuse in the Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [57624/22]
My question is on the interim report by the independent review group on sexual abuse in the Defence Forces. This is the most serious of matters. The Women of Honour group has brought this to the attention not only of the Army but also the State. It wants an update on the interim report, which the Minister has probably seen.
I thank Deputy Gino Kenny for raising this question as it gives me an opportunity to put on the record of the House where we are in this regard.
This is a very serious issue from my perspective that we are trying to deal with comprehensively.
As the Deputy will be aware, I am committed to ensuring every member of the Defence Forces is able to carry out his or her duties in a workplace underpinned by dignity and equality. The judge-led independent review group, which I established last January following Government approval, is examining the systems, policies and procedures for dealing with issues relating to bullying, discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment and sexual misconduct in the Defence Forces as well as the prevailing workplace culture. I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that this review is a necessary and critical first step to address the need for a safe work environment for serving members, with zero tolerance for such unacceptable behaviour. The serving members of the Defence Forces expect nothing less.
I have received nine updates from the independent review group, including when it asked for a fourth member to assist it in completing its work. This request was approved. In line with the terms of the review, I have also been briefed via an interim report and at the request of the group, although this report will not be published given the group’s work is not complete. It would be inappropriate, therefore, for me to discuss this interim report. The work of the independent review group is entirely independent, in keeping with the terms of reference. The group has full independence and autonomy to undertake its body of work under its chair, Ms Justice Bronagh O’Hanlon.
I assure the Deputy that the work of the group is ongoing and the final report is expected to be submitted to me before the end of the year, in line with the terms of reference. The terms of reference for the review are wide-ranging and provide that the Government may consider further work on receipt of the independent review findings. As I said, I am eager for this work to conclude and I reiterate that the final report will be brought to the Government before being published. I look forward to the report forming the basis of the next stage of actions to deal with this issue.
As the Minister noted, these allegations are of the utmost seriousness in regard to our Defence Forces. There is a frustration in respect of the interim report. The Women of Honour, who have made these allegations, would like to see that interim report and I think they have every justification in that regard. My understanding is that a number of other victims have come forward in the meantime to make allegations of the most serious nature against individuals in the Defence Forces. It is imperative for the process to proceed with confidence that the women see this interim report, where it is going and whether it is going in the direction they would like. We want accountability and justice for the women who have been subjected to this awful conduct in the Defence Forces.
I understand that sentiment and I understand people wanting to know the status of the report and the direction of travel in terms of thought and recommendations. The independent review group itself asked that the interim report would not be published, because its work is not complete. Publishing, therefore, or making publicly available work that has not concluded or been finalised is something it was concerned about. We do not have much longer to wait, and in a few weeks we will have the full report. I hope to be able to act on that quickly. I expect the report will respond with the seriousness we would expect to the stories the group has been hearing and the evidence it has collected. I encourage all interested parties to interact with the independent review group to ensure it will get as complete a picture as possible in order that it can make recommendations that can allow the Defence Forces to move forward and the Government to make the appropriate decisions. I said at the start of this process that the independent review group was not going to be the start and the end of the process. The group is going to map out the course of actions we should take on foot of the evidence it has looked at, and I hope to be able to move to that phase as soon as we get the report and I bring it to the Government.
From the outset, there have been issues with the terms of reference of the review. I understand that witnesses cannot be compelled, so there is something of a failure in that regard. If the Women of Honour, at this juncture, do not have full confidence in the review group and its interim report, that sets alarm bells ringing. The people who have made these allegations will not be included in the interim report, and that could lead to a failure.
I acknowledge that the Minister said this is neither the beginning nor the end of the process but rather that it is a process that seeks accountability for the grave actions these women were subjected to. It is important, therefore, for the Women of Honour to be given confidence and transparency in respect of a report that is ultimately about them. It is about what happened to them and their peer group, so it is important they have confidence in the process.
That is true. This group is, of course, looking at historical cases and at how we should deal with them in a comprehensive manner to establish the truth and so on. It is also looking at current practices within the Defence Forces, as well as the culture and procedures within the body. As an employer, I have an obligation towards people who are currently serving in the Defence Forces to ensure I act on recommendations to modernise the organisation, to change a culture that has been there and that needs to change and to ensure that everything from complaints procedures to dealing with historical investigations and so on will be dealt with in a comprehensive way.
That is what the review group is doing and it has spoken to many serving and former Defence Forces personnel. I certainly hope the Women of Honour group will interact fully with this independent review group in order that its recommendations can be trusted by all interested parties. That is what we are trying to do here. Nothing is hidden about this. There are no agendas, apart from seeking to establish the truth and make appropriate changes for the future.
3. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Defence the measures he and his Department are implementing or intending to implement to stem the exodus of doctors from the Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [58339/22]
4. Deputy Cathal Berry asked the Minister for Defence the current number of medical officer vacancies; the extent to which this is impacting on Defence Force operations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [58477/22]
Will the Minister outline the measures he and his Department are implementing, or intend to implement, to stem the exodus of doctors from the Defence Forces, the current vacancy rate in that section and the extent of the impact on Defence Forces operations?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 and 4 together.
I am informed that, contrary to what has been suggested, there is no exodus of doctors from the Defence Forces. Medical officers are recruited into the Defence Forces via two streams, direct entry and the military medicine training scheme, which is a five-year training programme leading to dual specialisation in both military medicine and general practice. The establishment figure for medical officers is 28, which includes the position of psychiatrist and for which a civilian consultant psychiatrist is employed. I am informed the current strength of Defence Forces medical officers is 22, of whom three are undertaking the military medicine training scheme. Medical officers participating in this scheme rotate every six months between Defence Forces and civilian general practice placement and, as such, they are considered as 0.5 whole-time equivalents, giving an effective Defence Forces medical officer strength of 20.5, plus one civilian psychiatrist. There are currently 6.5 vacancies.
I am informed, however, that recruitment for medical officers remains ongoing and that four applicants have been successful via a recent direct-entry competition. One of these was recently commissioned and a further three are in the process of being security-cleared. In addition, the first two doctors are due to graduate from the military medicine training scheme during 2023 and will become full-time medical officers in the Defence Forces.
The Defence Forces acknowledge the key enabling role medical officers play in respect of operations to ensure a layered level of medical cover for all operations undertaken.
Specifically with regard to overseas, medical services provided to Defence Forces personnel are dependent upon the size of the troop deployment and the overall medical services provided as part of the mission. On larger missions, for example, the Defence Forces medical corps provides routine primary healthcare, specialised first aid, interim emergency surgery treatment, resuscitation, stabilisation of casualties and short-term holding of casualties until they can be returned to duty or evacuated. On smaller missions, these services may be provided by medical corps personnel from other forces participating in the mission. The recruitment and retention of trained medical personnel, as with other specialist areas within the Defence Forces, continues to be a major priority.
Listening to what the Minister said and reading what has been reported, I have the impression that there are two very different experiences of this issue. What has been reported is deeply concerning and would reflect the wider retention of experienced personnel in the Defence Forces.
To follow up on what the Minister said, the established number of medical officers is 28. He said 22 officers are currently in place. How many of those 22 officers are available in the here and now? This includes those on any form of absence, in service in any other jurisdiction, on illness or maternity leave or anything else along those lines. It has been reported that just nine medical officers are available. This is vastly different from what the Minister said. If one version is correct and the other incorrect, that needs to be reflected. It was reported in the media that nine were available.
All I can do is-----
I am sorry; I will take Deputy Berry first and come back to the Minister.
I hope I can shed some light on the issue Deputy Clarke raised with the Minister. I completely accept that the Minister can only use the information he is given. Having been a medical officer, I probably have slightly more accurate information that may be able to shed some light on proceedings. First, there should be approximately 32 medical officers in the Defence Forces. I am not sure where the figure of 28 came from. Without splitting hairs, however, approximately one third or 30% of medical officer posts are vacant at the moment. In the HSE, approximately 20% of consultant posts are vacant and that is causing mayhem. The Minister can imagine, therefore, the carnage in the medical corps as a result of its even higher proportion of vacancies.
I am particularly concerned about news from Syria over the past few weeks where, during a window of five or six weeks, there was no medical corps officer available. This is unprecedented in Irish peacekeeping history. The question is how we solve the retention problem because there is an exodus. Retention is primarily about pay from a medical officer point of view. I will give the Minister a quick example. The Irish Prison Service advertised for doctors earlier in the summer. It was offering €147,000 per year, plus a plethora of allowances, for doctors whereas medical corps doctors are paid half that amount. Will the Minister intervene with his Cabinet colleagues to ensure medical officers are paid at least on a par with other uniformed services in the public service?
I got the statistics I cited directly from the Defence Forces. Let us be clear on that. As it happens, I have my monthly recruitment and retention meeting with the general staff today. Every month now, I have a scheduled meeting on recruitment and retention with key leaders in the Defence Forces. We will keep having those meetings until we turn the tide on recruitment and retention challenges. There is pressure with regard to medical staff, just as there is with many other specialties in the Defence Forces and across the rest of the public sector. I listened earlier to a discussion on "Morning Ireland" about psychiatric nurses and so on. We have many pressures across the public sector. The Deputy might look at the recruitment campaign for An Garda Síochána this year. When a country is at full employment, skill sets are in demand across the private sector and people are being headhunted out of the Defence Forces and offered alternative careers, we face a challenge. The numbers I outlined are from the Defence Forces.
The United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, UNDOF, is an issue I have asked about. I am informed that a medical officer was deployed to UNDOF on 12 November. The UNDOF medical section now comprises one medical officer, one paramedic and two combat medical technicians, which is full strength. It is important to put that on the record. I have heard all sorts of social media commentary and so on with regard to a lack of medical support on the UNDOF mission. That is the factual position. If there was delay in getting medical staff on to that mission, I will certainly look at why that happened. There have been challenges with the pace of recruitment and getting medicals done, particularly with the Reserve Defence Force recruitment campaign over the summer. That is a source of some frustration. We need to look at outsourcing some medicals as part of recruitment and induction campaigns. I thank the Deputies for their insight.
I genuinely believe the Minister read out the figures as they have been presented to him. There is no question about that. At the monthly meeting this afternoon, to which he referred at a meeting of the joint committee, I respectfully suggest that he clarify whether four doctors left in the six weeks in the run-up to the beginning of November. What is the current financial outlay on the use of locums? This information will enable us to get to the bottom of this because the figures in the public domain are vastly different and there is a real need at this point to establish the facts in this case. I am in no way insinuating that the Minister has not given us the facts as presented to him. Questions need to be answered here, however. If there is an issue with doctors leaving the Defence Forces to go to the Prison Service or any other issues, a specific plan of action needs to be put in place. It is unfair to new recruits to the Defence Forces and those who currently serve in terms of the continuity of care.
I want to double up on Deputy Clarke's comments by fully accepting the Minister's bona fides with regard to the figures. He mentioned that there are two pathways into the medical corps, direct entry and the military medicine training scheme. There is a third lesser known pathway. It is the one through which I joined the medical corps and one of the current medical officers is in a similar situation. He is a GP who came back from Syria where he had been for the past six months. He joined the artillery corps 20 years ago and took a career break. He funded himself through medical school, did his internship and GP training and then rejoined the Defence Forces. Perhaps at the meeting this evening, the Minister could discuss whether we could further explore and expand this third pathway. We know the Defence Forces send officers to college to study engineering, electronics, languages and commerce. Medicine is not included in the list of eligible courses, however. Will the Minister consider including medicine on the list of university courses in order that we can make maximum use of the homegrown talent that already resides in the Defence Forces?
I expect the figures I outlined to be true, regardless of what is being said on social media platforms or in other media outlets. If they are not correct, there is obviously an issue. I expect the numbers I outlined are factually correct, however.
We need to get an awful lot better at recruitment and retention in the Defence Forces in terms of how we manage people. That is why we have approval now to move ahead with the recruitment of a head of transformation and head of HR in the Defence Forces. Both of those positions are likely to be civilians who will bring outside expertise to work with the Chief of Staff, general staff and others within the Defence Forces to look at improving our recruitment and retention rates. We are planning for that.
To be fair, the Defence Forces have done a huge amount of work in planning for a dramatic increase in numbers for the years ahead as regards inductions, training programmes and so on. Let us not forget, we are seeking to add an extra 3,000 people to the Permanent Defence Force over the next six years, which means a net gain each year of 500 people. This year, we will probably have a net loss of a couple of hundred people in the Defence Forces. We need to turn the tide. There is a huge focus in the Defence Forces and Department of Defence on doing that across all specialties and ranks and among enlisted personnel.
The straight answer to the Deputy's question is that I am, of course, open to new ways of adding to the medical staff in the Defence Forces beyond direct entry and the normal induction and recruitment campaigns which we have.
5. Deputy John Brady asked the Minister for Defence the timeline for the delivery of a military air doctrine, following the publication of the Commission on the Defence Forces, and the subsequent publication of the Government’s high-level implementation plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [58340/22]
Following the publication of the Commission on the Defence Forces report and the subsequent publication of the Government’s high-level implementation plan, what is the timeline for the delivery of a military air doctrine?
I will give the Deputy my answer and I am not sure if it is what the Deputy is looking for but I will come back with supplementary responses and perhaps clarify if she has further questions. The military air doctrine dates back to before the commission but I will put a number of things on the record and I will try to ensure that I answer the Deputy's questions then, if I can.
The Defence Forces Capstone Doctrine was published in 31 March 2016. This Capstone Doctrine is published in support of the objectives of the White Paper on Defence and provides a common framework for all components of the Defence Forces engaged in military operations in accordance with Government’s defence policy. It is vertically nested under the White Paper on Defence 2015. It articulates the principles which underpin how the Defence Forces go about their work, while giving guidance on many of the key concepts that drive the approach to military operations in the complex operational environments of the twenty-first century.
Currently, the White Paper on Defence 2015 and the 2019 update are the principal drivers of doctrine at the policy level which may evolve as the State progresses the implementation of the Commission on the Defence Forces report. The Defence Forces also have a standardisation strategy that seeks to develop and implement, inter alia, doctrine to achieve and maintain the most effective levels of interoperability at the national and international level in the fields of operations, materiel and administration.
Doctrine in the Air Corps is underwritten by the White Paper on Defence and the 2019 update, the Capstone Doctrine, and standardisation strategies. It is expressed through subordinate publications including Defence Forces Regulation CS.8 and the air regulation manuals. These are continually reviewed and updated and will require ongoing development in light of structural changes arising from the Commission on the Defence Forces report, and the appointment of an independent military aviation regulator, both of which are under consideration at this time.
The Air Corps is, furthermore, currently engaged in a Defence Forces project that is working to develop joint doctrine across the whole of the Defence Forces. Military air doctrine is an essential part of this process. I have given the Deputy something of a history lesson there but I can answer some of the direct questions in respect of the commission.
I thank the Minister. Initially I noted that the Questions Office had flagged to me that the Department was not too keen on answering this question, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I thank the office of the Ceann Comhairle for not disallowing this question and for allowing us to have this conversation which is purely policy-based. I have heard of the Defence Forces Capstone Doctrine and of the White Paper but I have not heard about that specific stand-alone policy around military air doctrine. This is a declaration of the fundamental principles by which the Air Corps can and will operate and acts as guidance for a national document. It is not a strategy document but it is a core document that then leads out into the development of a specific doctrine. We have a capability which is driven by capacity because of that lack in certain sections of an overarching doctrine, ultimately to define clearly what the State views as the role for the Air Corps, which is soon to be renamed.
Yes, I hope so and the sooner the better.
The delivery of the air doctrine is not in itself a recommendation of the Commission on the Defence Forces or the high-level implementation plan. However, doctrinal development is part of the training and education command in the proposed future high-level command and control structure proposed by the Commission on the Defence Forces. It is my intention to revert to the Government on the proposed changes to the Defence Forces structures and, in particular, the reform of high-level command and control of the Defence Forces.
This includes the creation of a chief of defence, or CHOD, as supported by a vice-CHOD, with the appropriate military command and control authority of the Defence Forces. Advice has been sought from the Attorney General. Clarification of the Minister's role and the future of the Department of Defence may be required following receipt of that advice. As Minister, I favour the implementation of recommendations 1, 3, 4 and 5 in annex 1, and I presume that the Deputy also has this document, which is basically the implementation strategy for the commission's recommendations. It effectively involves a redesign of the structures of the Defence Forces, how they react with each other, and within that the delivery of a military air doctrine needs to be part of that consideration and it will be.
I fully accept that this may not have been a specific recommendation of the Commission on the Defence Forces. This, however, should have been the perfect opportunity for the development of such a doctrine. Without that necessary framework being in place, my concern is that we are not looking in the exact areas that the Air Corps need to be and wants to be looking. No matter which way one looks at this State, we may be 30% land and 70% water, but we are 100% air, and that is why a doctrine such as this is of such importance. Without that comprehensive military air doctrine being in place, I fear that there will be a lack of cohesion between each element of the Defence Forces where we have not clearly identified what the State's ask is of each arm of the Defence Forces individually, which then feed back into that larger policy of the overall Defence Forces, which the Minister has referred to in the White Paper.
I do not believe that there is a lack of clarity here but this is something which must continue to evolve. For me, growing and expanding the Air Corps is a very big part of what we will be doing over the next decade in the Defence Forces. For the obvious reasons that the Deputy has outlined, we have ten times as much sea surface as we have land surface. If one takes our sovereign territory at sea as well as land, I believe we are the fourth or fifth largest country physically in the European Union. In order to have competent and comprehensive surveillance of that sovereign territory, we need an Air Corps that is continuously resourced to do that, as indeed we need our Naval Service, as well as expanding our Army and cyber domains, and so on. The advantage of having the commission report is that we now have the resources to deliver that expansion on a scale that, I believe, many people were not expecting. I can assure the Deputy that the Air Corps will be a big part of that growth story. It is up to the Defence Forces, working with the Department of Defence, to map that out and there will be no lack of ambition from the Government in how we respond to those asks.
