Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I join with others in welcoming the commitment to holding an independent review regarding the experiences of the Women of Honour. It is correct that there is a need for cultural change and concrete protections. Both are needed. Cultural change is crucial within the Defence Forces. As Senator Martin, I think, referred to, however, there is also a need for a wider cultural shift concerning how we treat those who have experienced sexual abuse. I note that legislation is also going through the Oireachtas in respect of whistleblowers. It is at the stage of pre-legislative scrutiny.

Members spoke about Tom Clonan and other people. It is unfortunate that so often those people who raise the alarm about issues of abuse and malpractice are themselves victimised and then suffer in turn. That is something else that we must address. It should not take an issue being covered by RTÉ to cause a matter like to be addressed. It should be sufficient for a flag to be raised internally in an organisation to bring about action. We know that flags were raised concerning these issues for a long time. None of us could deny previous concerns in this regard in respect of the Defence Forces. Senator McGreehan spoke eloquently about that aspect.

Regarding this Bill, I welcome elements of it. It is important that we formalise the non-recruitment of minors. It is not the practice here, obviously, but this move is important in an international context, where the recruitment of minors does occur. I lived in New York during and immediately after 9-11. I saw aggressive recruitment of minors. There were times when funding to schools was conditional on recruitment conversations happening within those school settings. There is of course a need to advertise and to encourage recruitment. It is important, however, that it is done ethically. I state that because I recall being in Times Square in New York and seeing a giant billboard showing a very young army officer climbing up a tower to fight a dragon. That was the recruitment video. It was purveying a fantasy of what military action is.

It is therefore important that we recruit and that we have an ethical aspect to such recruitment. I agree completely with those who say that what we should be doing is extending the age limits for recruitment into the military upwards to allow people who are older and have life experience to apply for enlistment. I refer to people who may be in their 20s or 30s and who may wish to enter the armed forces. It is important that they will be supported to do that. Equally important will be the terms and conditions associated with the work they undertake. I refer to housing conditions, opportunities for progression, security of pay, working time and clarity in that respect and regarding overtime payments. All those things are aspects that would make it possible for people in their 30s and 40s to either join the Defence Forces or remain there. This is not just about recruitment, because one of the key issues is retention. It is the major issue. People feel that if they have a family life that there comes a point when they are not able to sustain their engagement in the Defence Forces. We really should not be losing people in that way.In that regard, I wish to highlight a concern about one aspect of the Bill which was in the original text, which was removed in the Dáil and which related to re-enlistment. It is important that we have routes to re-enlistment. It was stated in the Dáil that it was covered by the emergency Covid legislation. The latter will expire, however, and, as a result, the question of pathways to re-enlistment is important.

I welcome many provisions for the Reserve Defence Force. It is important to note that overseas work is and has been powerful in nature. It has been spoken about. It is not there simply for the experience. The work that the Army and Naval Service have done overseas have been done not just because it is a function but because it has purpose. The difference is that the mandate the Army, Naval Service and Air Corps have had is unique . That mandate emanates from Ireland, a neutral country that is committed to peace, neutrality, peacemaking and peacekeeping across the globe. The humanitarian mission is crucial. People know when they are serving that they do not take part in wars of interest but only in military action to protect human rights rather than interests. The actions taken are about principle rather than power.

That brings me to the crux of certain aspects of the Bill. I am concerned about the slippage we have seen in recent years. I know that many in the Naval Service were heartbroken when Ireland stopped doing search and rescue and when we went from saving 8,500 lives in 2015, as part of a humanitarian mission, to only 1,888 in 2018 as we changed policy and joined Operation Sophia. There has been slippage in permanent structured co-operation, PESCO, where we are engaging in military procurement. What will that be used for by those in the partnership? If we are researching new weaponry, how may it be used? I am saying this because I am concerned about section 2, which provides for the delegation of military authority to international forces commanders. I do not believe that there is sufficient safeguarding in that with regard to which international force commanders it applies to and under what circumstances.

There are references to the Defence (Amendment) Act 2006, specifically section 3(1)(a) regarding one of the grounds for despatching for service, which will now be layered with a delegation of authority to command, and about carrying duties. Section 3(1)(a) contains the phrase "carrying out duties as a military representative or filling appointments or postings outside the State, including secondments to any international organisation". The definition of international organisation is quite wide and could include EU and other forces. That is a concern. Section 3(1)(f) already allows us to ensure that Irish armed forces can take part in humanitarian tasks even outside a UN Security Council brief. This is not a necessary provision in order for us to take urgent humanitarian action. What kinds of actions are we taking? We have seen the slippage from when we joined Operation Sophia and then PESCO. Last year, our armed forces were appointed to EU battle groups. We had a discussion regarding matters in 2020 that did not go ahead-----