Mr. Gerard Guinan:

The Senator said that commanding officers are members of RACO. I would counter that and say that they are not obviously members. Membership of a representative association is not tattooed on someone. Someone goes in and expects impartiality and proper rules and procedures and for the law to be applied equally and fairly. I would see membership of a representative association as meaning nothing in terms of someone's work within the Defence Forces. We work for those members. We make sure their rights and entitlements under law are upheld. The Senator is correct in his observation that these people would not be represented. While it is primarily involved with RACO members and it is well capable of defending its members' rights and entitlements, our concern extends to the provision that allows for the Minister to designate other parties as members of an association and then deny them representation in much the same way as our colleagues in ICTU and RACO. We think it is abhorrent that the freedom of association would be stripped from somebody so unnecessarily.

We believe head 25 should be removed. It is unnecessary. Nobody can point to an example of where membership of a representative association has impinged or infringed upon the ability of members to do their duty. We swear solemn oaths to uphold military law and to do our duty to the best of our ability and that is what underpins us not membership of a representative association. People can come and go in that regard but you uphold your oath for the duration of your service. That is the core of our being. I find it unconscionable that somebody would seek to remove your human right to freedom of association.

Regarding the impartiality of the general secretary, members are more learned than I am. They have held high office within the State and know how things work. Again, we do not want to personalise it. What we asked for all along was that we be included as ex-officiomembers of the oversight committee. The oversight committee came out of the IRG. We had one meeting with the IRG where we expressed views about a multitude of issues but we were not informed that the oversight body was something that was likely to fall out of the IRG at that point in time, so we would not have made strong recommendations. We were more focused on what was happening in the Defence Forces there and then, the treatment of people and the grievance mechanisms as opposed to an oversight body.

We would necessarily have a problem with the Secretary General being on it. The Senator may know some procedural defect and the reason this may not be the case or would not be appropriate. All we want is to be included and to contribute to the balance necessary in such a body. In the absence of the representative associations, that body may make recommendations that give rise to anxiety, stress and concern among members and it is our job as representative bodies to allay those fears and make sure our members' voices are heard and considered in any decision-making process.