Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. O'Driscoll and the other commission members who are tuning in for their time. I do not intend to go over questions other members have asked because we are quite short on time but I will start with a couple of background questions regarding the terms of reference. Mr. O'Driscoll stated that the terms of reference set out a challenging range of issues that have been raised by the Government. Given that he went on to say he does not think the commission will be able to address the huge range of staffing and HR issues, does he think the timeframe allocated to the commission for this piece of work is adequate? If the commission is not able to address the HR and staffing issues, will it make a recommendation, as part of its report, on a practical alternative to address them in their totality?

On public consultation, there is mention in one of the briefing documents of sifting through the submissions and reviewing the responses. Perhaps I misinterpreted this point and Mr. O'Driscoll may clarify it. If the commission is close to the end of phase 1, the issue identification phase, how confident is Mr. O'Driscoll that all issues have been identified if the commission is still sifting through submissions? Does that mean they have not been read or that they have not been graded? Will Mr. O'Driscoll provide clarity on that?

Mr. O'Driscoll also mentioned the webinar. It was absolutely excellent and I agree with him that these webinars need to take place more often. It was an extremely interesting event and one that should be repeated quite regularly.

To stay on the terms of reference for a moment, there are repeated statements on having regard to the level of funding provided by Government. How does Mr. O'Driscoll see that affecting his job and the piece of work the commission is undertaking? Are we to presume the commission will hold back on making recommendations on strategic advice because of it is constrained by budgeting issues or, perhaps, the political impact if it is seen to be asking for increased spending? This is an area of significant concern because there must be a hierarchy of planning in terms of the flow of recommendations and plans. Operational thinking comes after strategic planning. Strategic planning comes after the long-term national plan. The focus needs to be on that plan and it needs to take on board all recommendations by the commission, regardless of budgetary expenditure. My fear is we could end up putting the cart before the horse. We will not get the best value out of the potential of this commission if decisions are made before that national long-term goal is established.

I move on to international commitments and the overseas domain. Will the commission examine the role of the Chief of Staff in respect of policy advice to the Government? It is done in other Departments, in particular with direct advisory roles. Is that something the commission will examine?

Mr. O'Driscoll mentioned the search and rescue contract being done by the time this commission reports. Is that also a factor in the work the commission is undertaking? Is the fact that the contract will have gone out to tender limiting the view the commission will take on the future role of the Air Corps in search and rescue or top cover? Again, that goes back to the original statement regarding the level of funding provided by the Government.

I am moving down through the terms of reference that are laid out and I will touch on cybersecurity. There is no doubt higher priority needs to be given to cybersecurity and tackling cybercrime in Ireland. This was a major aspect of that webinar. We hold 30% of Europe's data due to international companies located here and there is a huge range of talent in that environment in the private sector. The lack of appropriate information and communications technology, ICT, capabilities could make this a dangerous combination if it is not addressed and if structural policies are not put in place to do so. Some €3.5 billion has been lost to cybercrime, an absolutely phenomenal amount of money. Is the commission looking at cybercrime and cybersecurity in terms of ultimate responsibility moving back to the Department of Defence and away from the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications?

On the grade structure, the restructuring that took place in 2012 created significant imbalance and regional uncertainty, and that is far from suitable. Nobody is happy with this as it stands, based on conversations I have had. Given the level of understaffing and the lack of defence regional development, will the commission assess the return to a three-brigade structure and of a return to a brigade based in Westmeath? Will the commission carry out a full review of the efficiencies, including assets and personnel, given as the reason for that restructuring in 2012?

I apologise because I know I am throwing questions at Mr. O'Driscoll left, right and centre but I move on to the Reserve. An issue raised with me regularly is the lack of a permanent headquarters, HQ, for the Reserve that would facilitate training and development and encourage more activity within the Reserve. One option that has been put out there is looking at one of the closed barracks as part of that restructuring. It would be one that would be central, easily accessed from the motorways and from Dublin, the Curragh and the Glen of Imaal, that would have sufficient land for small- and large-scale exercises and access to training facilities for water-based activities. Is that something the commission will examine? Will the commission go on to examine the potential for overseas participation by reservists? If so, what model is it looking at or what existing country has a system that may suit Ireland?

On retired members and veterans, is the commission looking at the potential for building on the relationship between the veterans and the Defence Forces, in terms of partaking in the Reserve, to give of their experience and expertise gained in a lifetime of service? Senator Craughwell mentioned the training location and that location also has an impact on the Reserve and on the attractiveness of people coming into the Reserve, in hand with the Permanent Defence Force.

I move on to the remunerations systems and structures and that strategic perspective of HR. Regarding grievances, be they gender, diversity or pay and conditions, one of the key aspects is representation. It can play a fantastic role in stopping a complaint becoming much more serious if it is put in place at the start. I refer to the case of Yvonne O'Rourke before the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, in December. Discrimination against women due to pregnancy is not acceptable in society or in any structure. Has the commission taken on board the recommendations from the WRC on anti-discrimination as part of its work? Has it looked at the potential for specific strategies to address diversity and equality?

There needs to be an end to the current situation where public pay sector deals that affect current service members are negotiated and concluded with little or no input from representation bodies. The most recent round of pay talks are exactly of the kind in which PDFORRA wanted to play a constructive role and it would have done so, had it been allowed to affiliate with ICTU, as per the European Social Charter. There is reference to a pay review body in the context of the national public sector wage policy. However, given that is an ask of other public sector groups, how does that mechanism not potentially undermine the current collective bargaining structure, should there be multiple demands for pay review bodies in different groups? The current contracts of Defence Forces members are of significant importance and need to be reviewed in their entirety. They are not fit for purpose and until they are, they will not be able to compete with the private sector in the labour market.

On recruitment, these contracts need to be dragged kicked and screaming into the 21st century. They need to meet the asks of future employees and current service members. On recruitment and retention, the long-term costs of losing personnel after training far outweigh the investment in retaining staff. That has to be critical when we look at recruitment and retention.