David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I have been looking at this section for a while and believe it contains a number of loopholes. I agree that persons in uniform who are obviously members of the Permanent Defence Force should not be making political statements or commenting on Government policy. As a former member, I feel that would be a step too far. However, the Bill also says "or otherwise making himself or herself identifiable". If a person does not make himself or herself identifiable, if he or she does not wear a badge indicating membership of the Defence Forces, does that mean that he or she can make public statements or comments?

My second question relates to a member who has authorisation from his or her commanding officer. Who is the commanding officer? Is it the rank immediately above, is it the platoon commander or is it the battalion commander? Who is it? The section implies that if a member of the Defence Forces has authorisation, he or she can make a public statement in relation to a political matter or Government policy. If a commandant tells a captain that it is okay to make a speech, does the commandant need clearance from someone higher up again? There is a loophole there. If the commanding officer says someone can do it, then he or she can do it.

The second subsection talks about attending a protest march or other gathering in relation to a political matter or a matter of Government policy and we have already talked about a meeting with regard to climate change. Let us suppose that the Minister for Defence is opening a barracks. He or she stands up, makes a speech and says that it is part of Government policy to put money into the barracks. If there is a guard of honour for the Minister standing by, are the members of that guard of honour in contravention of the law by being there? This provision is very loose and it could be interpreted in all kinds of ways. The phrase "while in uniform or otherwise making himself or herself identifiable" is problematic. What does "making himself or herself identifiable" mean? Does it mean that a person has to stand up and say that he or she is a member of the Defence Forces and is going to make a speech? If members are in civilian clothes, can they do whatever they want?

It is very loose and open to all kinds of interpretations. I am referring in particular to the reference to "a gathering". A gathering could be anything. What about a march? Soldiers march all the time. I know it is implied that the march would have to be a protest of some sort, but the Bill does not state that. If you break this down and parse it, you will see it is wide open. I agree with colleagues that individuals identifiable as members of the Defence Forces representative organisations were before the committee and made very valuable contributions. Will they not be able to do that in the future? For instance, will they be barred from coming in here as it would involve a gathering on a political matter? It is a little ambiguous. My contribution is intended to be helpful.