Billy Timmins
Question:73 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Defence his plans to change the legislation permitting Irish troops to train overseas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6807/05]
Priority Questions.
Overseas Missions.
Joe Sherlock
Question:74 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Defence if there is a need to change the law to facilitate Irish participation in EU battle groups; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6810/05]
Bernard J. Durkan
Question:390 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Defence the extent to which he has had discussions with his EU colleagues in the matter of European battle groups or rapid response forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6932/05]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 73, 74 and 390 together.
I refer Deputies to my reply to this House on this subject on 26 January last. The position remains as I outlined at that time.
The background to the rapid response elements concept commonly referred to as the "battle groups" is that at the European Council in Helsinki in 1999, member states set themselves a headline goal, that is, that by the year 2003, co-operating together and voluntarily, they will be able to deploy rapidly and then sustain forces capable of the full range of Petersberg Tasks as set out in the Amsterdam treaty. This included, inter alia, a capability to provide rapid response elements available and deployable at very high readiness. The ambition of the EU to be able to respond rapidly to emerging crises has been and continues to be a key objective of the development of the European Security and Defence Policy and the rapid response concept.
The EU has learned from historical experiences in the Balkans and Africa and wants to be able to react faster when crises develop. This was effectively illustrated last year by the EU's first autonomous military operation, which was conducted in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
During his visit to Dublin in October 2004, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan underlined the extent to which he believes regional organisations, such as the EU, can contribute to the UN's requirements in the crisis management area. In this context, if we did not seek to establish how best Ireland could make a meaningful contribution to the rapid response elements initiative we would be departing from our traditional policy of full support to the United Nations. At the Cabinet meeting of 16 November, the Government agreed that I should advise my EU counterparts of Ireland's preparedness to enter into consultations with partners with a view to potential participation in rapid response elements. A military capabilities commitment conference was held on 22 November 2004 at which member states committed up to 13 battle group formations, which will be available to deploy to crises within a five to ten day period from 2005 onwards. The five to ten day period begins from the date of a decision by the European Council to launch an operation. However, it is to be expected that a crisis would normally have a longer gestation period during which the UN Security Council would have sufficient opportunity to decide on a UN mandate.
To fully assess the implications associated with such participation, I have established an interdepartmental group, which includes representatives of my Department, the Defence Forces, the Taoiseach's Department, the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Attorney General's office. This group met in December and has established three sub-groups to address the policy, legislative and operational issues arising. The work of these sub-groups, which met earlier this month, will span some months due to the fact that the rapid response elements concept is still evolving and a complete picture of all other member states' proposed involvement is not yet available. Following completion of the necessary analysis I intend returning to Government with proposals regarding the level of any proposed participation.
One must bear in mind the Defence Forces are currently in Liberia in a UN operation, in Kosovo in a NATO-led operation and in Bosnia in an EU-led operation, and that rapid responsive elements are but one aspect of EU capabilities to assist in crisis management. The rapid response concept raises many issues, not alone for Ireland but also for other EU member states, such as legal issues; operational, training, deployability, rotation and timeframe issues; and decision-making issues, in particular how to preserve the integrity of national decision-making.
Once again, I stress that the question of Ireland's participation in rapid response elements will remain subject to the usual requirements of a Government decision, Dáil approval and UN authorisation, and I have no plans to change this.
The Minister has had a few months during which to think about this matter. If the sub-group dealing with legislative matters indicates that legislation needs to be introduced to permit Irish troops to serve abroad, will the Minister bring forward legislation to that effect?
I will not anticipate the outcome of the sub-group's deliberations. We have identified certain legal barriers to our participation in the so-called battle groups. I have asked people representing various Departments and the Office of the Attorney General to advise us on precisely what are those problems and how they propose we get around them. When I receive the report of the relevant sub-group, I will discuss the matter with my Cabinet colleagues.
Is there a conflict between the Minister and his colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, on this issue? The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, has clearly stated that the law needs to be changed but the Minister for Defence has stated that there is no point in changing the legislation. What are the precise legal and constitutional issues to which the Minister referred? Would these changes affect the triple-lock procedure?
As I emphasised, the Government's policy is that the triple-lock procedure will remain in place. In accordance with the Defence Act 1960, if we are to deploy troops abroad, provided the number of troops is more than 12 and provided they are carrying arms, the triple-lock will continue to apply. In other words, that operation will require a United Nations mandate, a decision of the Cabinet and a decision of Dáil Éireann. That will continue to be the position.
I take this opportunity to reiterate that there is no difference in policy between myself and my very good friend and colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in this matter. There may be a difference in emphasis in the way in which we have responded to questions asked by the media but we are both committed to the triple-lock. We both recognise that there are some legal impediments to our participation in the so-called proposed battle groups. We are engaged in an exercise of trying to identify what are those legal impediments and what proposals will be necessary to get around them. When that report is available, which I expect it to be by the summer, I will discuss it with my Cabinet colleagues.
The Minister is known as an outspoken man. Does he believe Irish troops should be allowed to train abroad with other armies and what view will he express? Does he believe we should participate in these battle groups? Has any member of the Government asked him to park this issue until after the referendum on the EU constitution?
It should be parked forever. It should be clamped.
No one has asked me to park this issue until the outcome of the referendum on the EU constitution is known or any other time. The concept of our becoming involved in battle groups is still evolving. The European Council has just agreed the broad outline parameters of what will be involved. As I stated, a huge amount of detail must be finalised in terms of where the battle groups will train, whether it will be in the host country, which will provide the main element of the battle group, and with which countries we will be involved.
What is the general principle?
As Kofi Annan has stated, times have changed and the UN must be in a position to respond quickly to avoid the genocide and slaughter which was witnessed in the Congo last year. The recommendation is that to do that, this particular aspect of the rapid response element is necessary. It would be invariably organised regionally, whether by the EU or NATO. In principle, I agree it is a very good idea. I agreed with Kofi Annan when he suggested it. However, the question of Ireland's participation in it will have to be decided by the Cabinet in light of the changes that will be required to Irish law to make that participation possible. That will be more obvious in a couple of months' time when the sub-group is ready to report and makes available the many outstanding technical details in regard to how battle groups will operate in respect of joint training and so on. However, these are not available at present.
I asked the Minister if there was a difference of view between himself and the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, stated that there was no constitutional prohibition against participation, which the Government wanted, but that the law needed to be changed. He referred to the Defence Act 1960 which prevents this. At the same time, the Minister for Defence stated that there is no point changing legislation until the UN Security Council is able to produce resolutions within the deadline in terms of battle groups and so on.
I do not accept that there is a conflict. We both agree that to participate in the battle groups as we understand the concept at present, the law will have to be changed. I made the point that there might not be much point changing the law until the UN reforms itself to get Security Council decisions much more rapidly than at present. That in no way conflicts with what my colleague stated. We are both in agreement that there must be some legal changes if we are to participate in the battle groups as they are constituted.
Bullying in the Workplace.
Finian McGrath
Question:75 Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister for Defence if he will report on the way in which bullying is dealt with in the Defence Forces; and the number of confirmed cases there have been in the past year. [6878/05]
Dr. Eileen Doyle and the external advisory committee presented their report, The Challenge of a Workplace, in March 2002. This independent report addressed the range of interpersonal issues for the Defence Forces. Its contents and recommendations were accepted in full.
Implementation of the recommendations of the report has been one of the highest priorities for the Defence Forces and my Department since its publication. An independent monitoring group was established in May 2002 to oversee the implementation of these recommendations. The independent monitoring group's progress report, Response to the Challenge of a Workplace, launched by my predecessor on 24 September 2004, is available on the Defence Forces website and describes in detail the progress achieved since the publication of the original Doyle report in 2002.
Arising from the Doyle report, the following steps have been taken. Firm guiding principles have been set out in the Defence Forces "Dignity in the Workplace" charter. A major educational awareness programme throughout the Defence Forces is ongoing. A new administrative instruction on interpersonal relationships was introduced in March 2003 and a user's guide distributed to every member of the Defence Forces. Some 177 of a planned 200 designated contact persons have been put in place throughout the organisation to facilitate the operation of the formal and informal procedures that may be used by any party wishing to institute a complaint. An independent external confidential free phone helpline and counselling service was set up for members of the Permanent Defence Force in March 2003. An independent pilot project of exit interviews seeking the experiences and views of outgoing members of the Defence Forces was conducted. Leadership training has been given by external experts and has been the subject of NCO focus groups with emphasis on training the trainers. Changes in cadet school instruction have been initiated and issues concerning the ranking, selection and training for cadet school instructors are being addressed. Defence Forces regulations, administrative instructions, policies and procedures have been reviewed by an equality steering group under a Labour Court chairperson. Legislation to establish a Defence Forces Ombudsman completed all stages in 2004.
The chief of staff has repeatedly emphasised his acceptance of the problems indicated by the Doyle report.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
He has recognised the necessity to tackle this matter in a fundamental way at all levels of the Defence Forces and has demonstrated an active and genuine commitment to change. He has emphasised that it is incumbent on all commanders to ensure that best practice in the management of personnel is fostered at all levels to eliminate the problems identified in the Doyle report.
Policies on equality, dignity and bullying are constantly being communicated to all ranks. I am satisfied that the military authorities are alert and vigilant on this issue and are committed to addressing the matter in a continuing and proactive manner through education modules on interpersonal relationships now embedded in career courses for all ranks.
Bullying is not training for anything. I realise that the project of bringing about necessary fundamental changes in attitudes and culture will not be quick or easy. However, with substantial and vigorous leadership, I have every confidence that the proper environment will be firmly established and maintained throughout the Defence Forces.
The military authorities advise that since the revised procedures on the conduct of interpersonal relationships in the Defence Forces were introduced in March 2003, eight complaints of unacceptable behaviour have been formally initiated in the Defence Forces. Five of these cases were proven to be unfounded. One case was upheld and the person complained of had disciplinary action taken against him. There are two cases under investigation. I cannot comment on these further at this stage, as they have not concluded.
I thank the Minister for his response. Is he aware of the serious allegations by members of the Defence Forces that bullying is widespread? Is he aware of the recent serious allegations of bullying and intimidation by members of the Defence Forces, particularly against female soldiers? These allegations must be confronted. Citizens do not want a cover-up on this issue. What exactly is the role of senior officers in these cases? Is the Minister aware of the suffering of junior members, particularly female members, of the Defence Forces? It is a nightmare for many of them, especially for those who wish to serve in the Defence Forces in the future.
Does the Minister now accept the need for an independent inquiry to deal with bullying in the Defence Forces? Is it good enough to have cases of intimidation, bullying and abuse in the Army being investigated by the Defence Forces? I welcome the establishment of the independent monitoring group. What is its composition? There cannot be a cover-up of bullying in the Defence Forces. Is the Minister aware that these cases of bullying and intimidation will discourage young people from joining the Defence Forces in future? Many of them wish to serve at United Nations level. I put particular emphasis on female soldiers who wish to have a career in the Defence Forces. These allegations are doing serious damage to the Army. Will the Minister act immediately on these matters?
The chairperson of the independent monitoring group is Dr. Eileen Doyle who composed the original report. The members include the deputy chief of staff, the assistant secretary of the Department of Defence, the general secretary of PDFORRA and the general secretary of RACO, the representative organisations of enlisted personnel and officers.
Everybody is aware of allegations. We read the newspapers, although I do not believe everything I read in them.
The Minister writes many articles himself.
Apart from those. The final part of my reply puts the issue in context. Since the revised procedures for making complaints were introduced in March 2003, eight complaints of unacceptable behaviour have been formally initiated in the Defence Forces. Five of these cases were proven to be unfounded. One case was upheld and the person complained of had disciplinary action taken against him. Two cases are under investigation and I cannot discuss them in detail.
I believe Deputy McGrath was referring to the allegations relating to McKee Barracks. Certain female staff members have alleged bullying. That is one of the cases being investigated and the investigation is coming towards a conclusion. There was another high profile case recently, again involving a female recruit. That case was investigated by the military authorities and a conclusion was reached. I wish to be as transparent and informative as possible but I do not wish to discuss that case because the recruit in question has now consulted a solicitor and put the matter into the legal domain. I am precluded from discussing the internal Army investigation.
It will no longer be a question of nemo iudex in sua causa; the Army will not be investigating itself. There are procedures in place but, ultimately, people will have recourse to an independent ombudsman. Some people who complained in the past of bullying in the Army did not use the internal complaints procedures for one reason or another but decided to go to the courts. That is their entitlement.
I am confident the changes we have put in place since 2002 have considerably improved the atmosphere in the Army. To provide reassurance, however, we have ensured that in early 2007 there will be another examination of what improvements have been put in place since the monitoring committee reported last September.
National Emergency Plan.
Billy Timmins
Question:76 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Defence his plans to extend the composition of the emergency planning cell; the frequency with which this group meets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6808/05]
The Government task force on emergency planning, which I chair, was established in October 2001. The membership of the task force includes Ministers, senior officials of Departments, senior officers of the Defence Forces and the Garda Síochána and officials of other key public authorities that have a lead or support role in Government emergency planning. I can provide a list of the people to the Deputy. The work of the task force continues and there have been 36 meetings to date. The next task force meeting will be held tomorrow afternoon and further meetings will be held on a regular basis as required.
The office of emergency planning was established, following a Government decision in October 2001, as a joint civil and military office within my Department. The office supports the work of the task force and continues to work with Departments and other public authorities to ensure the best possible use of resources and compatibility between different emergency planning requirements. A key area of activity is oversight of emergency planning to refine and develop the arrangements that exist, to improve them continuously through review and revision and generally to provide the basis for an increased confidence in the emergency planning process.
An interdepartmental working group on emergency planning supports the work of the task force and carries out studies and oversight of emergency planning structures and processes. This working group has met on 33 occasions. Its membership is slightly different from that of the task force and I can supply the list of members to the Deputy. The interdepartmental working group encompasses all Departments with lead roles in the various Government emergency plans and those key public authorities, including the Defence Forces, which plan to support such activities.
The lead responsibility for specific emergency planning functions remains with the relevant Departments, as do the budgetary and resource management requirements. Emergency plans are co-ordinated by the various lead Departments at a national level and through the local authorities, including the fire service, the Health Service Executive and the Garda divisions at local and regional levels. The Departments and key public authorities involved in this process have particular responsibilities under eight strategic areas of Government emergency planning. The objective of the Government is to ensure that all State bodies can react quickly and efficiently to any large-scale emergency.
My officials have met in 2004 with 13 Departments with responsibilities in emergency planning and four State bodies which provide key support functions. These oversight meetings are conducted as part of a continuing programme which informs my confidential annual report on emergency planning to Government. Each of these Departments has assured the office of emergency planning that it is addressing its emergency planning responsibilities and has plans and response arrangements in place to address large-scale emergencies in Ireland.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
As chairman of the task force, my approach continues to be that such responses must be characterised by effective management of all aspects of emergency planning and by a high level of public confidence in all the response arrangements. Review and refinement arrangements will ensure co-ordination of all those responding so that, should we be unfortunate enough to experience a large-scale emergency, we will be in a position to mount a credible response. I will continue to report regularly to Government on a confidential basis on emergency planning. There continues to be excellent co-operation between my Department and all other Departments and public authorities in these vital areas.
Since taking office as Minister for Defence and attending these meetings, does the Minister have a concern about the state of preparedness of his or other Departments to deal with a natural disaster or nuclear fallout from Sellafield? Have members of the group expressed concern about our state of preparedness? Although I do not have detailed evidence, I believe we are ill-prepared for a natural disaster, irrespective of how we might talk up the situation. Have any members of the committee made proposals or suggestions of radical changes with a view to setting up a full-time group or organisation that might deal with co-ordinating reaction to any natural disaster? Is there any funding implication as a result?
No. It has been my practice since becoming Minister to call the emergency planning task force together on at least a monthly basis, which will continue. The next meeting is tomorrow afternoon. No member of the task force said anything that would necessarily alarm me or drew my attention to serious deficiencies.
Each plan is a matter for the relevant lead Department. For example, the public health reaction to some sort of a biological threat or the fallout from biological warfare would be a matter for the Department of Health and Children. In the case of nuclear accident, the lead Department would be the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, which has its plan to deal with such an incident.
With regard to whether there have been proposals for change, I have made such proposals because some aspects of the functioning of the task force could be changed, although this is not in any way to criticise the good work done. However, we must bring the work of the task force into the public domain and let the public know what is happening. This can be achieved by disseminating information in various ways and publicising the simulated exercises in which many of these bodies engage. For example, last year the Garda Síochána and the Army engaged in a number of simulated exercises, as did the Department of Health and Children. In the United Kingdom, when the army, police or any government department become involved in such exercises, there seems to be no barrier to this information coming into the public domain. While there has been a shyness in this regard in this country, we intend to change this. That is my proposal to the task force and I hope to implement it.
Does the Minister agree local authorities were ill-equipped to deal with flooding last winter? As a result, does he agree it would be difficult to have confidence in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government plan to deal with nuclear fallout, whatever the plan may be? Is the Minister aware or, more importantly, are local authorities aware what the plan is?
The plan was prepared by the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland. I am aware of it and can make a copy available to Deputy Timmins, if he wishes. He can evaluate it himself.
I would appreciate that.
A definitive plan exists. I wish to explore aspects of it with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. As there will be a large representation at tomorrow's meeting, we can refine the plan there. I have no difficulty making the plan available for the Deputy's perusal.
Defence Forces Training.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh
Question:77 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Defence if he will report on the human rights training provided to members of the Defence Forces, including subject matter, duration and upskilling requirements. [7051/05]
A number of educational programmes are undertaken in the Defence Forces in regard to international humanitarian law. The military authorities advise that the position is as follows. Lectures on international humanitarian law are conducted by legal officers on all basic officers courses in the Military College. In addition, a day-long seminar on international humanitarian law is conducted for the command and staff course. Non-commissioned officers and privates are instructed on the fundamental rules of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts regarding the protection of war victims.
Since the 1970s, legal and line officers of the Permanent Defence Force have attended the international military course on the law of armed conflict at the International Institute of Humanitarian Law in San Remo in Italy. A number of line officers and many legal officers have now completed this course. Since 1990, the Defence Forces have made PDF legal officers available from time to time to conduct courses provided at the institute.
All officers and senior NCOs proceeding to overseas peace support missions receive briefings at the United Nations Training School in the Curragh on international humanitarian law and human rights.
Is it correct that the White Paper on defence includes no reference to human rights training? Does the Minister agree that human rights training and regular human rights upskilling are essential for a modern army, especially given the cases to which he referred in reply to Deputy Finian McGrath's Parliamentary Question No. 75, on some of which I questioned his predecessor?
Is the Minister aware of incidents involving Irish peacekeepers in sexual violence against women in conflict zones in which they have served? Does the international humanitarian law and human rights training course include a module on gender sensitivity designed to educate members of the Defence Forces against engaging in domestic or sexual violence, sexual harassment or other sexual abuses? Does the Minister agree that international humanitarian law training should form part of human rights training?
The Deputy is correct that there is no reference in the White Paper to this aspect. Nevertheless, the position remains that officers — those in charge — get a very good grounding in international humanitarian law, which includes human rights law. To be frank, I do not know whether the course includes a specific section on sexual harassment, but I will find out and let the Deputy know.
I am not aware of the allegations of sexual violation or mistreatment of women in combat zones by Defence Forces personnel. If that accusation had any validity, it would be thoroughly investigated by the Army.
The cases are not recent. They were investigated in the past.
Since becoming Minister, I have not been aware of any investigation in that line and I do not know the outcome of any such investigations. I am not aware that anybody was specifically punished, dealt with or otherwise. Therefore, I must conclude the investigations found no case to answer or insufficient evidence to condemn anybody.
We send personnel to the international course in San Remo to keep them upskilled on changes to the law. They learn the latest position and keep officers and troops upskilled. Officers receive a good grounding in this area while troops learn the basic rules. We do not have the time or money to turn all our troops into international lawyers. However, the ground rules are fairly clear and officers know what they are doing. I will ascertain whether the human rights aspect of that course contains particular reference to sexual harassment or bullying.