Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

There are a number of issues to address. I thank all Members for their contributions. I will first address matters relating to the Bill. As the Tánaiste said, I reiterate this is the first of two substantial defence Bills that will be advanced this year. Members are aware of what is to come, so let us discuss today's Bill. The major issues being discussed are the establishment of the external oversight body on a statutory basis, which is a priority for the Government because it is the major piece that gives effect to the IRG. I recall and read in full the debate of 25 April 2023, when the House very properly considered that report. Senators were universally supportive of the recommendations implicitly and quite explicitly across different political groups and individuals. There is no need to go too far with that, but they were very clear that the recommendations should be implemented quickly. This Bill attempts to do that. There has been a consultation process between the publication of that report and the publication of the Bill. The intent is to enact the Bill and establish those oversight mechanisms as quickly as possible for the very good reasons Senators described, not just today but in April 2023.

As the Tánaiste said, it was a recommendation of the group that the Secretary General be a member of the external oversight body. That is why provision for that is in the Bill at this time. It was also a recommendation that no provision could be made for members of the Defence Forces or representative associations to become members of the EOB, as it would be inconsistent with the principle of the EOB's independence. I wished to place that issue back in its original context. Of course, we are always trying to develop legislation iteratively to have the best effect, but I wanted to set it in that context.

Similarly, on the piece around protest, as raised by a Senator, and the political or apolitical nature of that, it is very important to state that the Defence Forces are first and foremost apolitical. They are about the defence of the State and an overriding duty to the State that can only be exercised in an apolitical way. The Defence Forces are not alone in that; it is also true of An Garda Síochána and members of the Judiciary. It is worth contextualising some of the Senators' questions in that light. What is attempted in the Bill is simply an extension of the existing regulations. No change or additional restriction is being proposed, as such. This will be teased out in a more technical way on Committee Stage, but no additional restriction is being imposed. It is simply a continuation of the 1990 regulation provision.

The direct answer to the question of whether somebody can protest is he or she cannot protest in uniform or in an identifiable way. Members of the Defence Forces can turn up in their civvies or jeans and go along, as long as they are not identifiable. My question on Government policy in this regard is how I would view a member of the Judiciary going to an equivalent protest in Cork, or wherever it happens to be. Would I regard that as the right thing to do, even if such an individual could do it? Should that person do it? I am trying to say that I think of the Defence Forces as an elevated body in the same way I think of the Judiciary as an elevated body. Without wishing to place any restriction, in order to protect that elevation, there is a question around whether members of the Defence Forces should protest and how they might choose to use their participation in different ways. The answer to the question is "Yes" in civvies.If we had a pandemic again and we required the Defence Forces to support the State in the implementation of whatever measures needed to be taken, it would not be appropriate for members of the Defence Forces in those contexts to question Government policy in that way. Senators are talking about enhancing the ability to talk about the terms and conditions and culture within the Defence Forces. Those issues are incredibly important but they are distinct from a measure of gagging on Government policy. What we very much want to do is create a better culture within the Defence Forces. What we very much want to do is enhance recruitment through a range of different means, in particular, through cultural change.

I will highlight a number of different matters in relation to that. The first is, of course, the changes in the salaries. There has been significant progress on pay in the ranks rising from €39,000, essentially, for a school-leaver up to €48,000 for a graduate. These are very significant public sector salaries and I hope will be some measure towards recruitment. Recruitment is an enormous challenge. Of course, it is not a challenge that is unique to the defence in a full employment economy. We are not immune to losing people to the private sector who have developed very considerable skills through the training in the Defence Forces but there is an enormous focus on that.

I got a briefing in Cathal Brugha Barracks last week on the particular measures being taken to target different groups that might be interested and the use of different means such as social media and other mechanisms of trying to achieve the target of 540 this year, which is important and significant.

I took the opportunity to meet women in the Defence Forces as far as I could - separate from the tribunal and absolutely nothing to do with that - on the broader issues. I am the second female Minister of State at the Department of Defence - former Deputy Mary Hanafin having been in the position some years ago - and that is different. In this debate, for example, at various times I counted seven, eight or nine Senators, all of whom were male, and I am here as a woman. The only reason I point that out is that even at the best proportional representation I had as one in seven, it was still twice as high as the proportion of women in the Defence Forces at all times. That is culturally something. That is something one sees and feels as a woman. Anything that I can do as a female Minister of State in the Department of Defence to say that out loud to the Senators - they will not mind me saying it - to amplify the voice of women in the Defence Forces and to go beyond the measures that have already been taken to make sure that there is cultural, technical and broad change to support women in the Defence Forces is important to me and I will take every opportunity I can to do so.

The Acting Chairperson will forgive me. Do I have one more minute?