Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Minister for Defence the steps he is taking to ensure the safety and protection of whistleblowers within the Defence Forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20331/14]

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Minister knows, the position of Ombudsman for the Defence Forces was established after the then captain Tom Clonan blew the whistle on serious matters. This led to the formation of the office. Recently there has been some controversy because the Minister has made the position a part-time one and appointed to it a person who served in the Defence Forces rather than an outsider. Will the Minister provide an assurance for potential whistleblowers in the Defence Forces in the future?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy will be aware, the programme for Government made a clear commitment to the introduction of whistleblower protection legislation. In this regard, my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, published the Protected Disclosures Bill in July 2013. It is anticipated that the legislation will be enacted during this Dáil term. The Bill has as its main objective the protection of workers against reprisals in circumstances where they make a disclosure of information relating to wrongdoing in the workplace. It will have application in all sectors of the economy, including the Defence Forces. The Bill provides for a stepped disclosure regime in which a number of distinct disclosure channels are available, internal, regulatory and external, which the worker can access to acquire important employment protections.

Three specific forms of protection are provided for in the legislation which will also apply to all members of the Defence Forces. These protections are protection from the retributive actions of an employer; protection from civil liability; and protection from victimisation by a third party. In a situation where an employer penalises an employee for having made a protected disclosure, the Bill provides for access to appropriate redress mechanisms. For most workers, this involves making a claim for redress through the normal industrial dispute resolution mechanisms, namely, through a rights commissioner or the Labour Court.

In the case of the Defence Forces, section 114 of the Defence Acts provides for an internal redress mechanism where a member of the Defence Forces thinks he or she has been wronged in any matter. This system provides for the internal investigation of a complaint at various levels in the organisation up to and including the Chief of Staff. In addition, the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces provides an independent external redress mechanism for members of the Defence Forces. Under the new Protected Disclosures Bill, either or both of these mechanisms can be used where members allege penalisation for making a protected disclosure. The Bill specifically provides that members of the Defence Forces can make a complaint directly to the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces where they consider they have been penalised for having made a protected disclosure. They are not required to go through the internal redress system.

I am confident that the provisions included in the Bill, once enacted, will copperfasten the safety and protection of whistleblowers across all sectors in the State, including the Defence Forces. I am satisfied also that the Office of the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces works extremely well and that there can be no valid allegation of any nature other than that the current ombudsman deals objectively and fairly with all complaints that come before him.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister will be aware of the serious concerns of PDFORRA about the decision he made to make the Office of the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces a part-time one and to appoint a retired colonel, Liam McCourt, to the position. To be clear, I do not question the character or sterling record of Mr. McCourt. The issue for PDFORRA, however, is that there was a full-time independent person in the role for seven years but now it has been given to somebody who served in the Defence Forces. Regardless of any decision he makes, this could put a question mark over the adjudication of issues that may arise. Is the Minister entirely satisfied with the decision to appoint him and does he believe it has had no negative impact on anybody in the Defence Forces who has issues he or she wants to have addressed?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am satisfied that is the case and find it regrettable that the Deputy should raise any issue concerning the current Ombudsman for the Defence Forces. The person concerned was a judge in the military court, adjudicated on issues and there was never any question that he did so other than independently and objectively and with fairness. As the Deputy is aware, the issue he has raised has been part of an approach taken by way of litigation by PDFORRA.

I am not going to enter into that. Moreover, the Deputy should be careful not to cast aspersions on the capacity, independence and objectivity of the current Ombudsman for the Defence Forces. The Deputy says it is not his intention to do so, before asking questions which seem to do exactly that. I said to him on a previous occasion that I find his continuing concerns for whistleblowers touching, given that some of his former colleagues in the Provisional IRA had little concern for such people. Their remedy was a bullet in the back of the neck.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister cannot resist the opportunity to pass the buck. His stewardship over two Departments is an absolute bloody disaster. PDFORRA, which represents the vast majority of men and women serving in our Defence Forces, has expressed grave concerns about the decision he made in this matter. No aspersion is being cast on retired Colonel Anthony McCourt, but PDFORRA is making the obvious point that the Minister has replaced a person who was independent, not from a Defence Forces background and served full-time in the role for seven years with somebody who previously served in the Defence Forces and will work on a part-time basis. Whether we like it or not, this might throw into question decisions made by the ombudsman or create a certain perception. That is the reality.

Will the Minister address the concerns expressed by PDFORRA as representative of the overwhelming majority of members of the Defence Forces? I am merely putting those concerns to him today. Perhaps he will even be willing to meet with people who have a different view from himself. Instead of looking in the mirror for wisdom all the time, he might, God forbid, discover that there are people other than himself with a valuable opinion to offer.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There the Deputy goes again. The individual to whom he refers was appointed following the holding of a competition which I had no hand or part in influencing. He was recommended following the outcome of that competition and so appointed. That is the end of it. As I said, the individual in question was formerly a military tribunal judge, yet the Deputy is suggesting that he is not an appropriate person. Of course, what the Deputy is doing in this area is what he does in other areas. He is seeking to pretend he is the friend of the ordinary rank and file of the Defence Forces while pillorying anybody who is in a position of leadership therein. The narrative in which he and his colleagues are constantly engaged is an interesting one, but it genuinely does not fool too many people. In the context of some of the history with which his party is associated, it will get little traction within the Defence Forces.