Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence debate -
Tuesday, 15 Oct 2024

Good afternoon members and witnesses. I have received an apology from Senator Gerard Craughwell. Our agenda for this afternoon is our meeting with Ms Julie Sinnamon, chair of the implementation oversight group of the high-level action plan for the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. I welcome Ms Sinnamon and thank her for her work. I also welcome the following officials from the Department of Defence: Mr. Eamonn Murtagh, assistant secretary general; Mr. David Byrne, principal officer; and Mr. Brian Molloy, assistant secretary general. They are all very welcome.

Members will be aware of the fact that there are certain issues in the plenary timetable of Dáil Éireann which may be of interest to some of them. Deputy Carthy, in particular, will have to leave at approximately 4 p.m. and I am keen to give him an opportunity to make a contribution. That said, everyone is very welcome.

The committee last heard from Ms Sinnamon, as chair of the implementation oversight group of the high-level action plan, in May 2023. It is interested in hearing about what has been achieved since then, how things are progressing and the plans going forward.

The format of the meeting will be as usual. We will hear an opening statement from Ms Sinnamon and this will be followed by questions and answers with members of the committee. I ask members to be concise in their questions in order to allow everyone an opportunity to participate.

I advise both witnesses and members of the long-standing parliamentary practice that we should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it in any way identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the name of that person or entity. Therefore, if any statement is potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, witnesses will be directed to discontinue their remarks, and it is imperative that any such direction is complied with. That said, I do not expect that this will occur.

I remind members that they are allowed to participate in this meeting only if they are physically located in the Leinster House complex. I remind our witnesses that we still have a kind of hybrid, post-Covid operation here insofar as it is possible for Members to contribute and listen from their offices, provided they are within the confines of Leinster House in that regard. The identity of such persons should be shown on the screen. I do not see any currently, but should the situation arise, I would be happy to remind witnesses and members of the requirement.

I call Ms Sinnamon to make her opening statement.

I thank the Cathaoirleach and the committee members. As independent chair of the implementation oversight group for the Commission on the Defence Forces, I thank the committee for inviting me back to address it. This is a welcome opportunity to share progress that has been made since my previous appearance here in May 2023. I very much look forward to hearing the contributions of committee members. I am joined by implementation oversight group members Mr. Eamonn Murtagh, Mr. Brian Molloy and Mr. David Byrne.

I have held the position of independent chair of the implementation oversight group since November 2022. In total, the group has met eight times, with the next meeting due to take place in early November. The group meets regularly and reviews progress on the implementation of the detailed implementation plan for the Commission on the Defence Forces, which was published in November 2023.

As the committee will be aware, the independent review group on dignity and equality issues in the Defence Forces published its report on 28 March 2023. The Tánaiste established an external oversight body of the Defence Forces in line with one of the 13 recommendations in the report. The establishment of this external oversight body was a critical element for driving the necessary cultural change throughout the Defence Forces and increasing transparency and accountability. While my appearance here today is in my capacity as the independent chair of the implementation oversight group, I am also a member of this external oversight body.

Before going into further detail regarding progress, I will take this opportunity to provide context to the role of the implementation oversight group and the work to date relating to the Commission on the Defence Forces. The establishment of a commission on the Defence Forces was a commitment in the programme for Government. In December 2020, the Government authorised the establishment of the commission and agreed its terms of reference and membership. The terms of reference covered the structures and size of the Defence Forces, defence capabilities, HR policies and strategies, the Reserve Defence Force, governance and high-level command and control in the Defence Forces and pay structures. The work of the commission was carried out against the backdrop of the defence policy framework set out in the White Paper of 2015 and the White Paper update of 2019, both of which were developed by joint civil and military teams.

Following 13 months of intensive work carried out by the commission members, the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces was published in February 2022. The report contained 130 recommendations in total and recommended widespread and unprecedented changes for the Defence Forces and defence provision in Ireland. The commission emphasised the urgent need for cultural transformation within the Defence Forces.

In response to the report, a memo for Government and a high-level action plan, including a response to all 130 recommendations, were brought to the Government and approved on 12 July 2022. The Government approved a move over a six-year period to a level of Defence Forces capability equivalent to level of ambition 2, as set out in the capability framework devised by the commission. This will entail funding increases to reach a defence budget of €1.5 billion, at January 2022 prices, by 2028, to be agreed through the annual Estimates process. This represents the largest funding increase for defence in the history of the State.

The high-level action plan to which I refer grouped all 130 of the commission's recommendations under five strategic objectives: strategic HR and cultural change to be delivered; new command and control and joint structures to be established; services to be reformed and restructured; the Reserve Defence Force to be revitalised; and joint capability development to be implemented. The high-level action plan set out implementation and oversight structures, including a high-level steering group chaired by the Secretary General of the Department of the Taoiseach; an implementation oversight group with an independent chair; and a civil-military implementation management office.

The membership of the high-level steering board includes Secretaries General from the Departments of the Taoiseach, Defence, Justice, Environment, Climate and Communications, Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform and Foreign Affairs and the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces. In addition to holding the position of independent chair of the implementation oversight group, I sit on the high-level steering group.

The purpose of the high-level steering board is to oversee the implementation of the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces, as approved by the Government. In addition to supporting and guiding the implementation, the board acts as a clearing house for issues that cannot be resolved or where particular blockages are being experienced in the implementation of the commission's recommendations.

The purpose of the implementation oversight group is to oversee and drive progress on the implementation of the recommendations of the commission. The membership of the implementation oversight group includes senior representatives from the Departments of the Taoiseach, Justice and Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform, Foreign Affairs and the National Cyber Security Centre. It also includes me, as the independent chair, two Department of Defence assistant secretaries, two Defence Forces deputy chiefs of staff and the Defence Forces head of transformation. I am happy that these oversight groups are working successfully and providing real and tangible value to the overall transformation programme.

The five strategic objectives I mentioned formed the basis of the detailed implementation plan. Intensive work was carried out on this plan in 2023, and the independent oversight group received progress updates on the development of the plan throughout the process. It also had an opportunity to provide feedback and guidance. The process involved in developing the plan was thorough and methodical. As the Tánaiste stated at the time, while it was important for this plan to be completed expeditiously, it was more important that we got it right. I am confident, as the independent chair, that we did get it right.

The detailed implementation plan, which was published in November 2023, sets out how the commission's recommendations are to be delivered up to 2028. The scale of the proposed transformation effort is unprecedented. Strong progress has been made to date regarding the implementation of the detailed implementation plan, and there is much work to do in the months and years ahead. While acknowledging the scale of the task that lies ahead, I will also take this opportunity to reflect on what has been achieved to date, particularly since my last appearance here.

Of the Commission's 130 recommendations, 105 were accepted by the Government as set out in the detailed implementation plan, with a further 25 requiring further evaluation or to be reverted to the Government at a later stage. To date, 33 of the accepted 105 recommendations have been fully completed. This is just under one third of the accepted commission recommendations in total.

A further 13 are on track to be completed by the end of 2024, with work under way on 100 of the 105 recommendations in total. The remaining five recommendations were not scheduled to commence prior to 2025. This is a significant achievement, with still more than four years of the overall transformation programme remaining to the end of 2028. In parallel, five of the recommendations for further evaluation and revert-to-Government recommendations have been completed and have now been accepted by the Government for implementation.

The key achievements to date under each of the five strategic objectives include strategic HR and cultural change to be delivered. Pay has improved as a result of increases arising from the Public Service Pay Commission's report, from recent pay agreements and from the early implementation of some of the recommendations of the Commission on the Defence Forces. All personnel of private 3 star, or able seaman, rank are now paid the full rate of military service allowance applicable to the rank, and the requirement for that cohort to mark time for the first three years at that rank has been removed. Existing seagoing allowances have been replaced with less complex seagoing duty measures. The Defence (Amendment) Act 2024 allows the Minister for Defence to grant permanent ICTU associate membership, subject to the restrictions set out in the Act. Healthcare afforded to officer ranks has been extended to enlisted ranks. Consultation with the communities of under-represented groups to discuss the attractions and barriers to service in the Defence Forces has been conducted.

Women in the Defence Forces are now supplied with, and have ready access to without delay or special request, fit-for-purpose clothing and equipment designed for females. Gender, diversity and unconscious bias training is now mandatory for all ranks of the Defence Forces. A mechanism has been created to ensure female participation and input at all meetings at general staff level. Fitness standards have been reviewed and updated to ensure they are relative to accepted standards for females and modern military roles. The Defence Forces women's network has been extended to include female members of the Reserve. A female mentoring programme to allow women in the Defence Forces to benefit from the experience of identified role models and mentors has been established.

Priority courses for remote and distance-learning solutions have been delivered. An administrative solution to enable the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces to investigate complaints received more than 12 months after the alleged action, or after the date the complainant became aware of the alleged action, has been established. Greater transparency of the wider benefits of membership of the Defence Forces is now in place. Fitness and appearance standards have been reviewed and updated. Recruitment and induction strategies have been developed, encompassing advertising, expanded recruitment and induction capacity. The maximum retirement age has been increased to 62 for all ranks and the age limit for recruitment to 39. The gender adviser role was advertised internally and on publicjobs.ie and a successful candidate has been appointed. The same is true of the digital transformation officer role.

Turning to command and control and the joint structures to be established, in June 2023, the head of transformation for the Defence Forces was appointed. In September 2023, the head of strategic HR for the Defence Forces was appointed. Strategic HR and transformation leadership teams, led by the externally recruited head of transformation and head of strategic HR, have been established. The Defence Forces vision statement has been completed and approved by the Tánaiste. The Commission on the Defence Forces made a number of recommendations relating to command and control, including the creation of a new position of chief of defence. The Tánaiste received Government approval in July of this year to prepare the necessary legislation to provide for the reform of high-level command and control of the Defence Forces. The work undertaken is significant, complex and sensitive, involving a fundamental review of the current regulatory framework governing the relationship between the Minister for Defence, the Defence Forces and the Department of Defence. These reforms are part of the modernisation of the Defence Forces and bring the high-level structures into line with international comparators.

The reduction of a number of specific aid-to-the-civil-power commitments has commenced. Smart metrics for patrol days have been developed and agreed between the Naval Service and the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority. The Army force design process has been initiated.

With regard to the Reserve Defence Force to be revitalised, the joint office of Reserve affairs is operational and annual reporting mechanisms have been put in place. The revised recruitment process for the Reserve Defence Force is ongoing and the age limit for recruitment to the Reserve has increased to 39. The maximum retirement age has increased to 62. A new Reserve Defence Force vision was published in May of this year, while a Reserve Defence Force regeneration plan was published in July.

On the joint capability development to be implemented, the capability development team, a civil-military team under the Department of Defence, has been established and is operational. Significant progress has been made on a number of large equipment procurements. Two inshore patrol vessels, IPVs, for the Naval Service were delivered in May 2023 and have subsequently been commissioned, namely the LÉ Aoibhinn and the LÉ Gobnait. Two new C295 maritime patrol aircraft were delivered in 2023, with a third due for delivery in mid-2025. In line with timelines set out in the detailed implementation plan, progress is being made on the projects for each of the specific capability enhancements in all services set out in the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces, including military radar, an anti-drone or unmanned aerial system, an armoured fleet replacement, naval fleet management and replacement, an enhancement of the Air Corps fleet, and sub-sea awareness capability.

As I mentioned, to date, 33 of the commission’s recommendations have been fully implemented. With 13 more recommendations on track to be completed, we will have a total of 46 fully completed by the end of the year. Significant progress has been made on many more recommendations. The development of an update to the detailed implementation plan is under way and is scheduled for publication in November. The implementation oversight group will continue to engage with the Department of Defence and the Defence Forces throughout this process. As a group, we have monitored the progress of the implementation of the detailed implementation plan and are satisfied with the progress to date. This progress has laid strong foundations for the future work to deliver on this critical agenda.

At the time of my last appearance before this committee, I mentioned that following the publication of the report of the independent review group on dignity and equality issues in the Defence Forces in March 2023, the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence set out his priority to develop one strategic framework for the transformation of the Defence Forces. The strategic framework, which was published in September 2023, brings together into one overarching document the immediate actions to be taken to support the transformation of the Defence Forces. The priority within this transformation is cultural change above all else. The end goal of this cultural change is to ensure that the Defence Forces are an equal opportunities employer, reflective of contemporary Irish society, and are providing a safe workplace where self-worth is actively promoted, where mutual respect becomes a dominant feature, where all members are treated with dignity, in an organisation that continuously evolves to deliver positive change. This strategic framework covers the period September 2023 to December 2024. A new strategic framework for 2025 is being developed and will be published in the coming months.

The defence budget provision has increased year on year throughout this transformation programme. The funding allocated in budget 2025 has increased by €100 million, or 8%, and will enable the Defence Forces to deliver effectively on all their key domestic and international responsibilities, enhance our national and international security capability, and facilitate progression on the structural and cultural transformation of the Defence Forces as recommended by the commission. Since the publication of the Commission on the Defence Forces report, there has been a huge increase in the defence capital spending allocation, as evidenced by the highest capital spending allocation to date in defence, to €215 million, a figure that will increase to €220 million in 2026. This increased budget provision has resulted in tangible impacts, including the delivery of the two new C295 maritime patrol aircraft, the two IPV vessels I mentioned earlier and significant upgrades of infrastructure at multiple Defence Forces locations throughout the country, including Collins Barracks, McKee Barracks and Haulbowline.

As the committee will appreciate, a huge amount has been achieved since my last visit here. This transformation programme is well under way and the significant progress to date has given me confidence that we have the momentum required to ensure delivery of the objectives set out in the detailed implementation plan.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues on both the IOG and the high-level steering board for their invaluable contribution to the process so far. I would also like to acknowledge the importance of the work carried out by the Defence Forces and the Department of Defence. Finally, I thank the Cathaoirleach for inviting me here today. I look forward to hearing members thoughts and views on the matters relating to the Commission on the Defence Forces.

Cuirim fáilte rompu go léir. I thank the witnesses for being here and thank Ms Sinnamon for her opening statement.

I hope Ms Sinnamon does not mind me being a little critical but, with due respect, her statement could have been read by the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence or by an official in the Department. It is important that an oversight body provide a broad oversight in terms of where we are vis-à-vis some of the key issues in the Commission on the Defence Forces.

I will deal specifically with the issue of the working time directive because this committee has heard from representative organisations repeatedly that the single biggest thing that Government could do to address the recruitment, but particularly the retention, crisis with the Defence Forces is remove the blanket exclusion of Defence Forces personnel from the protections of the working time directive. It has been identified as a core strategic priority within the Tánaiste's strategic framework for the transformation of the Defence Forces. The Commission on the Defence Forces, in February 2022, recommended the expeditious removal of the blanket exclusion. Five months later, in July 2022, the high-level action plan identified submitting heads of Bill as an early action to be completed within six months. In March 2023, a full year and a bit later, in the update on the high-level action plan, the Tánaiste reported that the legislative framework was well progressed. In November 2023, within his detailed implementation plan, the Tánaiste set a target of last January for the heads of Bill to be progressed and yet, last month, when I submitted a parliamentary question, the Minister for enterprise, whose Department it falls under, refused to give any timeline for the legislation. I have to say I was a little surprised that the working time directive was not mentioned in Ms Sinnamon's remarks. I reiterate that this committee has heard on numerous occasions that this is the single greatest thing the Government could do in terms of addressing the issues.

In terms of budget allocations, Ms Sinnamon mentioned rightly that the defence budget has increased year on year but she did not mention that the Commission on the Defence Forces set out a ten-year capital investment requirement. It set out that it would require, in 2022 figures, annual investment of €246.5 million in additional expenditure every year over ten years. Government has fallen short of that target by €70 million in the past two years and while Ms Sinnamon set out correctly that next year's target of €215 million and the following year's rise to €220 million will be an historic high, it still falls short of what the commission set out was required in order to meet level of ambition 2.

My question to Ms Sinnamon is: has her oversight group a view as to how long, under the current trajectory, it will take for capital expenditure within the Defence Forces to meet the level that was set out within a ten-year timeframe in the Commission on the Defence Force's report? I also was expecting some insight into the reason €18 million that was allocated to the Defence Forces went unspent last year and was surrendered to the Exchequer. This is an annual phenomenon. Largely, it results from the fact that every year on budget day, the Tánaiste announces that he is providing funding for 400 additional personnel and every year, since he and this Government have been in office, more members have left than have joined.

I have a number of specific questions that perhaps the oversight group has a view on. The number of patrol days has decreased dramatically over recent years. Ms Sinnamon referenced the recent acquisitions of naval vessels and maritime patrol aircraft. Based on those acquisitions, has Ms Sinnamon an understanding as to how many ships we are able to simultaneously put to sea and what level of patrol is being and should be carried out with our new capacity? Can Ms Sinnamon give a view as to the timeline that will be in place in order to acquire military radar and sub-sea awareness capabilities - two primary pieces of infrastructure that we have set out?

We have also seen in recent months the outsourcing of particular roles within the Defence Forces. We have seen the outsourcing of naval maintenance and ordnance training and now recruitment itself is outsourced. Has the oversight group opinions on how this relates to the implementation of the recommendations and has it any fear that the outsourcing of these provisions within the Defence Forces leaves less opportunities within the Defence Forces for particular skills?

I welcome that there has been a focus on the Reserve Defence Forces. The recommendations regarding the reserve and the recent document on regeneration, however light on detail, are welcome because we need to have a particular focus. However, I still get the sense that there is a lack of ambition with respect to redeveloping the Reserve Defence Forces knowing, as we do, that across the world reserve defence forces are a critical element of recruitment to the permanent defence forces and we are critically low levels. In terms of the group, has Ms Sinnamon a view as to what the expectation is and should be in respect to the strength of the Reserve Defence Forces, say, over the next two to five years?

Deputy Berry is the next speaker but in view of the fact that Deputy Carthy has to leave to attend the plenary session of the Dáil at 4 p.m., I will invite Ms Sinnamon to answer the questions posed by Deputy Carthy. I am sure Ms Sinnamon will address these issues in collaboration with the team that can be called upon at her convenience.

I thank the Deputy. First I will address the working time directive. The Deputy is correct that it is a critical recommendation. It is something which has been complex in terms of getting us to the stage we are at. The question was on how we would best effect that change. A lot of work was done with the Department of enterprise and the Attorney General's office in terms of making that decision. That has now been decided and a statutory instrument will be used, under the European Communities Act 1972, to remove that blanket exemption. Work is ongoing effect that decision and it will be completed by the end of the year. That is something which has been complex to get to this stage but it is now being concluded. Is there anything Mr. Murtagh wants to add to that?

There has been quite a deal of time since. The Deputy outlined the chronology of all the events. He is quite right the Tánaiste would have outlined the priority associated with that. The first element was to get a policy agreement at the start of this year which was discussed with the representative associations and military management. Then, as Ms Sinnamon outlined, there was the legislative means to enable the removal of that blanket exclusion and that is where the engagement with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment has come to pass. As Ms Sinnamon has outlined, that statutory instrument is intended to be completed before the end of this year, which would remove the blanket exclusion from that point on.

On the budgetary side, the Deputy has acknowledged the budget increases have reached historic levels. There is a time lag also required - I will get Mr. Murtagh to comment in the context of the radar systems, etc. - before the significant funding is required. The expectation is the budget set out to get to level of ambition 2 by 2028 is still in sight.

To reaffirm, obviously there have been increases in recent years. We have a very substantive equipment development plan, infrastructure development plan, as well as some very big projects under the Commission on the Defence Forces and the strategic framework. We have that big pipeline of projects which we are trying to progress over the next number of years. I expect the capital allocation will increase as those projects start to come through the system. What the Deputy is seeing is an increase. It was €141 million in 2021, or in and around that, and in 2022 it was €170 million. It has been increasing year on year as that pipeline of projects comes through. We obviously have to engage with the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform with respect to what capital allocations are outlined in the NDP itself. The allocations have been agreed for 2025 and 2026. I am assuming negotiations or engagement will happen for 2027, 2028 and 2029 thereafter. We will be demonstrating, as part of that, the very substantive capital programme we have and that pipeline of projects that is there to deliver that over that period.

The Deputy has referred to declining numbers in the Defence Forces and that is something which has been an issue in recent years. This year, the focus has been very much on trying to get to a stabilisation position, as opposed to the decline. That is by means of initiatives on the recruitment side to increase recruitment and, second, by increasing retention levels within the Defence Forces. The focus this year is on getting to a position of stabilisation. All the indications are that recruitment has increased relative to previous years and the level of discharges from the Defence Forces has reduced, bringing us to a position where we expect to be stable by the end of this year. That has contributed to less budget being required for a pay budget than was previously the case. Going forward, the focus is on increasing the numbers, having reached a stabilisation perspective. All the initiatives that are being implemented, such as the pay increases, the various allowances that have been allowed and the cultural transformation programme, are all part of the retention process as well, in terms of increasing the age at which people are forced to retire and decreasing the age at which people can be recruited. There are lots of initiatives that have been brought forward to help on both the recruitment and retention sides. We expect that will stabilise this year, which would be a welcome development after the reductions over the past couple of years.

I ask Mr. Molloy to come in on the patrol days.

One of the pieces from the commission report was on the metrics and moving to smart metrics rather than simply judging on the basis of the number of patrol days. There has been work done on managing and setting the smart metrics to be used to measure within the Naval Service. They were agreed and I can provide the Deputy with further details subsequently. There has been agreement with regard to the use of smart metrics in that space as part of the recommendations of the Commission on the Defence Forces. Rather than just counting the number of days and then checking to see the next number of days, the metrics actually make sense and provide a better and more realistic measure of the effectiveness of the patrols that are out there.

Yes. On the issue of radar, under the detailed implementation plan, the plan is to get that delivered by 2028, with a decision at the end of this year on effectively how we are going to implement that military radar programme. We have established a joint civil and military team which has been operating in recent months to identify what our requirements are both from a long-range or recognised air picture, short-range radar as well as maritime. We have identified what our needs are. We are engaging and have engaged to determine the appropriate procurement strategy to try to get that completed within the 2028 timeline. Matters we are considering are the potential for government-to-government type arrangements in the sense of looking at other governments and their capabilities and seeing whether we can access those, as well as a joint procurement process or a national procurement competition. The decision there is expected by the end of this year and the hope and expectation is to meet the timelines we have currently outlined in the detailed implementation plan for that. That is the expectation with respect to military radar. It is broader than just the recognised air picture; there are other elements that have been included as part of that.

On outsourcing, how it relates and whether or not the implementation group has a view on it, there is currently an ongoing piece of work on the appropriate strategy for civilianisation of some of the roles. The Deputy mentioned the recruitment side. In the Naval Service a tender has been completed to bring in outsourcing of the recruiting to support the recruitment campaigns. The key thing is when that strategy is complete on what roles are appropriate and what should be the appropriate approach on civilianisation, that it will be brought to the Tánaiste and we will consider further at that stage. One of the things the IOG has been cognisant of is whether there are people doing roles that could be freed up via outsourcing to allow more time for defence work. There are benefits in it. It is not a free-for-all but bringing in some outsourcing for some roles where there is specialist expertise can free up Defence Forces personnel to do other roles.

On the Reserve numbers, the target that has been set is for 4,500. That is the target level that is seen to be optimum. It is hoped 80% of that target will be achieved by 2028. There are 230 new recruits this year and a target to increase the recruitment 20% per annum. The target we are working towards is 3,600 by the end of 2028.

It was remiss of me at the beginning not to mention the members of the Defence Forces currently serving with the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, under the most difficult of circumstances. These circumstances are equally difficult for their families back home. I wish to record our thanks for the work they are doing and for continuing what is a very proud tradition of Irish Defence Forces participating in UN peacekeeping missions.

Finally, I wish to make a general point which Ms Sinnamon might respond to about the role of the oversight group. I gather from this exchange it is a report group as opposed to an oversight group. I do not get a sense it is holding feet to the fire in terms of delivery in a number of areas. I offer Ms Sinnamon an opportunity to challenge that assertion. On a number of issues concerning specific implementations, she pointed to Department officials who we could engage with directly if needs be. What I would like to see from an oversight group is a sense of urgency and for it to be conveyed to this committee and the public that there is an independent chair that is dragging the Department, if necessary, and the Defence Forces to where we need to get them.

There has been quite active interaction over the past two years with the Department and the Defence Forces on all of the actions set out and the timelines set. That feeds into the detailed implementation plan, strategic framework and dates. Pushing to see what is possible on all of those dates is a key role in being demanding on the system and using the other members. The membership of the oversight group is made-up of senior figures from the various Government Departments and an external chair. With both the Defence Forces and the Department of Defence, we are going through action by action on why something is not happening and what needs to happen to ensure that it does. The fact that 33 out of 105 actions have been completed at this stage with another 13 actions to be completed before the end of the year indicates active engagement with the total group and various parts of the group independently. I am satisfied the oversight group is achieving its objectives.

Before I come to Deputy Berry, Deputy Carthy mentioned in particular the importance of the working time directive. It comes as a disappointment to this committee that there has not been a greater level of progress. It has been put to this committee, and I heard it put in the Dáil Chamber, that this is an issue for another Department, namely the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, a Department Ms Sinnamon is particularly familiar with from a previous guise. I see a real difficulty there insofar as when we ask questions here, officials from the Department of Defence can say it is not their issue but one for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. In fact, the Tánaiste has said that here. Looking at the membership of the implementation oversight group, I do not see any reference to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Can Ms Sinnamon tell us, before Deputy Carthy leaves, what is the relationship between the Department of Defence and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment? It seems that this is a classic case of kicking for touch, saying it is for another Department and that it is not their issue. Deputy Carthy cited the fact he tabled a question to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, but he did not tell us what the reply was.

If I can interpret that reply as being less than satisfactory, I hope that I am sharing Deputy Carthy's view of it. As an independent or an external chair, what type of discussions are under way with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment? We are told on a regular basis that if there is one issue that causes grave difficulty or gives rise to real progress, it is the issue of the working time directive. The fact of the matter is that it is not happening. Can any of the four people here tell us that it is happening? If so, under what timeframes because the timeframes that have been indicated to us and predicted have not been met?

I apologise if I gave the impression that nothing is happening on it. The Department has agreed the basis on which it will progress through the statutory instrument and the intent is that that will be concluded by the end of the year. That is having had extensive engagement. It has come up at every implementation group meeting we have had and it has also come up at length during interactions between myself and the Department regarding whether or not this can happen at a faster rate. It has been frustrating for all that it has taken as long as it has to get to this stage. We now have clarity both from the Attorney General's office and the Department. The Minister for enterprise has confirmed the basis on which it can proceed. That will be completed by the end of the year.

I apologise if I gave the impression that I was at loggerheads with or was pushing this to another Government Department. There has been extensive engagement and real co-operation and collaboration between ourselves and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to try to find the right legal mechanism. The conclusion of that process now as regards the identification as the statutory instrument as the appropriate legal mechanism to give effect to the removal of the blanket exception is very welcome from a timing point of view, as the Deputy knows.

Bringing a whole Act through would be quite difficult but the statutory instrument provides for that to be completed quickly. The hope and expectation is that it will be done before the end of this year. That is the communication the Tánaiste has received from the Minister, Deputy Peter Burke. That is what has been worked through.

The timeline that had been outlined in the detailed implementation plan was that legislation would be completed by September of this year. We are a bit further beyond what we had hoped and expected but I am assured it will be completed this year. It is absolutely the number one priority for the Tánaiste. It is all he focuses on with us as a management team. At the strategic management committee of both the Department and the Defence Forces, the Tánaiste always raises the implementation of the working time directive with us. It has been a very complex piece of work to get to this stage but I am assured we are at that final hurdle.

Does the witnesses accept it is less than satisfactory, having regard to previous predictions? If we look at the high-level steering board, which has been working for quite some time, it is chaired by the Secretary General of the Department of the Taoiseach and consists of the chair of the implementation oversight group, the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces, the Secretary General of the Department of Defence, the Secretary General of the Department of Justice, the Secretary General of the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform, the Secretary General of the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Secretary General of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications. There is no reference to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. One can, therefore, see how we are frustrated if we are told by the various stakeholders involved that this is an issue for Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and that they know it is working away on it. Nobody really knows what outcome or timeframe is going to be. Are the witnesses in a position today to give us new timeframes, timetables and deadlines, accepting, as Mr. Murtagh does, that this is one of the most important aspects of the work that the independent oversight group does?

I share the Cathaoirleach's frustration. There has been substantial engagement on it. It was to happen in September but it did not. That is not something I am happy to be here reporting but that is where we are with it. The decision now as to the line of sight on how this is going to be resolved is positive in terms of knowing what we have to do.

The deadline of the end of December is an important date for everybody to work with and the steering group has a role in ensuring that that happens.

I welcome Ms Sinnamon and her team and thank Ms Sinnamon for her opening statement. I acknowledge the presence of Colonel Sean Grant from the British Embassy who is in the Public Gallery; he is a great friend of the Defence Forces.

From the outset I want to acknowledge the small bit of progress that has occurred, particularly over the last five years. The pay improvements are modest but helpful and ask Ms Sinnamon to comment. We understand from the Comptroller and Auditor General that even though there have been improvements in pay that Defence Forces personnel are still the lowest paid public servants in the country. That is my understanding and it would be good if we got some confirmation of that.

I acknowledge the progress made on premises and the budget as the extra €100 million will certainly help. Is it adequate? Of course not but it is progress in the right direction.

I welcome the comments that Ms Sinnamon made about the headcount. The stabilisation of numbers is very welcome. There might even be a net increase in Naval Service personnel by the end of this year of maybe a couple of dozen people but it is the first net increase in about a decade.

The increase does indicate an inflection point. Unfortunately, we are supposed to have a headcount of 11,500 by 2028, only four years away. Does Ms Sinnamon see a net increase per year of 1,000 regular members of the Defence Forces over the next four years? The target is ambitious but is it realistic?

I will phrase the following as diplomatically as possible. I would always, as does the committee, regard the defence sector as one team and the defence apparatus is made up of three components - the Defence Forces, the Department of Defence and the Minister's office. I am not sure if Ms Sinnamon is a GAA fan but I always view the sector as forwards, backs and a goalkeeper. What we have noticed over the past five years is that consistently the forwards are the only people who are examined, scrutinised and blamed. In fact, the backs and the goalkeeper seem to go out of their way to make sure that they are not scrutinised. Has Ms Sinnamon encountered any acknowledgement from the political side, and I include this committee in this, or institutional Ireland that they recognise the damage that was done to the Defence Forces, not by the Defence Forces, over the last decade in the form of defunding, neglect, and the dismantling of the command and control, and governance frameworks? It would certainly help the healing process if the forwards could realise that they are not being thrown under the bus all the time. With a lot of the communication we get, there is a cultural problem in the Defence Forces but there is never any mention of the political side or the institutional side. Let me give an example. Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill is a very able Deputy. She is a female Minister of State. She has been appointed to the role of junior Minister for defence and is the Minister of State yet no powers have been delegated to her. She is the only one of 20 Ministers of State with no powers delegated. In fairness, the same thing happened to Deputies Jack Chambers and Peter Burke beforehand. My view is that the Defence Forces are in crisis so it should be all hands on deck but when junior Ministers are appointed with no powers delegated to them that points to me that there is a political governance issue as well.

In terms of the Commission on Defence Forces, we were very clear that it should have been a commission on defence, not on Defence Forces, thus assessment of the entire team of the back, forwards and goalkeeper. Does Ms Sinnamon feel that that would have been a better approach from a commission point of view? I think it would myself and I am very keen to hear her views on that.

On the damage that was caused outside of the Defence Forces - and I am not apportioning blame and no one is looking for accountability or anything like that - I seek an acknowledgement that all the problems in the Defence Forces are not caused by the Defence Forces. First, let us consider the pay issue. I welcome the fact that the requirement to "mark time" for the first three years has been removed because these personnel were the only public servants in the entire country where no increments were paid for the first three years. It is good that the requirement has been removed but my fundamental question is why that was allowed. Why was that even considered appropriate? How come it took a Commission on Defence Forces to intervene to get rid of that injustice?

On the Office of Reserve Affairs, it has been presented as being a fantastic idea and that they are going to ride in on their white horse and solve the Reserve Defence Force problem. However, 12 years ago that entire office existed but was called the Directorate of Reserves. It is not a new concept, just a different name, but somebody shut down that office 12 years ago and it was not the Defence Forces. Again, this goes back to the fact that there is no acceptance of responsibility. I would love a Minister to come in here, and I would recommend any Minister to come in, and say, "Look, we accept the shortcomings at political level and institutional level, and these are not just unique to the Defence Forces" because that would certainly help from a healing point of view.

On gender diversity and unconscious bias training, is that just for the uniformed services or is it for the backs and goalkeeper as well? If it is not for the entire team, then why is it not for the entire team? I regularly get comments that there is an anti-military bias in the defence sector or apparatus. Perhaps that is an unconscious bias but perhaps it might be worth considering the entire team undergoing such training as it would be beneficial.

Ms Sinnamon mentioned the last time that she intended to meet the representative associations. Has that meeting occurred? If not, will it soon occur?

To return to the unconscious bias piece, the Defence (Amendment) Bill was discussed here around six months ago. We do not mind working constantly but it appears that we got the first draft rather than the final draft of the Bill. Also, there was no consultation whatsoever with the representative associations prior to the Bill being published and presented here. That culminated in the President having to convene the Council of State, which to me is not how a piece of legislation should be brought to the three arms of the Houses of the Oireachtas, if one includes the President. I suggest that with the next batch of legislation that comes through there needs to be early consultation with RACO, PDFORRA and the Reserve Defence Force Representative Association, RDFRA, and we should see well-developed final drafts rather than the first draft.

I welcome the improvements that have been made in capability and welcome the two new maritime patrol aircraft. I wiould point out that the aircraft were ordered in 2019 before the Commission on Defence Forces reported and the commission did not ask for the two inshore patrol vessels, IPVs. The commission asked for two new medium lift helicopters but there has been no sign of them. In fact, when there was the MV Matthew assault off the south coast there was only one helicopter serviceable and it was not even available. Where are the two helicopters? Are they likely to appear in any shape or form?

On the cultural change piece, and this is constantly used, some of it is appropriate but it is sometimes used to shift the responsibility from the goalkeeper and the backs on to the forwards. That is a cultural issue primarily in the uniformed services. I have said it before and I will say it again that I have worked in loads of different places and sectors but the best culture by a country mile that I have encountered to date is the one in the Defence Forces. If people want to know what the true culture of the Defence Forces is, it is to be seen in south Lebanon at the moment. Perhaps it is even more significant in Finner Camp at the moment where we have approximately 300 troops who have volunteered to go to Lebanon in six weeks' time and replace the troops who are out there. we need to be careful when we say, "for cultural change". Do we want our troops to be less brave or less selfless? There are hugely positive aspects of the Defence Forces' culture that should be emphasised as well.

Lastly, I want to double down on the point made by the Chair and Deputy Matt Carthy that the European working time directive is key. The reason our soldiers, sailors and aviators are the lowest paid public servants is that they do not get overtime for rostered duties.

That is the key. That is the nub of the issue. Gardaí are the best paid public servants because they do shift work, like every other uniformed service.

I thank the witnesses for coming in. It is hugely appreciated. I thank them for all the work they are doing. I think the four of them are new to the defence team so the issues that went on ten years ago are not their responsibility. It is great to have them on board.

I will start on pay improvements. I have not done an analysis across the public sector. There are recommendations of the Commission on the Defence Forces on various allowances, etc. I updated the committee earlier on the progress made on those. It was not specifically dealing with the pay of the Defence Forces. That was beyond the brief of the commission. I have not done a comparison across the public sector. Differences have been pointed out to me but that is not a comprehensive review of it all. Mr. Molloy may want to speak on other forums he is involved in, but it is not specifically a focus of this.

Most would accept, and the Deputy is on the record as acknowledging, the work done on pay and conditions for new recruits. The figures and the communication of them are making it clear to potential joiners to the Defence Forces that the pay, conditions and package of benefits available to new recruits has been significantly improved. There are various pay deal feed-throughs into existing pay and conditions. In terms of the recommendations, there are more pieces of work to be done around pay and conditions. Some of them were subject to further evaluation. They are being worked on and progressed. The starting pay for a new recruit straight from leaving certificate, to be dramatic, a 17- or 18-year-old with 24 weeks training, is €40,000. Very few public sector jobs have that if you go in as a clerical officer or anything like that. I am not saying there is any equivalence between a clerical officer and a member of the Defence Forces. The responsibilities are very different, but historically going way back there was not that disparity with a starting salary of €40,000-odd for somebody of 17, 18 or 19 years of age. There is other work ongoing with regard to allowances, long service increments and other issues, which are progressing as we go through the plan and have timelines yet to be delivered on.

The Deputy asked a question on targets set out in the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. They are massively challenging. In 2022 there was a net decrease of 456 and in 2023 there was a net decrease of 340. This year we are looking at stabilisation. If it is anything better than stabilisation, it will be small numbers. That is because of trying to increase the numbers. Inductions have increased so far this year. There are 494 to the end of September, compared to 415 for all of last year. Those numbers will increase over the next three months towards the end of the year but there is a gap between getting to a stable situation and starting to grow the numbers to achieve those set out in the report. Those are massively challenging numbers for us to achieve. We have spoken about recruitment levels, salaries for people coming in, the transformation agenda, investment in all of the facilities the Defence Forces is staying in, advertising recruitment campaigns, positioning the opportunities a life in the Defence Forces brings, etc. There are many things that will help to attract more people but the challenge in achieving the numbers is significant, given where we are at this point in time and where we will be at the end of this year if we are stable. We are coming from behind.

On defence and the Deputy's parallel with the forwards, the backs and the goalie, I sit on the implementation oversight group. Delivery of the 130 actions set out in the commission report does not sit solely with the Defence Forces. Some sit with the Department of Defence. We heard earlier of the working time directive and the fact that for us to achieve that requires the co-operation of the Department of enterprise. Largely, those actions fall to the Department or the Defence Forces to implement. From the implementation oversight group, I am following both organisations and both have senior representatives at that oversight group accounting for the various actions they are responsible for. I do not see it as being all about the Defence Forces. It was a Commission on the Defence Forces, regardless of whether it should have been called something else or should have had a different focus. There are 130 recommendations the implementation group is overseeing. Some are with the Department and some with the Defence Forces. The focus is on trying to deliver those 130 recommendations. We could spend a lot of time looking backwards at why various things happened, such as why it was decided to do away with the Reserve office. We could do that with all sorts of things in the country, such as railway stations. I have put my focus on where we are on the 130 actions and what has to happen to implement them.

On cultural change, I think we all acknowledge the fantastic work done by our troops in different roles every day of the week. While much has been written on the transformation agenda and what needs to change, it would be remiss not to acknowledge wholesomely the positive contribution, the great work being done every day and the situation those people are in. As we sit in an office, they sit in a trench in Lebanon with missiles going overhead. They are putting themselves at risk for a greater good. You cannot do that work without a lot of very strong, positive things within your culture. While there is a focus in many of the reports on things that need to be improved, I acknowledge the things that are working and that allow the Defence Forces to deliver, and they come up at every session we have.

Where are the helicopters, Eamonn? I do not know.

On the representative associations, all of the issues to do with HR, cultural change, etc., involve a dual function with the external oversight body, and I sit on it in addition to the IOG. We have had a number of meetings with RACO and PDFORRA. There has been significant engagement between the executive teams and representative associations in terms of the range of issues being progressed and getting their input into them.

I welcome Ms Sinnamon and her colleagues to the committee. I thank Ms Sinnamon for her comprehensive opening statement. Like other colleagues, I very much welcome the completion of 33 of the actions and look forward to the further 13 actions being completed by the end of this year. I also welcome the progress that has been made on pay and conditions. I have one question to ask on that. That was primarily for the private rank up to three star and for first and second lieutenants. It was not across the board to all ranks, NCOs, etc. I would welcome a comment on that.

I welcome that there is a focus on stabilisation and retention. Retention is vitally important. I also welcome that, as Ms Sinnamon has said to us here, the numbers have begun to stabilise. My understanding is that, over recent years, there was a net decrease of 50 personnel across all ranks per month. That just could not be sustained if we were to reach 11,500 personnel in the next couple of years. That is going to be a very difficult task.

The one query I have regarding the pay and conditions is in respect of the long service increments. The commission recommended that long service increments for other ranks required further evaluation. The timeline given by Ms Sinnamon's body for that evaluation was to be completed by March this year. Could we have an update on that, please? Another recommendation from the commission was the lance corporal rank being incorporated into the Defence Forces. The commission recommended that this rank be created but it also required further evaluation. The timeline given by Ms Sinnamon's body for that evaluation was September this year. Could we have an update on that, please?

Regarding procurement, some of the areas have already been alluded to and I do not want to go into them again, but the procurement process for the provision of new drone and anti-drone equipment was due to have been completed by August this year. Has that happened? Will Ms Sinnamon give us an update regarding that? The procurement for the provision of primary radar has been somewhat touched upon. It is due to begin in November this year. Is that on track to actually happen? The procurement process for the provision of a new upgraded armoured vehicle fleet is scheduled to begin early next year. Is that on track to begin as scheduled?

I will kick off on the long service increments. There was an evaluation on how to progress that, which has just been completed. It has been decided that this would be considered as part of the local bargaining. It will be progressed through that process and the timing and the dates associated with that will be published. I mentioned earlier that there will be an updated strategic framework published by the end of November and that will form part of the actions to be progressed in that way. I will pass over to Mr. Murtagh who is involved in the procurement side. He may want to talk about each of the various acquisitions.

I will. I also note the Senator referenced the further evaluation of the lance corporal rank that was due to be completed by September. That is not completed as of yet but the hope and expectation is that it will be completed by the end of the year. We view that this further evaluation work will be completed by the end of the year.

The Senator referenced three different procurements. The first one I will deal with is the armoured fleet replacement. We have established a civil military team, which I am chairing along with a brigadier general to identify what our armoured fleet replacement needs specifically are. That work has been ongoing for a number of months. As to the plan for that work, what we are calling the needs phase was completed in or around May and the requirements phase was to be completed by quarter 1 of next year. I am comfortable enough that the requirements phase will be completed by quarter 1 of next year. Then we will see the detailed implementation plan going into acquisition and contract phase. In my line of sight currently, I am confident enough this requirements phase will be completed by that quarter 1 period.

We have linked the other two acquisitions. The two referred to by the Senator were the military radar, which I have deal with, and the anti-drone counter UAS systems. The team is looking at both of those projects parallel with each another. We see an awful lot of overlap between the requirements of both. The expectation is that the identification of our requirements, that is, the work of how and what we will acquire, can be completed by the end of this year in terms of a direction of travel for those. Ultimately, we think we will deliver against the timelines we have outlined in the detailed implementation plan, which for the military radar is into 2028 and for the anti-drone capability is more in the 2025 period because what is required there is of a lesser scale and complexity than the wider military radar piece.

The witnesses are very welcome to our committee. I wish to be associated with the remarks of Deputies Carthy and Berry regarding our troops in Lebanon. I am a Kildare Teachta Dála and I have been contacted by a lot of families of members of the Defence Forces. While initially many of them were saying to bring them home, I have friends who served in the Defence Forces and who, while certainly not foolhardy and not holding any kind of jingoistic views either, have often said to me that, while they like coming to the aid of the civil power, such as filling sandbags if there is a national crisis, and do not mind doing that, ultimately they want to be known and respected as professional soldiers. I read a piece by Colin Sheridan the other day in the Irish Examiner which really summed it up for me that that is who they are. While they do not mind acting out of work in times of a national crisis, ultimately they are soldiers. We send them our solidarity from this committee. We want to know they are safe.

Will the witnesses explain the role of the external oversight body, and their own roles as well, in addressing any of the issues raised in the independent review group on dignity and equality, and what accountability mechanisms are in place? It can cause a lot of upset for the good, decent members of the Defence Forces but, at the same time, accountability and transparency can sometimes be ugly. It is sometimes not very pleasant but it is necessary. Will Ms Sinnamon tell us what the oversight group has in around accountability mechanisms, please?

The external oversight body was set up on a statutory footing, in line with the legislation that was recently passed, following one of the 13 recommendations from the IRG report and that will probably happen some time before the end of the year. That is the timeframe we are working towards as a group to transfer to that. I am the only member of both groups. All the recommendations in the IOG remit that are of an HR or cultural nature have joint oversight, if we can call it that. The IOG still looks at where we are against the timeline for those 130 actions, but the objective of the EOB in looking at its brief relates to overseeing the cultural change and the management of that within the Defence Forces.

To date, we have had at least 32 meetings. We meet every two weeks. We have substantial engagement with the Chief of Staff and various staff within the Defence Forces. In recent weeks, we were out with the air force in Baldonnel and we have also been in Haulbowline and Collins Barracks. We are out talking to people on the ground and hearing different inputs. We are engaging with the consultants who have been appointed by the Defence Forces with a view to supporting the Defence Forces to implement the work within their brief. We are engaging with the Department because, just as on the IOG agenda there are actions the Defence Forces have to do, there are also actions the Department has to do. The EOB is engaging to see whether all those backs and forwards are working together and that all the actions are happening. It is substantially time-consuming work, involving working with all those parties and, with the support of the secretariat, looking at international best practice and what has happened elsewhere. Many of the issues we are facing have been experienced in other countries by other defence forces at different times, so we are trying to learn from that.

Gender diversity is a subject close to my heart, having chaired Balance for Better Business for a number of years and in the context of the various roles I have held. At this stage, 7.58% is the total figure for female participation. We have engaged significantly with the various women's networks and met them a number of times in different locations. They are working with mentors and others and getting inputs from best practice in other women’s networks and other organisations that are further up the learning curve in respect of the issues they are experiencing. That direct contact is a valuable input for us, helping us understand what is happening, how life is for people on the ground and what key things need to change to help them.

On the recruitment side, a subgroup from the external oversight body worked with the recruitment team within the Defence Forces and it is specifically targeting females in respect of the schools they go into and other places with a view to increasing the numbers. I do not have to hand the breakdown for this year's recruits in terms of males versus females, but we are nowhere close to where we are trying to get to over a period. That said, females are being specifically targeted.

Numerous reports over the years have indicated that there has been progress, and we look back and ask whether it was the level of progress that might have been believed to be the case. We will know that the cultural transformation has happened when we talk directly to people. Steps are being taken within the Defence Forces in the form of focus groups with staff to understand the issues. Client surveys are one recommendation in the Report of the Commission on the Defence Forces that is being progressed, and they are about giving direct feedback. It will be only when people give detail of their lived experience and how it is different from that of others, given no shortage of initiatives has been introduced, that we will know whether, over a period, they are working and what has changed. That information will come directly from staff who are able to report. Certainly, from a number of the interactions we have had to date, the staff have said their lived experience is not different. There is a recognition that many initiatives have been implemented. Cultural change in any organisation, irrespective of the nature of it, takes a long time. It is that direct contact with staff that will let us know when staff are saying it is different. If there is a baseline culture survey and annual surveys thereafter, they will show what people are anonymously reporting as their lived experience.

The programme is to run until 2028. A number of actions that should have been completed this year will not be completed. In some cases, it has taken longer to get to here. I mentioned culture surveys. A culture survey will not be completed this year, but it does not make sense to rush it when there is other work that would feed into it being done at the beginning of next year and being better positioned relative to what is happening. In some instances , tendering and decisions to get to here have taken longer than we might have wanted, while in others, there may have been excessive optimism as to whether something could be done quickly. Some of the cultural changes will take longer and that is the reality. It is better that they take longer but be done right. There is real engagement between the external oversight body. Deloitte is working with the Defence Forces on the transformation agenda and significant engagement is feeding into that to try to make sure it is real, is happening and will have a lasting impact.

Regarding public perception of the Defence Forces, the publication of the IRG report and the Women of Honour testimony can cause a lot of upset, not least for decent members of the Defence Forces. Deputy Berry explained this well in the Dáil, whereas another ex-member of the Defence Forces, who is not here, did not take it so well. I know it is very difficult. My experience is with a different kind of uniformed group. I recall what happened when I was growing up any time there was criticism of the Garda, of which my father was a member.

I remember that when the Dara Quigley case was in the news, he was disgusted but hurt as well. I understand where people are coming from. How can the Defence Forces manage the public perception and support the members during this period of transformation? There is the working time directive as well. While wages have increased for members at the start of their careers, as we consider the terms and conditions of members we must ensure we do not focus solely on officers and young people who are joining. While wages have certainly gone up at entry level, we must bear in mind in the context of what a person earns when they are 18 or 19 that they are unlikely to have a mortgage, or a family to look after and all the expense that goes with that. We must ensure we retain the members we have in the Defence Forces. I add to my support to what the Chair and Deputy Carthy have said about the working time directive. We have to get that sorted. On supporting the members of the Defence Forces, how can we work on the public perception of them?

As I said earlier, culture change is hard and takes time. When culture change is in the public eye, it exacerbates the negative coverage. I have met people in the Defence Forces who are upset at the public image and I have met other people who are very upset because their lived experience is something they are looking to have changed, so it is not easy. In any change project, I believe in putting a spotlight on the successes. There are lots of initiatives that have been carried out within the Defence Forces. When people are beginning to see that change is happening, it is about making sure it is reported and communicating the positives and the things that are happening that are making life better. When people in the Defence Forces are saying things are different, this must be the story. The communication of it is something that is really important internally first, but the external media have a part to play in it as well. Everybody has a role to play in reporting the good news when there is evidence to show it is actually making a difference.

I thank the witnesses. This is an important review. I fully appreciate there is a level of overlap now, but it is important we all contribute. Before I do that, I want to say that our Defence Forces personnel serving with UNIFIL in Lebanon are in all our hearts and minds today. We can be so proud of them. It is a very distressing time for Army families all over Ireland. I have spoken to some of them. Even if they do not have personnel there, they share that family concern and it is important we acknowledge that. They are doing us proud and we are proud of them.

I am very encouraged by what the witnesses have reported. We are going places and there are so many positives. Obviously there is a journey to go and Ms Sinnamon has stated that on numerous occasions. The improvement in pay is a crucial thing. It is part of the public pay agreement, but one does not get the right kind of people, the right kind of morale, the right kind of lifestyle and all that without the right level of pay, which is why pay is crucial to the gender issue and every issue. That all personnel will receive the military allowance is a very important breakthrough. We discussed this a lot in the Seanad, but it is also a major breakthrough that the Army representative bodies now have access to ICTU and will be at the table there in future discussions. I noticed it was said the officer healthcare is extended to all personnel, which is of course good. To the layperson looking in from the outside, it was kind of bizarre that there was a two-tier health system at any time. The witnesses might elaborate a little on what that means in practice for the well-being of an ordinary recruit. There is no such thing as a truly ordinary recruit, but my point is that it is somewhat bleak that there was ever a two-tier health system there. That it has been eliminated is major progress.

Gender diversity training is so crucial. Deputy Cronin went down that road with the group members, but I want to say a few things about it. There has been a very big and dark cloud over the Army. It is depressing for the best people in the Army, and most of them are the best people. I know a lot of Army personnel. That is why I made reference to Army personnel being distressed about the UNIFIL situation even if they do not have family out there. I meet Army personnel around the country and we have many in my home area. I gather anecdotally there was a culture there. It is documented so much and established, but there was a serious culture of gender inequality, gender discrimination or whatever the term is. I am interested in the diversity training. How deep, serious and real is that and how much of it is there? How good are the personnel involved there? Do the witnesses think it is hitting the spot, to use simplistic terminology? If they think it is, is there a process of evaluation of it with respect to outcomes and its effect on personnel? I am interested, and pleased too, to hear that fitness standards were reviewed to take account of gender equality, gender diversity and diversity within the Army. The group members might wish to elaborate a little on that. That should be a major step forward.

I have a particular interest in the Reserve simply because we have a good few people involved in it up my way. There is a long tradition of involvement going back to the FCA. There are currently quite a number of people from Cavan and Monaghan involved in the Reserve Defence Force. I am happy to know that not only in the regular Defence Forces but in the Reserve, the retirement age has been raised and the recruitment age has too. I am told there are three issues in the Reserve. With recruitment, there have been undue delays with medicals and the need to bring in private personnel there. The witnesses might comment on that. I am told that when people are in, there is not a good level of activity and training. Membership of the Reserve Defence Force is so important for citizenship, civic spirit and personal development on so many levels. It creates great people who then make a great input to their community. Some of them will go on to the Permanent Defence Force at some point in their lives or at least will have that option. The witnesses might comment on the area of recruitment, including the speed and efficacy of it and the need to ensure the process is not too bureaucratic, delayed and dispiriting with respect to people waiting around and waiting on medicals. When people are in, how good is the training? I am told anecdotally that people do not have a great experience when they are in there and that there is not enough activity. We need to know about that. The age changes will matter. I have raised retention, which is important.

Everything comes down to money in the end so it is good that in the budget we had an extra €100 million. Some new capital for equipment, which is all-important, has already been achieved. The question was raised with the group members previously, but I did not pick up on everything. I refer to getting beyond the 9,500 figure. There is a targeted figure of 2,000. Where are we at with that figure? How is it looking and what are the indications? I recall the point being made that there is a pick up.

How real and long-term is it? Does Ms Sinnamon see it leading into the future?

I thank the Chair and colleagues for this opportunity. I believe the report is very positive, unless I am missing something or being naive. There is a sense that there is a desire to do things, that things are happening and that there is real progress. That represents a great day and we can be so happy. All of us who are half right-thinking have great pride in our Defence Forces and what they do, and also great pride in their members as patriots. We should be so supportive of them, as we are. I would like to believe progress is being made in all the areas mentioned and that we are going further. How optimistic are our guests that this progress will continue?

I thank the Chair. Most of the questions I might have asked have been asked already, but I have a few left. I welcome the delegates. I wish to mention our troops abroad and recognise the work they are doing. Just by being present where they are, by observing and by reporting back, which is what they were sent to do, they may help to ensure the situation does not get completely out of hand. Observing and reporting back comprise a very important job in itself. It has got so difficult now.

I have read much of the material submitted to us. I want to comment on the Balance for Better Business review group. I established it when I was in the Department. I thank the officials for the work they did on it. It is great to hear it is going well and having an impact across the public sector.

Page 8 of the written submission refers to subsea awareness capability. Progress has been made in this regard. Could Ms Sinnamon say a little more about this? In my part of the country, there is considerable concern over subsea cables, their safety, their importance, and the question of how we protect them and ensure there are no explosives sitting on them that could be triggered remotely at any time. This is a very important issue, not just nationally but also internationally. I would like to know more about it, if Ms Sinnamon can tell us. If there are sensitive or confidential data that she cannot tell us about, that is understood.

I want to focus a little on the Reserve Defence Force Regeneration and Development Plan, published a while ago. There are a few questions arising from it. I was a member of the Reserve 27 or 28 years ago and before that. In 1997, how many members were in it? I do not know whether it was called the FCA or the Defence Force Reserve at the time. From my recollection, there were about 20,000 members. I could be wrong and stand to be corrected. In 2007, there were about 12,000. The number went down again and is now down to about 1,500, meaning the number is way down on what it once was. The report refers to RDF regional recruiting centres. What is the progress on these? How many of them will there be? Where will they be? Are they established? When does Ms Sinnamon expect them to be up and running? Does she agree that the Reserve or FCA acted as a recruitment mechanism for the PDF? People who joined the Reserve and liked it went straight into the PDF, where they had a long-term, professional career. I refer to the Naval Service, Army and Air Corps.

The Reserve has a huge role to play apart from the civic side, whereby people learn a lot about civics, the role of the State and so forth. What is meant by the reference in the development plan to a revitalised first-line reserve? What is the current position on this and the long-term plan for it? What are the numbers? What is the ambition in this regard?

It was stated that a regulatory review mechanism will be established for the Reserve. Ms Sinnamon might tell us a little more about that. When will it happen and what will it do?

I mentioned the recruiting centres and geography. This is important.

The Air Corps reserve is not be established until January 2028. Why will it take so long? It is three or four years away, although the report was published two years ago. Therefore, it is taking ages for it to happen.

There is talk of an employment engagement strategy for the Reserve. Very often, that has to do with reservists being deployed overseas, which many reservists would like to do. What is the ambition in this regard? Linked to this would be a specialist reserve, because reservists can bring in talent, expertise and specialisms that would not normally be in the Defence Forces. For as long as I have been in the Houses, people have been talking about an employment engagement strategy and reservists serving overseas. I believe one or two have served overseas in the past while, but progress seems to be very slow. There is also talk of a third-level strategy. When will it be produced? Where is it at? Who will produce it? I welcome the diversity strategy, which has been spoken about already. There is talk about Reserve management offices within each brigade. Are these being established? What will they do?

Overall, the ambition in the report is quite positive. My only criticism is that progress seems to be very slow. The whole thing is taking years. When I see 2028 put forward as a starting date, I must ask why it is taking so long. The committee would like to support the delegates in moving this on a lot faster without losing effectiveness. I have asked my main questions. The rest have been asked by others.

Certainly, it was one of the recommendations on the health insurance. I cannot help Senator O’Reilly out on why there was ever an assumption that senior people got more sick than junior people. I have no idea where that came from originally and do not know whether any of my colleagues do. It is welcome that this has now been rectified and that the arrangement is universally applied across the Defence Forces.

On the Senator’s question on gender training and its effectiveness, as part of our external oversight of HR cultural change we engaged with the professor from UCC who was delivering the training, Professor Louise Crowley, who is highly regarded in this sphere. We had good engagement with her. Time will tell what progress has been made. We have picked up feedback that the initiative will not be the full solution regarding everything that needs to be done, but as part of the EOB oversight there will be questions asked about whether it has made a difference and, if so, the difference it has made. This will also feed through the cultural surveys and so on.

Yes. It is an initial step. People who went into the training quite cynical as to whether it would be effective came out of it having been forced to think about things they had not previously considered. However, I have never gone on a one-day training programme that changed my life. I suspect that what has been done is a start, and we will be reviewing it. That will be built into it.

Also, we would have to determine whether it changes things within the organisation.

All of that will be part of the EOB's oversight in terms of-----

I do not have specifics on the fitness training, but I will discuss the sexual ethics and respectful relationships, SERR, training. We have hired a group of additional internal people. We were using the UCC professor, as mentioned by Ms Sinnamon, to do the initial training. They have now trained a group of specific social workers who have been brought into the Defence Forces to work in the Defence Forces and continue to roll out and make sure there is an ongoing programme. There is no question of it being done in one day.

It is a continuing piece. The longer-term impact will be measured largely through mechanisms such as the culture survey, in which a baseline is set, followed by continuous measuring to see that it is actually having the impact on the culture. It is not a one-off piece that is done in a single period, however. I do not have details on the specific changes to the fitness regime, but we can get them and send them to the committee.

I will feed the Senator's comments back to Declan Carville, head of strategic HR. I will talk to him about it. To go back to retention, it is obviously great to see the stabilisation. Maybe with a bit of luck we will get to a small increase this year, but at the end of the day it is not in line with the level of recruitment we need to achieve that target within the timeframe set out in the report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. It is a very challenging figure at this stage. We can push other things, but that is a short-term goal. It is something we will keep under review, but we are certainly not on target at this stage - far from it.

On the subsea domain, which is obviously an important area, as was rightly outlined, two projects are under way. First, we are in the middle of a procurement process for a multi-beam sonar system for the P60 class of vessels. That is very well advanced. It is currently at tender evaluation stage of a public procurement competition. Detailed negotiations are ongoing. All due diligence will be done before we award a contract, but it is very well progressed.

The second area relates to the civil military working group we established to develop a suite of subsea awareness capabilities. We have been working on that for the past 12 to 18 months. That work is coming to its conclusion. I do not want to say too much about it, but we are nearing clear recommendations on what kind of subsea capability we need to develop and implement in the coming years.

The primary focus of the ORA in the immediate term has been about getting the numbers up. As the Senator rightly highlighted, when it comes to the numbers across the Reserve - I may be misquoting or partially quoting Deputy Berry - "withered on the vine" and similar phrases have been used. It may have been Deputy Stanton who made that comment. Whether it was approximately 20,000 in the Reserve back in 1987, down to below 2,000 now, the biggest challenge has been to put in place a plan and a structure and then to get bodies into it. That is where the focus has been over the last while.

There is a 27-item Reserve regeneration plan, which has many important components to it, but a lot of the immediate focus has been on how we can get more people in and make it more attractive. A communication plan has been introduced. There were some barriers. I gather there was an embargo on line officers joining the First Line Reserve from 2012. That embargo has been lifted and that has resulted in a further increase in people coming into the First Line Reserve from that space. There were barriers there, and part of the process is going back through those barriers and seeing if there is any particular reason that barrier cannot be lifted. It there is not, the barrier is lifted and we move on from there. A lot of the focus has been on getting the ORA up to initial operating capability, getting bodies in and getting to a point where we can start delivering on the Reserve regeneration plan. One can argue that the numbers being targeted are still too low but, from where we are, it is an ambitious plan to drive forward the numbers in the Reserve. There is the piece with regard to the Second Line Reserve and the First Line Reserve. The Second Line Reserve relates to the question about using the Reserve as a recruitment mechanism into the Permanent Defence Force. Obviously, the First Line Reserve comprises former members of the PDF and, therefore, it does not apply to them. There are different reasons people join the Reserve and they come in at different times. The increase in age limits allows for people who have specialist skills to bring those skills to bear.

The single force concept piece which has been used is primarily relevant to the First Line Reserve and the Second Line Reserve. The specialist Reserve is a different kind of structure to what we have with the single force, which has the same entry mechanisms and fitness tests. That is all the process that has been used. They are looking at all of these to try and come up with mechanisms to attract more people in. Employment and employment protection is a key element. There is a circular. Circulars are what civil servants live by, as the committee members know. I was in the private sector for 30 years before I moved into the public sector. There is a 1970s circular which is still extant that provides for members of the Civil Service to have additional days leave where they are using that leave to attend Reserve training. Even small things such as re-communicating that through the Departments and making sure that people are aware of that fact and encouraging it. There are matters relating to employment protections and the overseas issue and putting in place mechanisms that will facilitate overseas deployment of our Reserve troops. Specific timelines are included in the regeneration plan. To be fair to them, they are very enthusiastic about driving it forward. As the committee is aware, a colonel has been put in charge of the Office of Reserve Affairs, so it has been allocated to a senior position. That will be driven out over the next period. It is like any of those plans. As any of the committee members who were previously in the military will know, where there are plans, there are reviews and updates and people are held to account. That is what is going to happen with regard to the delivery of this.

I asked the former Minister, Michael Smith, about overseas deployment. That was not today or yesterday; it was a long time ago, but the Chair and I remember it. When we talk about not rushing, there is not rushing and then there is not rushing.

I refer to the establishment strength of the Permanent Defence Force and the Reserve Defence Force. The Tánaiste told us in response to a parliamentary question a few weeks ago that the establishment strength of the Permanent Defence Force was 9,600 and that of the Reserve Defence Force was 4,069. Is that the actual ambition, the final figures we are talking about? If that is the establishment strength now, as the Tánaiste said, where are we going with that? Are the ceilings going to be raised further with respect to the overall plan?

A figure of 11,500 is envisaged in the CODF but it did not become a formal recommendation or end-of-chapter recommendation as such". The figure of 11,500 was envisaged in the Commission on the Defence Forces as consisting of military and civilian personnel.

It is not 11,500 military only. It was 9,500 and now it is 9,600. Moving that up to 11,500 military and civilian personnel is the phraseology used in the Commission on Defence Forces. It is hugely challenging; there is absolutely no question about it. To use the phrase, it is a big, unwieldy ship and it has taken time to get it turned. We have shifted from significant multi-hundred negative figures in terms of our strength to point a where, as Ms Sinnamon said, we are getting to a position where it is balanced and stabilised. It might be a few positive or a few negative at the end of this year. It is to be hoped there is a drive on from here into next year and beyond.

The current establishment strength of military is 9,600, as set out in the regulation. We will be moving towards 11,500. The breakdown of that 11,500 between military and civilian is still to be determined. Ultimately, the level of ambition is to get to that 11,500 figure. That is where that position is. I think the Deputy mentioned an establishment strength of 4,069 of the Reserve. I think that is moving to 4,500. Ms Sinnamon outlined earlier-----

I have three final questions. I thank Ms Sinnamon for her comments, which I agree with. We should not try to retrospectively blame anybody for what has happened over the past decade. I would be the opposite. The idea I am trying to get across is that it is not really retrospective rather than forward-looking. Some of the commentary I heard – not in this opening statement at all and certainly not from this delegation – could easily be interpreted as a bit of Army bashing and anti-military bias. I might mention to the Minister that I have never heard any Minister acknowledge their share of the responsibility rather than the blame in what happened to the Defence Forces over the past decade. I have never heard anyone from the civil side recognise it either. It might tone down some of the, “They are the Army. They caused this problem and we have to ride in on our white horse and solve it.” That is the point I wanted to make on that.

Second, I am not sure if it was Mr. Murtagh or Mr. Byrne who mentioned the two Air Corps helicopters that may appear in 2025. Do we know what variant that is? Is that a 139 or a 145?

With respect to the MRV, the expectation is we will complete the preliminary business case in line with the infrastructure guidelines by the end of this year. We issued a prior indicative notice in January of this year outlining that was our intent. The expectation is the preliminary business case will be complete. It has to go through a process in line with the infrastructure guidelines given its value. It is required to go through to the Tánaiste and it may ultimately require a Government decision, given its size.

We are nearing an end. I will briefly refer to comments made by Senator O’Reilly, Deputy Cronin and Deputy Carthy related to our Defence Forces serving overseas, particularly those in Lebanon, and offer our good wishes to them in this time of great challenge. I acknowledge the work they do on a 24-7 basis protecting the peace. The priority now must be their own protection and welfare in difficult challenges. As an all-party group, we send them our good wishes. To their families, we say they are continuously in our thoughts and deliberations.

It may have been mentioned, but reunion flights in the event of there being a need to transport troops across certain distance are an issue that has been raised with the Tánaiste. Has it happened? Have we arranged for an appropriate level of reunion flights from resources within our own coffers, should the need arise? Is it happening?

Ms Sinnamon mentioned her face-to-face contact with many of the stakeholders involved. It seems outside consultants have been engaged and are being engaged in many of the tasks referred to. Has Ms Sinnamon, as independent chair, met with the outside consultants? Deputy Berry referenced that, on the previous occasion she was here, she said she had intended meeting the representative groups. I understand it has kind of happened insofar as any meeting she has had, she has been wearing a different hat. In her role as chair of the oversight implementation group, does she intend meeting the groups or is there a reason she has not done so over the past while?

I return to a point I made earlier on the working time directive. It seems that is one of the keys, especially in the area of pay and conditions. I do not think it is reasonable for us, the Department of Defence or the Defence Forces to expect this to be a priority for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. It is not going to prioritise this because it is not among its core issues. Who will do it? I think it is up to the four witnesses to do it to ensure not only is it prioritised but it is completed in a way that is satisfactory and in a way that is in accordance with the expectations.

I thank the witnesses for the important and helpful engagement. From an all-party group of parliamentarians, we stress to them the importance of this engagement. I have been in elected politics for more than 38 years. I have never seen security and defence being an issue on the doorsteps but I am seeing it now. The reason I am seeing it now is because of the Ukrainian situation and the unacceptable situation in the Middle East. Ireland is an active member of a European Union that sees war on its doorstep and a European Union that is ill-prepared to meet the task it faces in terms of an ever-aggressive Russia. In a few weeks’ time, we will see an election in the United States of America, for many decades the bulwark of NATO.

The uncertainty there is quite remarkable. All of this leads into question marks over the security and defence of this State; what we can do here ourselves and what we can do in collaboration, in partnership, with international colleagues. It is an issue that people are talking about in a way that has not been the case in the past. I see Ms Sinnamon's group as having huge influence on the direction Ireland takes in terms of its capability, its preparedness and the role and function of our Defence Forces.

I thank Ms Sinnamon for being here. Due to the timing of the election here we are unlikely to meet you again in this forum. We thank you for what you are doing. We wish you well in the remainder of your recommendations but we stress the urgency of your engagement. It has been put to us that the process is too slow. You may not agree with that or accept it but it is such that time is of the essence towards the completion of your mandate. We wish you well in that regard. Perhaps you might have a word or two on the couple of questions I have posed.

Before we finish, as Vice Chair of the committee, I assure the Cathaoirleach that if an election is called, I and Senator O'Reilly can still function here as part of this committee and it will be in very safe hands.

On a serious note, I wish to be associated with the comments regarding our Defence Forces personnel in Lebanon. Our thoughts are with them, primarily, and with their families. As the father of a member of the Defence Forces who was in the Golan Heights this time last year, I know a little about what they are going through. They are in our thoughts. I wish to be associated with the comments of colleagues here.

I thank everybody here for the engagement. I take away the urgency expressed on the working time directive. It has been something we have put a lot of time into but, again, the urgency of it is critical. It is about ensuring, now that we have a timeframe and a line of sight to what has to be done agreed, that it is delivered within the timeframe that is set out.

Regarding the reunion flights, I am not sure whether-----

Okay. On the engagement with consultants, and I mentioned we had met with Professor Crowley, Deloitte won the contract for the major support for the Defence Forces. We have had a number of engagements with Deloitte and will continue to do so. What Deloitte is supporting is totally aligned with the actions which are set out in both the IOG and in the EOB. We have regular dialogue with it to ensure what it is doing will deliver the results in respect of the transformational change we need. It is not a once-off; it is an active engagement.

On the representative associations, because of the overlap between the actions of the IOG and the EOB, although at this time the representative associations have decided they are not engaged directly with the EOB, I have not had any engagement with the Reserve Defence Force Representative Association but it is one I would be anxious to prioritise. Now that we have the development plan in place and a lot of work set out, those engagements are really valuable to understanding the lived experience of the people and what they see are the issues.

I am not sure whether I have missed anything out in that. I thank everybody for the engagement. It is something which is critical. It is more critical today than it was when the Commission on Defence Forces report was initially published, so this is a valuable dialogue for me.