Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome this opportunity to engage with Members of the Dáil on matters relating to the report of the Commission on the Defence Forces, and I look forward to hearing the contributions of Deputies today. The establishment of a Commission on the Defence Forces was set out in the programme for Government and was a key priority for me as Minister for Defence. The publication of the commission's report represents the culmination of the work carried out over the past 13 months, and is testament to the considerable efforts of all of those who contributed to its completion. I would like to put on record my thanks to the chair, Aidan O'Driscoll, and all the members of the commission for their hard work and dedication in producing this substantial report.

In December 2020 the Government authorised the establishment of the commission and agreed its terms of reference and membership. The terms of reference cover the structures and size of the Defence Forces, defence capabilities, HR policies and strategies, the Reserve Defence Force, governance, high-level command and control in the Defence Forces and pay structures. The commission has interacted with both the Defence Forces and my Department. It undertook a process of wide consultation, including receiving nearly 500 public submissions. It has also met a wide stakeholder group, including organisations such as the European External Action Service, other Departments and public bodies and agencies. Commission members conducted site visits across a large number of military locations across the country and met more than 1,000 Defence Forces members, the Defence Forces representative associations, veterans' associations; and senior members of the Defence Forces past and present.

This report is wide-ranging, blunt in its assessment, challenging and comprehensive. It proposes significant changes for the Defence Forces and defence provision in Ireland. The report poses serious questions on defence provision that we as a society must carefully consider. I hope that this report will foster real debate about the defence that we need as a modern neutral European country.

The report encompasses recommendations on high-level command arrangements, Defence Forces structures, defence capabilities, the Reserve Defence Force and funding. People matters are a key aspect of the report and the sections of the report dealing with these issues are forthright in challenging the current culture within the Defence Forces. The report dedicates a chapter to an analysis of the security environment and echoes many of the threats identified in the White Paper's assessment a number of years ago. The commission's report identifies an overarching trend of unpredictability and sets out four interrelated trends in the security environment. It examines these trends, considers their implications for Ireland and the Defence Forces and notes that in a security environment characterised by volatility and unpredictability, societal and organisational resilience is a critical asset we need to invest in. Ireland is contributing 567 Defence Forces personnel to nine different missions throughout the world.

The work of the commission was carried out against the backdrop of the defence policy framework as set out in the White Paper of 2015 and the White Paper update of 2019, both of which were developed by joint civil and military teams. The commission' s report examines the roles carried out by the Defence Forces in the military defence of the State, aid to the civil power, ATCP, maritime and air security, international peace and security and aid to the civil authority, ATCA. The commission set out its belief that a level of ambition, LOA, for each of the roles assigned to the Defence Forces is not currently clearly specified. The report recommends that specific taskings of the Defence Forces, including those arising from ATCP and ATCA, should be subject to regular review for continued relevance and priority. Other proposals include the development of a whole-of-government maritime security strategy and a national aviation security strategy.

The commission's report sets out a high level of ambition for the future of the Defence Forces and considers the issue of the overall level of ambition The report sets out three indicative levels of ambition namely, LOA 1, LOA 2 and LOA 3. LOA 1 represents current capability, which is aiming to uphold sovereign rights and serve on peace support operations to the same extent as at present. This would require additional defence funding of about €47 million per annum at full strength. As the House knows, we certainly are not at full strength at the moment. LOA 2 represents enhanced capabilities, which would involve building on the current capability to address specific priority gaps in our ability to deal with an assault on Irish sovereignty and to serve in higher intensity peace support, crisis management and humanitarian relief operations overseas. This would involve a significant defence funding increase of approximately €500 million per annum above current defence spending. LOA 3 represents a level of conventional capacity, which would involve developing full spectrum defence capabilities to protect Ireland and its people to an extent comparable to similar-sized countries in Europe. The report sets out costings of about €3 billion per annum for this LOA, based on defence spending in eight comparator countries.

It is important to state to the House that this report looks at three levels in monetary terms. The first is what it would cost to stay as we are today, which is less than one third of the average spend in comparable EU countries. To move to LOA 2 would mean we would spend roughly half of what those countries spend and to move to LOA 3 would be to move into a similar spending bracket to those eight countries. The commission's report makes a number of recommendations on capabilities based around these three LOAs. The commission also calls for the establishment of a capability development planning process through a joint civil and military permanent structure to work on an iterative capability development plan.

The commission report has identified the capability requirements for each LOA. The main recommendations on each are as follows. For LOA 1, current capabilities would be maintained through renewal and replacement programmes. LOA 2 would require significantly enhanced capabilities. This would require an extra 2,000 personnel, including many new personnel in the Naval Service because it is recommending double-crewing for a naval fleet of nine, which is what we have today. It would also require the development of a primary radar capability; a strategic reach aircraft and two additional medium lift helicopters; additional armoured personnel carriers with a higher level of armour protection and sufficient firepower; and a new air defence system for land forces. LOA 2 would also require increased military intelligence capabilities and an increase in the special operations forces establishment and capabilities. The report envisages the creation of an information command that would manage Defence Forces IT services, communications and information, CIS, services, and a new joint cyber command for the Defence Forces with an extra 100 personnel. This LOA would also require the development of capabilities to deal with hybrid attacks and see an increased focus on green defence, particularly in procurement. It is important to note that LOA 2 is a significant increase in capability that would take some time to achieve.

If LOA 3 were to be pursued, by 2040 the Army would have a significant mechanised component and units would have organic lift capacity, combat support elements and artillery and cavalry elements fully interoperable to NATO standards. The Naval Service would have a 12-ship fleet. The Air Corps would see the development of an air combat and intercept capability and combat helicopters would be required for the special operations force. Each level of ambition outlined above would require increased defence funding, and we in government must carefully consider the implications of each possible course of action.

One of the key recommendations on defence force structures involves a unitary command structure with command assigned by the Minister to a new military position of Chief of Defence, or CHOD as it is known internationally. The CHOD would be the head of the Defence Forces with a joint force commander, or vice CHOD, and three service chiefs in the Army, the Air Corps and the Navy also reporting to the CHOD. A new strategic headquarters would be established to support the CHOD, including a new civilian head of transformation reporting directly to the CHOD. The report also recommends the establishment of an office of reserve affairs. The CHOD would carry out an urgent review of Army structures, assisted by external experts. The commission recommends that any new structures arising from this review would need to be regionally balanced.

Other recommendations relating to structures include the Naval Service being renamed the Irish Navy, the Air Corps being renamed the Irish Air Force and the Army Ranger Wing being renamed Ireland's Special Operations Force or IrlSOF, along with the establishment of special operations force air and maritime task groups in Casement aerodrome and Haulbowline naval base. The commission recognises that arising from these recommendations, the governance and oversight framework of the Minister and the Department of Defence will need to be reviewed to provide effective assurance, oversight and accountability. This is a key consideration and one which will require interdepartmental discussion, agreement and legal advice.

The commission carried out a large body of work relating to people as the key strategic resource of the Defence Forces. This is reflected in Chapter 8, which is by far the largest section of the report. The people chapter is broken into four separate subsections covering a wide range of issues including but not limited to strategic HR, career progression, culture, morale, training, recruitment and pay structures. The recommendations on Defence Forces people and human resources are forthright and certainly challenge the status quo. The commission considers that cultural change is required in the Defence Forces and that a fundamental cultural change process should be undertaken and without that cultural change, it is very clear that the potential of this report will not be realised. The report recommends that a strategic approach to HR be implemented with the establishment of a strategic HR change leadership team to be led by an externally recruited civilian head of transformation. The report also recommends the creation of a permanent training establishment and the provision of greater flexibility for managers, within the overall establishment number, to allocate staff across formations and ranks. The report recommends the redevelopment of promotion systems to ensure that they are open, competitive and entirely merit based. The approach to recruitment should also be changed, with direct entry, civilianisation and utilisation of members of the Reserve Defence Forces, RDF, as part of the approach to deliver required services. Increasing female participation in the Defence Forces is essential and the report recommends a target of 35% female participation to be achieved over time. While that is not an easy task, it is certainly something to aim for. In terms of work-life balance, the report suggests that urgent reform of the existing work practices is required, including flexible work practices, family friendly initiatives and the introduction of a non-financial labour hours budget.

The commission found that in broad terms, levels of average turnover are not out of line with other military organisations internationally. However, there are gaps in specialist areas which have a disproportionate impact on operations. The commission believes that greater transparency of the wider benefits of membership of the Defence Forces should become a central feature in future recruitment campaigns and that the visibility of the total remuneration package should be increased. In terms of specialist posts, the commission recommends that there should be increased direct entry with appropriately adjusted training and physical fitness requirements. Recommendations are also made around affiliation to ICTU and pay structures, particularly for privates in their first three years of service and I intend to follow up on those issues as quickly as possible.

The commission recommends that the RDF be regenerated and revitalised through a new high-level vision, with a regeneration plan to be quickly developed. The commission is clear that the RDF should be a key aspect of Ireland's defence capabilities and recognises that much work is required to bring the RDF up to its establishment level. The report recommends a reserve for all three services, with the introduction of an Air Corps reserve and a focus on attracting specialists. The report suggests that the recruitment process for the RDF should become more efficient and be completely revamped. The regeneration of the RDF would be facilitated by the establishment of a dedicated office of reserve affairs which would report directly into the CHOD.

In the area of funding, the report concludes that Ireland is an outlier compared to our peers in western and northern Europe in relation to defence spending and has been for quite some time. The commission believes that the current level of financial commitment delivers military capabilities which are inadequate for the defence of Ireland and its people from the threats identified in its security environment assessment. The commission recommends that consideration be given to a step up in funding to Level of Ambition, LOA, 2 in the short term pending a more detailed policy debate and decisions required for higher levels of ambition in the future.

The commission has highlighted five core areas that it considers must be addressed in a detailed implementation plan on foot of policy decisions relating to the level of ambition and budget. These are transformational change to modernise the organisational structure, its human resource strategy and practices; reform of high level command and control and the creation of a joint strategic headquarters; revitalising the RDF; reform and restructuring of the three services; and joint capability development. The commission also recommends, following Government decisions on the recommendations in the report, the appointment of an implementation oversight group with an independent chair, the establishment of an implementation management office and the appointment of an external change management support team.

The report is a significant body of work running to 224 pages, including appendices. It contains 69 principal recommendations with many of these having a number of sub recommendations, giving a total of 133 recommendations. The recommendations are challenging and far-reaching and some on the structure side require significant governance consideration. There is a requirement for careful consideration of the recommendations which will require interdepartmental consultation and agreement on a number of cross-cutting matters before a proposal can be put forward for Government agreement. Given the breadth and complexity of certain of the recommendations, a period of four to five months is now required to facilitate appropriate consideration and consultation on the report and to prepare a proposed response and high-level action plan, which the Government can then consider and, I hope, agree.

I would like to reassure Deputies that this does not mean that all of the commission's recommendations are on hold. I have heard some commentary to that effect but significant work is already underway and ongoing in a number of areas, which the Commission has referred to in its report. This work includes the establishment of a capability development planning process through the creation of a permanent civil-military structure; an independent review group established to review dignity and equality issues in the Defence Forces to ensure that the Defence Forces is a safe workplace for all current serving members while also reviewing historical allegations; ongoing procurement of equipment in accordance with the equipment development planning process; management of the Defence estate in accordance with the defence infrastructure plan; direct-entry competitions; and the amendment of legislation relating to the Working Time Directive which, as I have said in this House previously, the Government is absolutely committed to. Other ongoing work includes an exploration of the opportunities offered by the EU' s Permanent Structured Cooperation, PESCO, to develop Ireland's defence capabilities; liaison with the Ombudsman for Defence Forces to examine and potentially enhance the remit of his office; and progression of the programme for Government commitment to extend provision of private healthcare to all enlisted personnel in the Defence Forces. I also want to commence discussions with representative bodies on the relationship with ICTU in advance of the new public sector pay discussions getting underway in the months ahead.

These and other initiatives will continue to be developed during the intervening months.

I am committed to progressing the work carried out by the commission and seizing this opportunity to develop Defence Forces that are agile and modern, designed not just for today but also for the future. Matters of national defence have traditionally been supported widely in the Oireachtas and I am eager to hear the views of Deputies today and throughout the course of deliberations on the report to feed into the wider consultative process.

I genuinely hope that we can create a cross-party consensus on how we respond as an Oireachtas and that it can feed into the recommendations the Minister of State and I can bring to the Government in a few months. Let us not focus on whether it is two, three or four months. The important thing is to get this right. We are talking about fundamentally changing the Defence Forces for the better in the future. I think that it is a realistic target to bring forward serious recommendations, which will come with significant funding obligations, before the summer.

See this speech in context