Cathal Berry (Kildare South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome Lieutenant Colonel King and his team. It is great to have people in military uniform before the committee. Perhaps they can fill in the gaps. I think ten years ago it would have been unheard of, frowned upon and deemed to be completely unacceptable to have people in military uniform before a committee. It might give us a glimpse into what Lieutenant Colonel King mentioned about why there is no or little consultation with RACO or PDFORRA. It is as though they are not full citizens or they are unworthy of the norms of workplace relations. It is an industrial relations issue. The lieutenant colonel is a law man. There are hints of civil rights in the idea that military people are not treated appropriately. We should be strong about it. It does not cost anything for the Department to pick up the phone to PDFORRA or RACO and ask to run something by them and ask what their thoughts on an issue might be. It costs nothing and it is a basic professional courtesy that should be extended. It is clear from what we are hearing that cultural change is required at three levels, political, departmental and military levels. Unfortunately, we only have a report on the military level because a set of circumstances were engineered so that the political and departmental levels would not be assessed from a cultural point of view. Those are my opening remarks.

The budget will be announced this day next week. I would be grateful to hear the team's thoughts on what needs to be in the budget next Tuesday to make things better and bearable in the Defence Forces. What would they need to see?

Last week we heard that there will be a new high level implementation plan for the Commission on the Defence Forces. Although the commission reported 19 months ago, we are only getting the high-level implementation plan now. What needs to be in the plan and what does not need to be in it? I take on board the delegation's views on the meaningless words, "commence", "evaluate", "develop", "explore", "progress". They are all waffle words. They are managerial spin designed to mislead rather than inform. What needs to be in the high-level implementation plan, HLIP and what do the witnesses not want to see in it?

The witnesses cannot comment on operations or at least they are not supposed to. However, they can certainly comment on health and safety. I am no pilot but from what happened last week, when only one helicopter was available in the entire country to do a take down of a vessel off the Cork coast, does not sound right to me. It could be argued that only half a helicopter was available as it was tasked with a specific purpose in Athlone and had to be re-rolled, repurposed, re-tasked and relaunched. These risks are not theoretical risks. We lost the Dauphin helicopter in 1999 in Tramore. Four people were killed. It was the same story with the Coast Guard four or five years ago in Mayo. That is a major health and safety issue for Defence Forces personnel. I would be grateful for the witnesses' thoughts on that.

Housing is a massive issue. It is the number one issue in the country at the moment. The Defence Forces have loads of land. They have provided family housing in the past. They provide a small amount of housing already. What is RACO's view on military housing for military personnel? Should we be looking at it?

I take on board the witnesses' views on strength. We hear this and that has been done, but the bottom line is the outcome. The numbers continue to fall. An Garda Síochána has dropped below 14,000 members. It should have 15,000. The country is up in arms. How could this possibly happen? An Garda Síochána is down 1,000 people. From what the witnesses said, the Defence Forces should be at a strength of 11,500 so they are down 4,000 regulars and 3,000 reservists. That is 7,000 personnel and no one seems to care. The fact that 1,000 gardaí are missing in action, so to speak, is having a detrimental effect on justice. I can only imagine what effect being down 4,000 regular troops and 3,000 reservists is having on the Defence Forces. Where do the witnesses see the strength figures in 12 months? Are there any projections? Is there a plan? Are there any targets in the defence apparatus? We heard the word "stabilising". I agree with Deputy Carthy that if you send a team out to draw a match it will lose. We are even talking about stabilising the national herd and stabilising is code for reducing. I am keen to get RACO's view on that.

The communications and information services, CIS, corps personnel is an outrageous anomaly. Approximately three years ago, we spoke in this committee about that the National Cyber Security Centre, NCSC. It was a basket case three years ago, but it has been completely turned around. I always give credit where it is due. In fairness to the Government, it has doubled the headcount, doubled the budget and provided a proper premises and now it is an exceptional place to work. The pay rates for technical staff have now been increased. If it can be done for the NCSC, why can it not be done for the Defence Forces? The cyberattack on the HSE was a wake-up call. It was the epiphany moment for cyberdefence and cybersecurity. What happened last week off the Cork coast should be a wake-up call for maritime security and resources should be allocated accordingly.

I agree with Senator Joe O'Reilly about the pensions issue. An emergency measure was introduced in 2013 because the troika seized our national reserve fund of €20 billion so we had no money. There has rightly been a move for pay restoration in the past decade. I agree with Senator O'Reilly that there are now grounds to looks at pension restoration. It is the same principle. If we want people to stay, we need to have the appropriate pension arrangements in place. I would be grateful for RACO's views on that.

What does RACO want to see in the budget next week and in the HLIP? Were there any health and safety issues with the operation last week? Will the witnesses comment on housing and where they see the strength of the Defence Forces in 12 months? Are there grounds for a national cybersecurity-type template to be applied to the CIS corps, especially from a cyberdefence point of view? Will they comment on pensions restoration? That is important. We are keen to publish pay per annum but pay per hour is the metric we should be using. I suspect that if the numbers were calculated correctly that pay per hour would be below the minimum wage, depending on the rank.

I thank the Chair and I thank the delegation again.