Report of the Independent Review Group of the Defence Forces

Manic Moran

Let's take a slightly more professional attitude to this, brought up by Beechwoodspark, shall we?

A new report has been released, which is garnering some attention on RTE. For those who want to read it and make some informed commentary, see here. (I've no idea why it asks for a password, seems to work fine for me)

https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/251296/a269a8f7-d842-4364-aba6-f106277fcd6d.pdf#page=null

See, for example,

https://www.rte.ie/news/2023/0328/1366701-defence-review/

Please try to be a little more specific in your various responses to ensure blood pressure as a whole remains low.

sparky42

Some articles from the Irish Times regarding the reaction from report:

https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2023/03/30/defence-forces-sex-assault-allegations-to-be-sent-to-gardai-rather-than-military/

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/social-affairs/2023/03/30/the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-officers-fear-abuse-report-may-be-the-last-straw/

Manic Moran

Being sent on frivolous errands (for a joke)

This one is harmless and we still do it in the US. As we do taping the new officer to the gun tube, firing his hat out the cannon, and a few other such things.

What's important is the manner in which it is done. It can be done in a demeaning/abusive manner, and it can be done in a tone of collegiality.

Larbre34

Yeah it's harmless Manic and it's done in all jobs (go get me a packet of skyhooks and a tin of rainbow paint), but what about everything else Dohvolle wrote?!

Well described Dohvolle, very sinister, very sobering.

Probably be quite a few quiet early retirements ahead of the statutory inquiry I'm guessing......

Notmything

Pretty sure anyone who served has stories about things that when they happened were "banter" but these days should get you kicked out or worse. Reading tweets from ex and still serving saying they never saw anything makes me question them.

One incident I remember was two female privates having buckets of water pored over them as an impromptu wet t-shirt competition, the person poring the water was a captain.

My sister joined the reserve in 06. Went to recruit camp in Kilworth, the stories she told me about NCO's claiming female recruits for themselves was disgusting. She was lucky one of the cadre made sure everyone was aware he would not let anyone "claim" her as he was a friend of mine.

But then again he didn't do much for the other females on camp.

sparky42

The president has weighed in:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sense-of-shame-president-higgins-slams-criminal-acts-in-statement-on-defence-forces-sexual-abuse-scandal-42412927.html

Larbre34

The President is absolutely right to. Although a political issue now, UnahÉ has a unique position concerning the DF as Supreme Commander and is perfectly entitled to express anger and dismay at the treatment of servicemen and women.

I must say there is a sense of momentum building here, even ahead of the Statutory Inquiry, to immediately address and redress these offences.

I don't think that it is at all credible for Seán Clancy to have said he only became aware of the true extent of the problem over the past year after the Women of Honour came forward.

Because its not just about the Women of Honour. He was Senior Staff Officer AC Personnel, Senior Staff Officer AC Support, GOC Air Corps for 2 years and D/CoS Support for 2 years, all of which had senior levels of responsibility for HR issues and welfare of service personnel.

When it comes to the assaults with toxic chemicals in the Air Corps that Dohvolle has described above, I just don't accept that he wasn't aware of it. Its not possible.

And I think he and some other general and command staff are going to have to fall on their sabres over this, in order to begin a systemic rebuilding of trust and conduct in the DF.

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120423989#Comment_120423989

I think you are right about the COS, a lot of the articles are asking about his role. When the elected reps start using the term FULL CONFIDENCE its time to look over your shouldee

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120424143#Comment_120424143

The follow up question though is who would replace him? As said this is current issues, so any of the senior leadership have at best been ignoring the problems and crimes throughout their careers, at worst…

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120424184#Comment_120424184

Major General Maureen O'Brien?

Larbre34

Thats true Sparky. And if so, it might be time for an appointment from outside the State. As far as I can see, any EU citizen with the requisite military career achievement would be eligible.

Although perhaps because of the upcoming reorganisation of the general staff structure, it might be best to appoint the first Chief of Defence from outside the State and in the meantime appoint a transitional Chief of Staff to see out the role. In that regard I would agree with Roadmaster and appoint Maj. Gen. Maureen O'Brien until her retirement in approximately 3 years.

That ought to be more than enough time to legislate for the necessary changes to DF command.

Manic Moran

Appointing a person from outside the military to the top military role in the country? I have many issues with that. Appoint one as Special Staff to the CoS (if you want to give him/her authority) or advisor to the Minister (if you don’t) if you really have to get an outside officer involved.

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120424603#Comment_120424603

They did it for AGS without issue

Claw Hammer

Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

The chickens are coming home to roost now!

Claw Hammer

The government can appoint an Inspector General to sort out the DF. It is provided for in the Defence Acts 1954-2015

The Inspector-General.

14.—(1) The Government may, whenever they think fit, by order under this subsection declare that there shall be an Inspector-General of the Defence Forces, and whenever any such order is made and is in force there shall be an Inspector-General of the Defence Forces.

(2) The Government may by order under this subsection revoke any order made under subsection (1) of this section.

(3) The Inspector-General of the Defence Forces shall be an officer of the Permanent Defence Force and shall be appointed by, and hold office during the pleasure of, the President.

(4) The Inspector-General of the Defence Forces shall be charged with the performance of such duties as the Government may from time to time assign to him.

Larbre34

Don't agree with an Inspector General. Thats a uniformed position, who would by description be subordinate to the Chief of Staff. In any case, the Defence Act needs a complete review and renewal in line with the Commission implementation.

The DF may well need an independent Inspectorate in the mould of AGS, to ratify standards and deal independently with grievous wrong-doing and bad practice.

Larbre34

And I'm sure the ordinary ranks feel so unbelievably loyal to the current commanders and general staff, what with how they've protected their more physically vulnerable comrades from debasing assaults, harassment and retaliation for simply living their lives.......

We are talking about this through the prism of the current structures. Those structures are about to be completely changed. So current conventions can be binned.

Service personnel will be loyal to those in authority who protect them, trust them, advocate for them, empower them.

No one is advocating for battalion level commanders to be parachuted in and take over, those are the sort of positions that need corporate knowledge, I'm talking about a Chief and/or Vice Chief of Defence with a transformational mindset, with command experience in a true 21st Century force and instincts honed in a truly integrated service with a strong reserve element and excellent human resource management practices.

DF members won't be told to be loyal to such a commander, they won't have to be. It might be the first time in their careers that they can have genuine faith in what their organisation is about.

Manic Moran

It seems to me that if the DF are without any competent senior leadership whatsoever who could engender some form of loyalty from the ground that one must wonder who they have been giving flags and colonelcies to, and I would suspect they would have to replace more than just the CoS.

The 1st Armoured comment threw me for a second, as I'm in the US 1st Armored.

roadmaster

Interesting how Army sources claim Mellet & Clancy didnt have "Experenice" to be COS

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2023/04/01/ex-helicopter-pilot-lieut-gen-sean-clancy-faces-hardest-rescue-mission-in-reforming-defence-forces/

Grassy Knoll

Are we heading into witch-hunt territory now … be careful, this could see a serious purge and set the DF back irrevocably for years - who didn’t know, as opposed to condone, initiate or participate … sometimes a line needs to be drawn under problems and we move on albeit with better structures and zero tolerance on a go forward basis, but of course what will likely happen is the purge …

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120426371#Comment_120426371

Id say there are plenty in defence forces senior managmemt looking at ways to throw people under the bus to advance there carrers out of this

Mellet for the craic should write an article in the times suggesting he belives the army should be redudced in size to he transformed in to a marine corps under the Navy

Signore Fancy Pants

Having spent over 2 decades in the DF (retired now), I'm shocked and appalled with the amount of accusations coming out.

When I say that I never heard of a female soldier being raped by a colleague, I'm being genuine. That includes canner talk etc, not once. Accused of sexual harassment?, yes I have heard and witnessed that from both sexes, but verbally only.

I know of 4 instances when an NCO rode recruits, 3 male NCOs and one female. The male NCOs were repremanded, not sure about the female.

I know of numerous female Privates and Corporals over the years who would offer themselves up to a senior rank, then blackmail them for years for an easy time. I know of female recruits who gave fellow recruits blowjobs for favours.

I know of female Privates who had a valid reputation for riding rings around them. Giving the impression they were easy, which made them a magnet for male and female advances. Some welcome, some not.

Historically, and before my time (in the 80's I think), I know of at least one male senior NCO who used to sexually assault male Privates, regularly apparently. I think there may have been a concerted effort to cover it up.

Overseas, I know of one recent male on male encounter. The story of which is still unclear. Two close friends, one gay, one straight. The straight guy ended up leaving because of it.

Overseas again, female gang bangs in the lines, leading to marriage break ups.

Sexual harrassment / assault / violence is indefendable, and should be dealt with in the harshest of terms.

Now when I was in the FCA, Id say I seen and heard more sexual harrassment in 3 years, than in the 22 I did in the PDF.

There's no room for that **** in an organisation based on heirarchy and trust. Those who have been identified without question should be made a blinding example of. Those accused should be fully investigated and dealt with appropriately.

Bullying etc is a harder one to call, as everyone has their own tolerances and perceptions of what is acceptable or not. It all comes down to context, but clear cut harrassment and bullying should also be dealt with harshly, all the mechanisims are in place.

My recruit training in 1999 would not be able to occur now, like many others, same with my NCO course. You would be accusing someone of bullying every 3 minutes. Id wonder how many of the complainants "felt" bullied, or is it only those with undeniable accounts of bullying.

I can say the quality of personnel entering the DF has dropped dramatically in the last decade, and maybe this is a factor. Or maybe its a neglected organisation that prefers to be blind to serious issues, just so people get promoted.

Either way despite genuine serious issues reported, if I was a CT head, it looks like an element of an agenda to finally get rid of the DF.

roadmaster

Going my all the articles in the papers and journos that normally dont comment on the defence forces righting articles there seams a sense of blood in the water and scalp wanted

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120427060#Comment_120427060

Honestly given the report, a scalp was always the most likely outcome, whether its from external forces as you mentioned, or internal issues like the Army not liking not being the CoS, to the basic reality as mentioned that its hard to believe that someone whose served for so long had "no idea" of any of the issues or the scale of them (to that I think the comment from General Clancy hasn't helped his position much).

The idea of an external appointment to me doesn't really hold up either, both because of issues already mentioned, and frankly because I can't see the attraction for any senior office of another military to actually take the job even if it was offered, not with the restrictions and state of the DF.

Alkers

I don't have the document to hand ATM (read it yesterday) but it also picks up on the (perceived) two class system between officers and enlisted persons. I definitely find that younger officers currently are more grounded than some of the older ones but you definitely see the elitist attitude amongst some of them.

I always find it odd that DF leadership material makes reference to leadership examples from past wars, with officers refusing to eat until their men are fed, then the Naval Service have their dinner served to them by enlisted persons in formal attire, what message does that convey?!

Larbre34

Of course there's a two class system between officers and enlisted, thats the whole point. If personnel are assigned as Stewards, thats the job, they must do it do their best ability. So long as they are treated with dignity and respect while doing it, no problem.

Just to circle back to those female gangbangs out foreign....... female only like?

Notmything

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120427941#Comment_120427941

Never heard of any gang bangs in any of my trips, but definitely knew of officers and NCO's mainly at bn hq who enjoyed the company of females for the duration of the trip.

Saying that on one trip two privates found out they were bedding the same female which led to much hilarity in the canteen.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120424814#Comment_120424814

By what description would an inspector general be subordinate to the Chief of Staff. The Inspector General can be given any rank and given functions distinct from those of the Chief of Staff. There were Inspectors General in the early days of the state. I would think the Inspector General would be appointed by the government in situations such as this where the DF is out of control.

Larbre34

The DF has a number of very specific problems that need addressing, but it is not out of control, by any stretch.

What would you suggest this Inspector General actually do anyway?

thegame983

I mean I always assumed that being in the military was like the opening 40 mins of Full Metal Jacket.

JP Liz V1

Katie Hannon discussion on RTE 1 now about the abuse and bullying, shocking stuff

jonnybigwallet

That was a very interesting post. Thanks Doh.

pjordan

Actually very surprised there isn't more comment and reaction to this report, and indeed the women of honour story overall.

It's interesting hearing the views and opinion of insiders or former military personell on here even if some of the jargon or terminology is over my head.

Coming at it as I am, with absolutely no experience of military service or even the RDF but with quite a lot of first hand experience of working and interacting with the ex officer class of the Irish military, I would have to say that very little of it came as much of a surprise to me. I have sadly found that the arrogance and sense of superiority engendered within the officer class in the Irish defence forces tends to extend far beyond their military career, invariably when they retire and are subsumed into private industry, or more likely into roles in the public service, enabled by a very influental and powerful old boys network who look after their own. That and the attitude of some many of these former officers to women in particular is something that belongs in the last century, or indeed the one before that. The levels of misogony and chauvanism and sexism that I have encountered from these "lads" as a male myself is unbelievable and is invariaby accompanied with the notion that it is "nothing but a bit of craic" and sure it's her problem "if she cant take a joke".

Indeed in the last week I'd say there are multitudes of serving and former officers frothing at the mouth and absolutely raging at the incursion into and spotlight being trained on their hallowed secretive club, and ranting at "that crowd of bitches" and proof if any were needed that "woman have no place in the military" oh and that a bit of discipline in essential within the military and is now being dressed up as "bullying" by whimps and snowflakes that just couldn't take it.

I'd also say that unfortunately this attitude and behaviour is so engendered and enshrined within the upper officer echelons of the defence forces that enlightened officers are in the minority and any effort to root it out would require a decimation and early retirement for a vast swathe of the officer class that would likely have the sort of destructive effect on the force that Stalin's 1937 purges had on the Russian military. I think a bit like the reform of the RUC into the PSNI, a lot of old heads with old ideas are gonna have to go and, considering the brain and personnel drain that the defence forces are already undergoing, one would wonder would it be even able to survive such purge to emerge as an effective defence force afterwards?

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120436935#Comment_120436935

The Clonan report came out 23 years ago. Either the DF is acting under orders letting this thing go on, or it is out of control and can't stop it.

The Inspector General should identify and eliminate the systemic problems causing all of this.

I notice you haven't explained how an Inspector General would be subordinate to the Chief of Staff by description.

What description?

Larbre34

By describing the simple fact that the legislation requires an I.G. to be appointed with a Military rank, so he or she would have to be of rank OF-9 (4 Star General or full Admiral) to be anything but subordinate to the incumbent Defence Forces Chief of Staff.

sparky42

The cabinet is going to hear proposals for a new oversight group at tomorrows meeting. Completely warranted yet a bit telling that on this matter of defence they can respond within days and weeks while anything that actually means spending on defence gets slowballed as much as possible.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2023/0404/1374274-defence-forces/

Larbre34

AGS have commenced an investigation into predatorial behaviour in the DF following receipt of 26 complaints covering 50 years, with more anticipated.

No doubt a good few of these allegations are against former members, but will be interesting to see if theres a uptick in early retirements among certain cohorts.

roadmaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120443313#Comment_120443313

How will this work with Military law? Does AGS & Civilian law overrule?

sparky42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120443564#Comment_120443564

Not sure, the Commissioner seems to have already ruled out involvement of the MPs, and RTE was suggesting the AGS would seek powers if needed to investigate overseas allegations as well?

Larbre34

We're talking about both alleged perpetrators and victims that are no longer in the DF, probably a very long time gone in fact, and also probably the shaking of a few trees to examine any coordination or conspiracy in terms of the pattern of offences over 5 or 6 decades.

The MP wouldn't have nearly the resources or the remit to lead an investigation like that and so AGS are the proper Authority to handle it.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120440074#Comment_120440074

The I.G could be appointed with a rank equal to the COS. In any event, even if the I.G. had a lower rank than the COS it wouldn't of itself make him subordinate. It might make him lower in rank but would not necessarily give the COS operational control over his activities. The Provost martial can arrest the Chief of Staff or other officers senior to him. They can't order him not to. An I.G> does what the government tells him. So does the Chief. All the government has to do is prescribe exclusive functions for each and there is no subordination.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120443564#Comment_120443564

many offences can be against both Military Law and ordinary law. E.g assault, theft, criminal damage. The AGs can investigate andy offence contrary to ordinary law. if a person has been charged under military law they can't be charged under ordinary law or vice versa. In a lot of cases it is more convenient for military law to deal with offences. There is no need for the Garda to visit army barracks to take statements and to summon witnesses to the ordinary criminal courts. in addition the sentencing criteria is different in the military with discipline being a factor in the military. The military judge can also schedule hearings and so can take account of operational requirements whereas a civvy court will set a date and expect the military to work around it. No allowance would be made for a witness or the accused being on a course or overseas.

sparky42

The women of honour group aren’t happy with the selection of the DOD SG for the panel:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41110201.html

Larbre34

It does seem a bit conflicted, to say the least. I mean sure, have a liaison from the Dept with observer status, but there should be no full member of the body from the DF or DoD, it the notion is for it to be external and independent.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120444555#Comment_120444555

A bit like putting the fox on the committee to review security in the hen-house.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120454857#Comment_120454857

They haven't been involved in the behaviour but it is not yet known that they haven't been involved in the causation and cover-ups.

Larbre34

It doesn't matter, the DoD is part of the Defence Structure.

We do not yet know, whether or if the Department itself was involved in ignoring, blocking or otherwise obstructing or failing complainants over the decades long duration of these allegations.

Despite the recency of McCrum's appointment as Sec Gen, she is the Chief Executive of the Department now and may well have to account for and represent her Department for actions in the past. Thats just the way corporate responsibility works.

And so, for these reasons and others, it is improper that she or any Officer of the DoD would be represented on any group or body investigating the allegations or having anything to do with advocating for complainants.

Manic Moran

I have to say, I’d be inclined to go with someone from the organisation as a “sanity check” on some of the group’s activities and, frankly, as an SME who knows who’s who and what’s where. You obviously can’t go about appointing former members of the DF, as you might when doing other similar investigations. As one member, she’s not going to have a controlling vote and as Dohville mentions, is not likely to be a part of the problem.

Larbre34

If you want a sanity check, chair it with a retired judge or senior counsel. Get representation on it from the professional fields of HR, counselling, human rights law, advocacy etc.

Not having a controlling vote is one thing, not being able to influence proceedings and get the inside track about what her Department may be facing, corporately, is another.

Its a clear conflict of interest, I can't be persuaded otherwise and I think her appointment will be withdrawn or otherwise ended sooner rather than later. If for no other reason than the refusal of complainants to engage with the body so long as she remains on it.

getoutadodge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120426662#Comment_120426662

JEEZ what a mess. The legal eagles must be licking their lips down at the Four Goldmines....years of lucrative work incoming. Currently they're extracting zillions from the HSE on negligence cases. The DF could be finished once the criminal cases start flooding the courts.

Larbre34

Finished? How would you describe that manifesting itself?