Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)

There is a philosophical aspect to the Deputy's question as to whether the ombudsman is the final arbiter which we should not get into.

The first recommendation in 2010 was received on 13 May 2010, the last on 4 October 2010. These are relatively new and some work must be done on them. Some decisions and determinations have been made in 2010 relating to cases disposed of by the ombudsman in 2008 and 2009.

When an ombudsman's recommendation is received, her overarching advice is considered. It is nearly always possible to incorporate that into best human resources practice. Sometimes specifics in an individual case or recommendations on systems in the Department or the Defence Forces may warrant further consideration. As with all ombudsmen recommendations, the Minister will turn to the parent Department for advice.

A total of 14 recommendations have been rejected since 2007. Of those in 2007, four related to the educational criteria for a potential officer's course and one related to retention of pay and allowances. In 2008, two related to the eligibility criteria for an aeronautical engineer course and one related to the eligibility of other candidates in regard to a promotion board. In 2009, three related to non-selection for courses, one to non-payment of technical pay, one to non-selection for a course and one to non-selection for acting appointment.

Another way to look at it is to examine the main categories of complaints to the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces. There are three chief categories - non-selection for promotion, non-selection for courses and non-selection for overseas service. They account for more than half of the cases referred to the Ombudsman. Other categories are pensions, transfers and allowances. A few cases are of a systemic nature and I can supply the Deputy with details in that regard if he wishes.

See this speech in context