Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Clearly something more was required. There was the documentary. There have been many watershed moments in history globally and nationally. In my view, clearly there was not the same cut-through as there has been now with the "Documentary on One" and the Katie Hannon documentary and the role of the Women of Honour in that regard. When I say cut-through I mean the very significant raising of the public consciousness and awareness about this which has led to significant numbers of people coming forward to the scoping inquiry that was established and the independent review group. That was important in terms of the safety of current members of the workforce. I think the review group has performed a valuable service. I accept that it has meant it will be a year and a bit before we have a statutory inquiry from the inception of the independent review group, but it has done very valuable work which I think can now inform current safety in the workplace within the Defence Forces.

What is interesting is the number of people who have come forward to an independent group who would not have come forward in previous times in the same volume. As Deputy Berry and others have said, the dynamic of the command and control structure is one that did not lend itself to people coming forward to share their experiences. Deputy Brendan Smith referred to the mantra of never complain, never explain. He was talking to former members he knew. I am talking to serving members at the moment who still have this tremendous loyalty to the Defence Forces. I have met them over time. They question themselves and they almost blame themselves for what happened to them. Looking in from the outside, it must be asked how they could have done anything. They know this too but they still want reform. They are still committed to the Defence Forces. What goes to the heart of this is the command and control structure.

Deputy Berry is correct about the search for excellence. I have very serious issues about the training system. I am thinking through some of this as well. It is almost as if training is considered to be a survival operation. It seems to me that people survive the training. It is not about helping people to get to a certain level. If people do not make it, it means they are not up to it. I might be wrong but that is my sense of it. A lot began with the inductions. That culture has to change. The comment about the obsession with excellence or image is true and I think that needs to change. We need to create a new mechanism because members of the forces did not come into the clinics of public representatives down through the years because they were not allowed to. Their wives or partners might have come in at various times when there were issues, but it was considered a breach for the members to come. All that has to change.

I will be honest that I do not have the precise formula here, but mechanisms and forums have to be developed where people can engage. No one should lose a night's sleep over the fact that there could be a number of soldiers or members of the Air Corps or Navy talking to public representatives. I know it all has to be managed but it is seen as dissent, meaning indiscipline, or that one is breaking rank. The culture has to change. Today, an 18-year-old or 19-year-old joining the Defence Forces should be welcomed, helped and supported to get through the recruitment process. It should not be an ordeal or an endurance test, which I venture it is for many. I have read Karina Molloy's book. Training keeps coming up time and again. Every course seems to be based on how much a person can take. What is a person's mettle? When will they crack? In my view, all that has to change. I am really going to go at this, at the whole training culture. People need to free up a bit. It seems to me they need to be at ease a bit more often than they are in terms of the public manifestations of the Defence Forces.

Deputy Bruton made some very insightful points about the inquiry. He has been honest in what he said. What I mean by that is the design of the inquiry is very important. I will consult all of the groups: current members, the Women of Honour, Men and Women of Honour, the Defence Women's Network, and the representative bodies within the service. The design of the inquiry is important, as are the time limits. It cannot go on forever.

Parallel with that, I must stress that we must get moving on reform. We cannot wait for the inquiry itself. We have very important work to do. The restorative piece is being looked at. We are engaging with personnel who have expertise in the area of restorative justice. The report did mention Australia but there is not huge international experience of restorative processes. The experiences in New Zealand and Australia were mentioned and we are going to explore them. The statutory inquiry comes first but parallel with that we will be working on restorative processes.

We are committed to implementing all of the recommendations. They may be in different formats. I envisage talking to organisations like the National Suicide Foundation, those with specific expertise in suicide, to go through that aspect of the report of the independent review group. In respect of air accidents, we will have separate agencies with expertise to go through that, although some cases are in litigation at the moment and in the courts. We will get people external to the Defence Forces to look at medical boarding and so forth. An independent external complaints mechanism is essential so that people can complain without feeling someone is looking over their shoulder or that this is a career-ending move.

I have met with women in order to discuss issues to do with maternity and motherhood. We do not have women at very senior levels within the Defence Forces because if they become pregnant, they cannot do a nine-month course in the Curragh or whatever. The regime in that regard is hard to credit in the modern era when we have online and blended learning and so many ways to facilitate tuition and learning. That has been the reality. We need women to be appointed to senior ranks within our Defence Forces fairly quickly. I am exploring mechanisms to do that and balance the scales in terms of seniority, gender and so forth. That is absolutely required. I am very clear about that. The inquiry will go through all aspects in terms of senior management, the Department and so forth.

Some groups will come forward and state that this is about 600 vacancies or pay and conditions; it is not. We have to make up our minds about this. It is about culture. There is no excuse for this behaviour. The great elephant in the room about recruitment and retention is this. We have to deal with pay, and we have improved basic pay. We have to do other stuff, including in the context of the organisation of working time directive. We will be doing more, but let us not lose focus when it comes to what is fundamentally wrong here, namely, the culture that is prevalent throughout the Defence Forces. Some individuals may not even realise the type of behaviour in which they are engaged and so on. We cannot allow ourselves to move to other matters when the focus has to be that, no matter what the resources are, there is no excuse for any of this behaviour. The Defence Forces have to commit to the 21st century when it comes to issues like gender equality, parity of esteem, respect, dignity of the human being, motherhood, pregnancy - all of it. What happens in any other workplace should be the same in our Defence Forces - end of. I do not want any more resistance. People go on about how the organisation of working time directive will do this, that and the other, but it simply has to happen. It is my job, as Minister, to drive this and make sure it happens. I look forward to co-operation from everybody in the House in trying to get this done.

See this speech in context