Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Tánaiste for bringing this report before the House. All Deputies can only feel shock and dismay at the findings of the report. I refer to the constant belittling of women, the unwillingness to counter bullying, the immense figure of 88% reporting sexual harassment among women, the abuse of power and the contempt for many of the skills women could have brought to the Army. The description of it as a "man's army" summed up much of what seems to have become the norm. It is chilling to see the conclusion that it is believed that "the Defence Forces is unable (or unwilling) to make the changes."

This is an important watershed moment. We can only thank the women for their bravery in pioneering to get this work done. It showed great commitment and determination and they certainly have been vindicated. I also take this opportunity to commend those who put the report together. It has been a very valuable service. The confidential approach they took, involving voluntary submissions done in confidence, with commitments that those would not be shared, a non-adversarial approach and not applying or seeking to apply legal proofs, has been vindicated by this report. Recently, we have had cause to see the dismay of some victims concerning a very legalistic approach taken in other contexts. It is commendable the way in which this work was done. We have an important body of analysis here that needs to be taken to the next stage.

I support the Tánaiste's conclusions regarding what needs to be done. We need a statutory inquiry. We need to move to an external oversight body. We must completely change the complaints mechanism. We need fresh legislation and a real reform of the culture. It seems to me that massive changes must be made. I will be interested to hear the view of the Tánaiste on how an inquiry is to be conducted. I have been a long time around this House. The Tánaiste has been around for a good deal of that time, although not all of it by any means. We have been disappointed by inquiries set up in good faith by successive Governments. They have often been a disappointment to the victims. They have also often led to frustration in terms of what flows from them. They cannot draw conclusions of individual culpability and they work on a particularly narrow approach. Sometimes they are held in camera and this avoids some of the lawyering up. On other occasions, they have been held with lawyers for everyone and they have been interminable, adversarial and difficult. This inquiry deserves some thought regarding how it is going to be designed. Like others, I read about the need for this to be victim focused and victim led. We must also be conscious that anyone accused has rights as well and how this aspect is going to be handled will present us with real challenges. Many people want this to be done quickly. This raises questions about what the structure in this regard will be. Will people be represented? If people are accused, will they have lawyers cross-examining people who are presenting? I would be interested to hear the Tánaiste's views on how this inquiry can best be structured. This process will probably need some time and require some consultation with the victims concerned. We must also ensure, however, that whatever we do will lead to the sort of change we want to see.

Above all, we cannot afford to wait on the quite complicated investigative work and the bringing forward of new legislation to start the reform of the culture within the Defence Forces. The question arises as to what is to be done with the immediate action group that was set up within the Army. It seems to have done some positive work, but it clearly did not achieve what it had hoped to within the time available. What structure, from today, can lead to better approaches being taken while we await the more detailed legislative framework for an external oversight body and a detailed inquiry?

It seems to me that whatever is done now will need to go well beyond an action group composed of internal military staff. We must bring in external expertise. We need to look at what is international best practice and how cultures can be developed internally. That would ensure that at least, before the external oversight body is established, we will have a real sense of momentum and reform going on. We cannot forget that we owe a huge debt of service to our Army for the work it has done. We must continue to attract people into the Defence Forces. We have to ensure there is not widespread demoralisation in the Army as a result of these shocking findings so that reform can be conducted from now on. This is the delicate balance the Tánaiste must try to strike.

I commend the Tánaiste on the work he has done. I also commend those who have been brave and come forward. The Tánaiste is on the right track. However, there must be some swift changes in the Army in order that when the external oversight body, the investigation and the new legal framework emerge, we will be able to see that the Army is already well on the road towards adopting best international practice and that we will never again see the sort of abuse of power, the belittlement, the sexual harassment and the ignoring of the needs of mothers and others within their workplace.

These things just have to be stamped out.

See this speech in context