Mr. Conor King:

In conclusion, the publication of the general scheme of the defence (amendment) Bill 2025 without any prior consultation with the representative associations is most regrettable. It leaves RACO, yet again, with no option other than to seek amendments to the heads of Bill through the pre-legislative scrutiny process, external to the conciliation and arbitration scheme. In that regard, we are grateful for the opportunity to come before the committee today.

At the heart of any sound defence policy lies meaningful consultation with those who serve. We learned a harsh lesson during the passage of the Defence (Amendment) Act 2024 that sidelining those most affected is neither efficient nor wise and yet that lesson appears to have gone unheeded. We respectfully contend that the draft heads as they currently stand are overly vague, even for primary legislation, and lack crucial detail on appeals mechanisms, and checks and balances, which could lead to a wave of unnecessarily unreasonable and protracted suspensions. We suggest that more detail is required to ensure clarity and support for our members who will be required to operate and administer a suspension policy, and that essential safeguards are necessary for all Defence Forces members who may be the subject of suspension or indeed dismissal into the future, in keeping with the principles of natural justice and fair procedures. We thank committee members for their time and consideration of this opening statement today. We are happy to address any questions or comments members may have.