Dáil Public Accounts Committee 14/05/26 – Director of State Claims Agency, Mr Ciarán Breen, misleads the PAC on Air Corps Toxic Chemical Scandal

Watch the Director of the State Claims Agency, Mr Ciarán Breen, give misleading evidence to the Dáil Public Accounts Committee 14/05/26.

Minister for Defence Helen McEntee mislead the Dáil a week previously on the same matter.

Transcript

(3  excerpts from full PAC meeting)

Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)

Sure. I thank Mr. Breen. I will ask specifically with regard to current and serving and also former Air Corps members. How many outstanding cases are open within the State Claims Agency regarding current or former Air Corps members?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Originally, we had 11 of those claims. We settled one claim. Following that claim, we received 13 more. Therefore, we have 24 cases now.

Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)

Are they at various stages of process? When would the earliest of those 20 have been opened?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

In the case we settled, for example, my recollection is that proceedings were served in 2014 and the case was settled in 2025. The other cases are at different levels of engagement and readiness and so on.

Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)

Would there be others from that 2014 era?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I guess many of them would probably date back to that date and maybe dates after that.

Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)

In Mr. Breen’s expertise, why would a case to be ongoing that long?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

When I answer this, I am not being critical at all of, obviously, when I say this but sometimes a plaintiff is in a very complex action like that because we are dealing with exposure to chemicals and generally an environment that alleges toxicity. Therefore, there are complex issues of liability and causation for both sides. If we add in discovery to that as well, we can see why we would get delays of, certainly, a good number of years. In the particular case that we settled, there were periods of relative inactivity. When I say that, I just mean legally. I am quite sure there was a lot of work being done in the background.

Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)

Maybe it is not as simple as asking in whose court the ball lies for those cases, but does Mr. Breen think that would be with the State Claims Agency right now or would it be with the plaintiffs?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

When a plaintiff sues, really, the ball lies largely with the plaintiff, but we do not rely on that. What we try to do, wherever we can, if we acknowledge that the State has a liability, is try to make an approach ourselves and ask, if both sides are ready, whether we can settle this case on terms that are acceptable to both parties.

*****

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

I welcome everybody here today. Following on from Deputy Neville’s questioning on wages and staffing, it seems to be a fantastic place to work when there are so many staff on such high salaries. Would I be correct in saying the salaries the witnesses are paid are much higher than civil servants in most other parts of Government?

Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)

Looking at the data, the NTMA was set up 35 years ago and was designed to be a market-based private sector model to get people in to manage the asset liabilities of the State, so, yes, you would say that.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

Does Mr. O’Connor think that is fair?

Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)

I do, and the reason is other people set up the agency on that basis. When you look at the scale of what is managed in the NTMA, in going to the market, funding that over €200 billion, doing it in a prudent way and managing the assets of the State, you need the talent in the room. When you are talking to asset and fund managers, you need to have people on both sides of the table who know what they are doing.

We have people doing payments – and we failed on this one payment – and we have people doing derivative transactions who need to know which side of the button to press on the FX, which currency we are trading in and all those different aspects. We need to have people of the appropriate skill and experience to do those jobs. The second thing is to get those people who are competing against the banks, law firms and engineering firms, etc., so, yes, I do.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

It sounds like a very good salary to me. In that regard, there were 270 personnel within the company who also received €2.5 million last year in State-related bonuses. Am I correct in saying that is all coming from Government funding?

Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)

Absolutely. Regarding performance-related pay, again, that is another aspect of the pay models and other tools. It is non-pensionable performance-related pay and is common in the marketplace. We are probably a little different in that we publish the amounts and, generally, the average would be about €9,000 or €10,000 to about a third of the staff.

The one thing is we tend to disperse to more staff because all parts – the front and middle office – are important. Rather than pay large amounts to some people who might appear big, as the industry does, because it might incentivise the wrong risk-taking behaviour, we tend to disperse to between 30% and 40% of staff.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

I am interested in the State Claims Agency and the duty of care to those who have been wounded by Government policy, such as thalidomide sufferers, those with hepatitis C and now the Air Corps.

Is it the policy that staff get pay-related bonuses to help ensure that the State Claims Agency fights these cases every single step of the way and to try to break down plaintiffs and get them to withdraw their claims?

Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)

Before I ask Ciarán to comment on the cases and the management of claims, to be very clear, performance-related pay is set on an agency-wide basis. It is not set for one business unit over another. The approach would never be to pay performance-related pay for a specific item to incentivise somebody to do a particular…..

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

What do they get the pay-related bonus for?

Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)

The pay-related bonus depends on the performance of the individual in their overall duties and the performance of their business area in the wider NTMA.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

Is Mr. O’Connor telling me it has nothing to do with claims?

Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)

People in the State Claims Agency are one cohort, who also get…..

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

They are getting pay-related bonuses for ensuring claims do not go through. Is that not the case?

Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)

No, not that. It is for the performance of their duty overall to fulfil their mandate. They are not incentivised to do one specific thing over another. They must always do the job to the best of their ability.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

The State Claims Agency failed to spot chemical exposure of Air Corps personnel, even though it did health and safety audits from 2006 until 2026. Am I correct in saying that? It failed to see that, and that there was no adequate PPE.

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Maybe I can answer that because I am the director of the State Claims Agency. Our risk management team, comprising scientists, engineers and people qualified in environmental and fire safety, did carry out audits in Baldonnel in 2006 and 2007…..

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

They failed to see, however, that the staff were not wearing PPE.

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I ask the Deputy to just bear with me for a minute as I want to explain. The particular area that is the impugned area was called the old engine repair flight workshop. By the time we carried out our audits in Baldonnel, that had been demolished or it was disused. I think it was disused in 2006 and demolished in 2007 so it was never, in fact, inspected by our risk management people. They could not have been aware of any issues with that particular workshop at the time.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

Were there no certificates of compliance from 2006?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I might just explain to the Deputy what we do. Our risk management is to advise and assist State authorities. One of the things that we are most conscious about doing is to ensure that somewhere like the Air Corps, Navy or Army – just looking at them as a group – has in place safety performance management. That is what we do. We do some audits.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

When the team investigated this, however, was there safety performance management in place?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Yes

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

It was in place.

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Yes, when we went there in 2006 and 2007, we absolutely made sure that such performance management systems were in place, and they were. By the way, we did carry out spot audits of various parts of Baldonnel. Very often we commented negatively on things that we found.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

Did the team spot at that time that there was a failure to store carcinogenic and highly corrosive chemicals on the property? Did it see that?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

As I said, that flight workshop was gone when we did the audit. Generally, in terms of chemicals management, we have found that the Air Corps is adhering to proper practice.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

How many cases are there? Was it 24?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

We had 11 originally and 13 very recently.

Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)

I have also been told that 65 Air Corps personnel died due to the health implications of what happened there. Where are those cases?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

We only deal with cases when we have claims in front of us. That is confined to the 24 that we have.

 

*****

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

…..I want to return to the issue of the Air Corps. When was the first case lodged or taken?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

The earliest cases were probably lodged around 2013-2014.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

Again, for the record, why did it take so long for the case to be settled last year in 2025?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

It is obviously difficult for me to talk about any individual case because you will understand that we have to respect the confidentiality of any plaintiff. I can say this to you definitely; during that period of the time, from the time that the summons was originally served, there were delays following that in terms of how the file was progressed, not at our end.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

Were the delays on the other side?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

They were not on our end.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

It was not on the State Claims Agency’s end.

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I am not saying that in any critical way, but there were delays until we finally got to settlement.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

Were there any disclosure actions taken against that discovery?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Yes, there were. The discovery was not actually in the case that was settled. The discovery was in respect of the lead case, which actually was not the case that was first settled. The Chair will probably be aware that in that particular case both the High Court and Court of Appeal upheld our discovery applications to limit discovery, and the Supreme Court overturned that finally.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

The State Claims Agency fully complied with that? Was the State Claims Agency found to have been in breach of the Supreme Court?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

There had been a breach by the Air Corps in that it had not made proper discovery. It was ordered to make proper discovery, which it ultimately did.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

This ultimately prolonged the case…..

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Yes, that did prolong it.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

…..so Mr. Breen’s prior statement that the delays were on the plaintiff’s side…..

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Sorry, I was not impugning the plaintiff at all. I said that there were delays there…..

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

There were delays.

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

…..and I agree with you that one of them was the breach in relation to the discovery. That did delay it.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

In relation to Baldonnel, I think the State Claims Agency portrayed the issue as solely down to the engine room. Is that where predominantly the chemical exposures took place? Am I right?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Certainly based on the claims as pleaded, the references are to the exposure over a period of time relative to that particular locus.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

When was the engine room demolished?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I think it was in 2007.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

Mr. Breen said it was in 2006 earlier on.

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

No. I said that I think it was disused in 2006 and ultimately demolished in 2007.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

Was the engine room still in use up to September 2007?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I am not sure. I honestly cannot tell you emphatically, but certainly what I recollect is that it had been taken out of use and then was finally demolished in 2007.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

I have an image in front of me from Google Maps from 2009 that clearly shows the engine room still fully intact. The image is dated May 2009. Is Mr. Breen correct with the information he gave that it was demolished in that timeframe?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

Sorry, I obviously was not there. I do not know when it was exactly. What I was told was that it was demolished in 2007.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

The evidence I have is that it was still fully intact in 2009. If the engine room was still in use up until September 2007, and this is the information I have, when did inspections of the engine room commence?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

We did not ever inspect that engine room on the State Claims Agency side, precisely for the reason that it was not actually in use.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

When did the avionic building on the right-hand side of the engine room cease being used?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I do not know. I do not have that information.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

That ceased being used as a classroom in 2008-2009 and that was used by the Air Corps College. It has been reported that 14 persons prematurely died from that building. The information I have is that while there is an attempt to portray it solely as an issue around the engine room, 102 people are reported to have prematurely died as a result of chemical exposure and other serious failures throughout the rest of the airbase. Would…..

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

I have just seen those stories in the media but I cannot comment on that. I do not know any causal link between those deaths and Baldonnel as an employer.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)

There are serious concerns that chemical exposure was rampant throughout Baldonnel. In Mr. Breen’s view, is that something that has been established?

Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)

In relation to the work that we carried out, and you can imagine that Baldonnel is a very big campus and it has many different parts to it, our audits were carried out in different parts of Baldonnel. Certainly in relation to our examination, the management of chemical hazards was in accordance with best standards in terms of all of the safety performance management paperwork we saw.

*****

A full transcript of the complete Public Accounts Committee meeting on Thursday the 14th of May 2026 can be viewed below.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/committee_of_public_accounts/2026-05-14/3/

*****

In this startling exchange before the Dáil Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on May 14, 2026, the Director of the State Claims Agency (SCA), Ciarán Breen, provides demonstrably misleading testimony regarding the Irish Air Corps toxic chemical exposure scandal.

During the hearing, Mr. Breen attempts to excuse the SCA’s negligent Health and Safety audits of Casement Aerodrome, which incredibly awarded the Defence Forces “best practice” compliance certificates in early 2007 while personnel were actively being poisoned without PPE. To defend these catastrophic oversight failures, Breen claims that the old Engine Repair Flight (ERF) workshop was “disused in 2006 and demolished in 2007,” and therefore was never inspected by his risk management team.

This is factually false. As highlighted by Deputy John Brady, the Engine Shop remained in use up to September 2007. Furthermore, it was not demolished in 2007; the building is clearly visible and fully intact in Google satellite images dating to May 2009. Official tender documents for the “Demolition of Old Engineering Workshops” at Casement Aerodrome prove that the tendering process only closed on July 15, 2009. Adding to the severity of this oversight, the right-hand side of the Engine Shop, the Avionics building, was actively used as a classroom by the Air Corps College throughout 2008 and 2009.

Breen’s testimony also reveals a calculated strategy by the State to geographically contain the scandal. He attempts to concentrate the chemical exposure allegations solely on the Engine Shop, claiming the legal cases are relative only to “that particular locus”.

The tragic reality is that chemical misuse was rampant everywhere in Baldonnel. While 14 individuals have tragically died prematurely from the Engine Shop / Avionics building, a staggering 102 personnel have died prematurely from the rest of the airbase. This means that 88% of the 116 recorded premature deaths occurred among men and women who served in units *outside* of the Engine Shop.

Without a doubt, Mr. Breen has misled the PAC in an attempt to rewrite history, downplay the profound incompetence of the SCA’s safety audits between 2006 and 2016, and minimize the State’s sweeping liability. It is yet another chapter in the State’s cruel playbook of “Delay, Deny, Die.”

To learn more about the campaign for truth, justice, and healthcare for exposed personnel, visit the Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors (ACCAS) website: www.accas.info

Delay – Deny – DLie

Dáil Éireann Priority Questions 07/05/26 – Air Corps – Minister rejects health supports for Air Corps victims

Watch Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire TD, the Sinn Fein Spokesperson for Defence, ask the recently appointed Minister for Defence Helen McEntee for an update on medical supports for exposed Air Corps personnel and watch her gaslight survivors & downplay their experience while ignoring and the issue of medical supports.

Transcript

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)

Question: 67. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Minister for Defence further to recent Dáil Éireann debates, her views on past health and safety measures in the Air Corps; the actions she intends to take to support former aircraft maintenance and ancillary personnel; whether she intends to ensure their medical needs are met; and the other supports that can be offered to the category affected as a whole. [33426/26]

Since our last engagement on this issue, we have had the “RTÉ Investigates” documentary, considerable reporting by Neil Michael from the Irish Examiner, and many disturbing and worrying disclosures and descriptions of what was going on. It is clear that Air Corps personnel were exposed to unsafe working conditions and to dangerous chemicals and there seems to be a strong correlation to very serious illness and bad health outcomes. These are people who served the State. They should get support. What does the Minister intend to do about it and how does she intend to ensure that they are looked after?

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

I thank the Deputy for raising this. I acknowledge the Deputy’s engagement around the issue. I welcome the opportunity to set out the position as it stands. As there are multiple ongoing cases before the courts, as I have stated previously, I am limited in terms of what I can say so that I do not prejudice any of the ongoing litigation. The Deputy has said previously that it is possible to discuss both but I always want to be careful in that regard.

The advice available to me is that any view I have here needs to be carefully expressed so that we do not undermine the current process. Each claim has to receive the necessary case-specific analysis and consideration because what is clear is that each individual case is different to a certain extent.

I had a number of briefs from my officials on this. I then requested further detailed analysis from them. I have received that and carefully considered it. I convened a meeting with the Attorney General, representatives from the State Claims Agency and officials from my Department to discuss the matter further, having sought various different advices.

There are accusations that the State is prolonging legal proceedings as a deliberate tactic but that is not the case. It is important to stress that at every step of the way, the engagement that we have had, be it through the State Claims Agency working with individuals, has been to try to find a resolution and to work constructively with them.

The State Claims Agency has confirmed to me that it has made representations to the legal representatives of the litigants to explore the possibility of mediation to find a resolution to this issue. This is the way we want to move forward – that we can mediate and find a way forward – but those approaches have been rejected pending the cases having been set down for hearing.

I would encourage all those involved. We want to find a way forward. We do not want this to have to go to a court setting. There is an offer there from the State Claims Agency to work with it and with its legal representatives. We all want to find a mutually agreeable resolution, taking into consider what people have gone through and the current individual situation for those involved in this overall. I would encourage them to take up that offer and to engage more broadly with us.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)

To be honest, that is a frustrating response because the Minister is well aware that I have outlined the point in the past. I would say there are issues in relation to the handling of the State Claims Agency of these cases. It is not appropriate for us to get into individual cases. I have never asked the Minister to do so. I have never tried to discuss individual cases in this Chamber, with the Minister or her predecessor. The issue here is in relation to a category of people who were acting in the service of the State. They were supporting the Defence Forces in terms of maintenance of aircraft. As the Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors group outlined, there have been 130 potential premature deaths. Clearly, we need to get to the bottom of that.

I am not asking for an update on the legal side, although I think there are issues in relation to the State Claims Agency’s approach. What I am asking for is what the Minister proposes to do, and which we discussed previously, in terms of the whole category, a potential package of health supports and health safeguarding, including forms of screening, and an accountability mechanism. There has to be an accountability mechanism as well.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

There are 22 active cases before the courts, which we are trying to engage with. Like the Deputy, I want to understand whether this is something that is happening on a wider scale but at the same time, we have to identify whether or not there is a consistent pattern here. Work has been done within the Department to see whether this is something that has been happening on a broader scale and whether there is a consistent pattern beyond the 22 people the Deputy is talking about here, and even within those cases where there is not a consistent pattern in terms of health implications or issues that have come to the fore. I am not for a second disputing the fact that the people who we are engaging with have health concerns and have had health concerns. There has never been a dispute that there needed to be better measures in place in terms of health and safety, whether it was gloves or handling. Whether the exposure had the overall effect, as has been set out by the individuals in the 22 active cases, is what is being discussed and engaged with at present. I would encourage all those to engage further in a mediation process that we have been actively trying to pursue because I think this the best route to be able to come to a conclusion for all of the individuals concerned.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)

If there is a pattern, we are not going to find that out in the High Court. That will be found out through a process the Department seems to be considering. A memo was due to be brought to the Minister in the first quarter but we are past the first quarter now. That is what I recall the Minister saying. Has the Minister considered this memo in relation to a whole-category approach?

I ask the Minister to not go back into the legal cases. The clear example is in relation to Australia where the Australian air force saw that there was an issue, it engaged with the group and the people retained their right to take cases as they saw fit but there was health screening, an accountability mechanism and health supports. There is nothing preventing the Minister from doing that. When will she make a decision as to whether the Government will put in place a process such as there was in Australia – a study of health outcomes, identifying whether there is causation and ensuring support for people who are very sick? Among these people, there have been heart conditions, colorectal cancer and suicides.

Clearly there is a need for things like routine cardiac screening. These are all things that can be done without any reference to the court cases. When will the Minister make a decision on a solution for the whole category?

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

The Deputy referenced Australia. The case in Australia involved de-seal and reseal programmes. The maintenance workers were quite literally required to physically climb into fuel tanks of F111 fighter jets. They worked in extremely cramped conditions for extended periods with chronic confined exposure to concentrated hazardous substances. Nobody has suggested at any point that this is in any way aligned with the conditions in the Air Corps.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)

No, but it still goes on.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

We have said very clearly that there need to be better health and safety standards. That is something that has been made very clear and those changes have been made. As the Deputy has outlined, we have a significant number of different conditions that have come to the fore with the litigants who have been mentioned. However, it has not yet been identified whether this was specific to the exposure.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)

We should find out.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

I told the Deputy that there was a body of work being done initially to see if there is a connection. Is there an increased level of particular types of health complications? Was there an increased level within the Air Corps during that time because of that exposure?

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)

When will we find out?

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

That body of work is still under way at the moment. I do not think we can say this is the same as Australia.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)

I hear the Minister saying that but when will we find out?

 

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)

That work is under way and I will bring that to the Dáil and to the Deputy’s attention when I can. If people have been harmed here, I want to make sure we know about it. I also want to make sure that those involved in the process can engage with us and come to a conclusion on that process.

*****

During her appearance in Dáil Éireann on May 7, 2026, Minister for Defence Helen McEntee prefaced her remarks by claiming she had to limit her comments “so that I do not prejudice any of the ongoing litigation”. She informed the Dáil that she had been advised to speak cautiously to avoid undermining the judicial process, arguing that “each claim has to receive the necessary case-specific analysis and consideration because what is clear is that each individual case is different to a certain extent”.

However, despite this stated commitment to avoiding prejudice, she immediately went on the public record to make several assertions directly related to the core disputes of the active cases:

      • Disputing Causation: While she conceded that “there has never been a dispute that there needed to be better measures in place in terms of health and safety,” she used her platform to publicly question whether the toxic chemical exposure was directly responsible for the victims’ illnesses. She stated that “whether the exposure had the overall effect, as has been set out by the individuals in the 22 active cases, is what is being discussed and engaged with at present”. She compounded this by claiming that “it has not yet been identified whether this was specific to the exposure”.
      • Commenting on Legal Strategy and Avoiding Accountability: She publicly discussed ongoing legal negotiations, announcing that the State Claims Agency had offered mediation to find a resolution, but that “those approaches have been rejected” by the plaintiffs who are waiting for their cases to be set down for a hearing. In an attempt to present the State as eager to resolve the matter amicably, she remarked: “I would encourage all those involved. We want to find a way forward. We do not want this to have to go to a court setting”. As noted by advocates, this statement is a calculated attempt to victim-blame the plaintiffs for decade-long legal delays. More importantly, by aggressively pushing for confidential mediation and working to keep all cases out of a court setting, the State is actively denying the victims true justice. Settling out of court ensures that no legal precedent will ever be set, thereby allowing the State, the Department of Defence, and the State Claims Agency to entirely avoid public and legal accountability for their roles in this scandal.

      • Downplaying the Severity of the Exposure: The Minister also publicly dismissed comparisons between the toxic exposure in the Irish Air Corps and the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Deseal/Reseal scandal. She downplayed the Irish working environment by arguing that the Australian personnel operated in “extremely cramped conditions” inside fuel tanks and claimed that “nobody has suggested at any point that this is in any way aligned with the conditions in the Air Corps”.

Minister McEntee effectively used the excuse of ongoing litigation as a shield to avoid committing to proactive healthcare interventions for the survivors. Yet, in the exact same exchange, she felt comfortable enough to publicly cast doubt on the victims’ claims of causation, minimize the severity of their working conditions, and criticize their rejection of mediation—all while executing a strategy designed to keep the facts out of a courtroom and shield the State from accountability.

*****

It should be noted that the Minister actively refuses to hear the other side of the story. Minister McEntee is only engaging with the perpetrators and the State Claims Agency whose personnel have profited from this scandal through performance relate gratuities. Minister McEntee has refused to talk to victims as have her immediate predecessors.

*****

Delay – Deny – Die

State Claims Agency to be asked by the Public Accounts Committee about performance-related payments to staff involved in risk, health and safety-related audit work.

The agency is to be asked a series of simple “yes or no” questions.

State Claims Agency bosses are to be grilled about what performance-related payments were paid to staff involved in safety-related audits in the air corps.

They have been summoned to appear before the Public Accounts Committee to explain how the payments were justified.

According to the ​National Treasury Management Agency’s latest annual report for 2024 “discretionary performance-related payments reward exceptional performance”.

The NTMA​, ​which operates as the State Claims Agency​ in its management ​of personal​ injury and third-party property​ damage claims against the State​ and State authorities​, made performance-related payments to 271 employees in 2025 with respect to 2024.

These payments totalled €2,584,729, with the highest individual payment was €30,000 and the lowest individual payment was €1,000.

But millions in performance-related payments have been made to State Claims Agency (SCA) staff over the past two decades.

The Oireachtas committee hearing, which follows a request from Sinn Fein TD Aengus O Snodaigh, is due to take place next month.

This is in light of allegations against the air corps over health and safety breaches since 2006.

This is when SCA auditors first carried out what was described at the time as “a comprehensive audit of the Defence Forces Health and Safety Management systems”.

This audit examined systems in each Defence Forces formation – including the Air Corps, which has around 30 outstanding damages claims against it from former personnel.

Read full article by Neil Michael below below.

https://reporterneilmichael.substack.com/p/state-claims-agency-to-be-asked-by

Majority of Defence Force complaints came from Air Corps last year, committee hears

Over two thirds of complaints received by the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces last year came from the Air Corps, a committee has heard.

Speaking in a Committee on Defence and National Security, Ombudsman Alan Mahon said this was according to a draft of an annual report due for release at the end of this month.

Speaking in a Committee on Defence and National Security, Ombudsman Alan Mahon said this was according to a draft of an annual report due for release at the end of this month.

Mr Mahon said the number of complaints from the Air Corps was “disproportionate” to its size.

“The army has just over 6,000 personnel while the air corps and naval service each have under 800,” he said.

Responding to a question from Sinn Féin TD Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire, Mr Mahon said “a very small minority of air corps cases would involve a health and safety issue”.

Read full article by Róisín Cullen at RTE
https://www.rte.ie/news/2026/0416/1568589-defence-forces-complaints/

*****

Delay – Deny – Die

Government playbook in Air Corps scandal copies all the others

The State’s response to decade-old Air Corps chemical exposure scandal is clearly one of ‘deny, delay, die’

Gavin Tobin beside Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnel Co. Dublin.  it has been over a decade since he, one of the whistle-blowers, first took legal action against the State
Photo: Gareth Chaney

I have a personal yardstick by which to measure how long it has been since the Irish Examiner broke news of the scandal of the chemical exposures suffered by Air Corps personnel.

I will always know my first story on this was published in January 2017.

I remember because a couple of weeks or so after a series of revelations in this newspaper, I was coming out of a maternity ward buzzing from the high of becoming a father for the first time.

Leaving the hospital, I checked my voicemail, assuming the missed call from a private number was a well-wisher leaving a quick note of congratulations.

The curt tone that greeted me made it apparent this was not the case. Instead, a senior member of the government of the day was letting me know, in a very diplomatic “I’m not angry, just disappointed” manner, what he thought of our coverage of the Air Corps scandal.

For obvious reasons I can’t recall verbatim a voicemail from over nine years ago, but the word that stood out then and still does now was “unfair”.

We had revealed that Air Corps personnel were not properly protected from the dangerous, carcinogenic, chemicals with which they worked in Casement Aerodrome.

We highlighted how whistle-blowers raising the alarm felt they were not being heard by the Defence Forces, the State, or senior politicians.

After public pronouncements from one minister to say they were not aware of any issues whistle-blowers had with contacting them, we published a series of messages between whistle-blowers and politicians that showed they had unsuccessfully tried to speak with the cabinet member on the matter.

State can act swiftly in certain matters

When RTÉ broke the Women of Honour story in 2021, detailing abuse suffered by female members of the Defence Forces, an official investigation and tribunal of inquiry swiftly followed.

The Air Corps allegations were added to the terms of reference of this tribunal — but jaded campaigners understandably believe they were only thrown in as an afterthought, benefitting from the larger outcry over a different scandal.

Even then, the tribunal is tasked with probing the handling of complaints about toxic exposure, not the exposure itself.

What is most unforgiveable about the State’s inaction on this issue is that a blueprint was there for them to follow.

The Australian Air Force had similar complaints from its mechanics, and established investigations, health screening, and supports for those affected.

“A precedent has been set by Australia where, in the early 2000s, the issue was identified and acted on by the Australian government,” Micheál Martin told the Dáil in 2017.

“Why was the State so slow to respond to the whistle-blowers and to investigate the health conditions at Baldonnel?” the man who is now Taoiseach asked.

Read full article by Joe Leogue at the Irish Examiner website below.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-41807864.html

*****

Delay – Deny – Die

Exposure to toxic chemicals in the Air Corps: ‘I hate that my life feels over at 53’

Years of exposure to toxic chemicals while serving in the Air Corps have left Mick Murphy practically bed-ridden.

After serving in the army and then the air corps before distinguished service in the gardaí, Mick Murphy has much to be proud of.

As well as a successful battle against cancer in his 20s, the 53-year-old also brims with pride when he thinks about his three daughters and his son.

But there is also sadness. Years of exposure to toxic chemicals while serving in the air corps have taken their toll. They have left him practically bed-ridden amid decades of constantly battling one illness after the other.

When Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin, then in opposition, labelled the air corps toxic chemical exposure scandal a “horror story” in the Dáil in 2017, Mr Murphy knew exactly what he was talking about.

The previous year, there were only two months when he wasn’t in a hospital. Then, that December, he got hit by double pneumonia and pulmonary sepsis.  As a result, he now has to use a nebuliser four times a day as well as an inhaler. He had to have an oxygen-compression machine fitted in his bedroom and oxygen tanks installed downstairs.

Mr Murphy’s horror story began just a few years after he completed his Leaving Certificate in 1989.

About four years after he started in the air corps, he started getting tired more often and experienced chest pain, night sweats, and a persistent cough.

A year after daughter Aoife was born, he got news he didn’t expect: He had the blood cancer Hodgkin’s lymphoma. He was only 23.

“I couldn’t believe it,” he says. “I was just floored by the news. I was never told any cause for my cancer and I suppose I just thought I had been a bit unlucky in life. It was only later in life that I heard about friends I had served with either died or ended up being really sick.

Unbeknown to him at the time, the disease is one of the cancers linked to exposure to certain industrial chemical solvents like TCE.

Other consequences of exposure to toxic chemicals include an increased risk of developing depression, anxiety, and other mental health disorders.

There was no history of cancer in his family so the diagnosis came as a massive shock.

Read full article by Neil Michael at the Irish Examiner website below.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/spotlight/arid-41800226.html

*****

Delay – Deny – Die

Promises, warnings, and 115 deaths: The air corps toxic chemicals controversy

Despite repeated warnings, rising litigation and more than 100 suspected premature deaths, air corps survivors say they are still fighting for answers and support almost a decade after the then Taoiseach promised action, writes Neil Michael

Photo: Gareth Chaney

On Wednesday, February 1, 2017, the then taoiseach ended a heated debate about air corps personnel exposure to toxic chemicals with five words.

Addressing the Dáil, Enda Kenny vowed: “We will sort this out.”

He was bruised by Micheál Martin’s excoriation of him, his government, and his ministers for their “unacceptable response” to “a very serious issue which could represent a serious scandal”.

Days previously, the Irish Examiner had published exclusive articles by reporter Joe Leogue exposing allegations around chemical exposure to personnel in the Air Corps.

State Claims Agency involvement

They also came a year after investigators for the State Claims Agency (SCA) were informed air corps personnel using toxic chemicals did not have access to personal protective equipment (PPE) and had never had access to it, or training on how to handle toxic chemicals.

The SCA found this out because after it received a claim in August 2013, which alleged personal injuries were caused by exposure to toxic substances in Baldonnel, it emailed the Department of Defence’s litigation branch.

The agency asked the department to appoint a liaison officer to prepare a detailed claims report outlining the background and circumstances of the claim the SCA had received in August 2013.

Timeline 

      • 1980s: Air corps personnel begin requesting protective equipment and safety measures for handling toxic chemicals.
      • 2013: The State Claims Agency (SCA) receives chemical‑exposure claim lodged by air corps technician and whistleblower Gavin Tobin. It asks the Department of Defence to appoint a liaison officer and compile a detailed claims report.
      • Mr Tobin files High Court case seeking records of chemicals he was exposed to during air corps service.
      • 2014: SCA receives Chemical Exposure Report (1994-2005).
      • 2015: First of three protected disclosures made by Mr Tobin to then defence minister Simon Coveney.
      • 2016: The Health and Safety Authority warns air corps it faces prosecution unless 13 safety recommendations are implemented.
      • 2016: Department of Defence appoints Christopher O’Toole to review whistleblowers’ allegations.
      • 2017: Joe Leogue’s reporting in the Irish Examiner triggers scrutiny.
      • O’Toole report submitted in June, days before Micheál Martin meets air corps survivors in Leinster House.
      • 2018: HSA satisfied air corps has implemented the 2016 safety recommendations. It considers the matter closed.
      • 2024: Complaint made about an air purifier in an air corps hangar made to air corps chiefs.
      • 2025: Air corps survivor Gary Coll settles his High Court case for €2m.
      • Then defence minister Simon Harris tells the Dáil there is “active engagement” between the SCA and litigants to find “mutually agreeable resolutions”.
      • Mr Tobin makes protected disclosure to Mr Harris about issues raised in 2024 around an air purifier.
      • New defence minister Helen McEntee declines a meeting with Gavin Tobin citing ongoing litigation. Department of Defence examining how an assessment of needs could work. Mr Martin tells the Irish Examiner he supports the proposed review and “will have a look” at what emerges.

Read full article by Neil Michael at the Irish Examiner website below.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41800793.html

*****

Delay – Deny – Die

Defence Forces warned it could be prosecuted for safety breaches over staff exposure to hazardous chemicals

Health and Safety Authority inspectors visited hangars and workshops at Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnel, Co Dublin, in December 2023, and numerous issues were raised in relation to health and safety of staff.

The Defence Forces was warned it could be prosecuted over health and safety breaches in the air corps in 2023, more than seven years after issues were first raised.

Health and Safety Authority (HSA) inspectors visited hangars and workshops at Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnel, Co Dublin, in December 2023, and numerous issues were raised in relation to health and safety of staff.

Details of the inspection have been released, as up to 20 men are taking a case against the State, claiming exposure to hazardous chemicals while working for the Air Corps.

They say they were not provided with personal protective equipment (PPE), or training in the handling or use of hazardous chemicals.

After the 2023 inspection, the HSA warned the Air Corps: “Failure to comply with this advice and relevant legal requirements may result in further enforcement action, including prosecution.” 

On the day of the inspection, the HSA issued the Defence Forces with a contravention notice in relation to staff working with diisocyanates, which are highly reactive toxic chemicals used in foams, coatings, adhesives, and sealants.

Occupational exposure can cause severe asthma and, in some cases, cancer.

Read full article by Neil Michael at the Irish Examiner 

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41800793.html

*****

Problems with Isocyantes were first noted in the Air Corps 30 years ago and reported in the Forbairt Report released in January 1997.

Delay – Deny – Die

Public health expert calls for probe into 400 Air Corps deaths

One of Ireland’s leading public health experts has said there are grounds for an in-depth examination into the deaths of more than 400 serving and retired Air Corps personnel.

Professor Anthony Staines believes there are indications that the death rates among the personnel — around 200 of whom died under the age of 65 between 1980 and 2026 — appear to be “excessively high”.

Around 20 men are taking cases against the State amid claims they were exposed to hazardous chemicals while working for the Air Corps and were not provided with personal protective equipment (PPE) or training in the use of hazardous chemicals. Many worked with chemicals used to clean engine parts.

The data raises some questions which merit a more in-depth examination,” Mr Staines said. “You have to understand that people who joined the Air Corps would be among the fittest, and would have to pass many sorts of tests.

“Given the number of men who have died prematurely, there are — in my view — enough suspicious indications that there is something, or was something, going on. This might be due to errors in the data collected, but it could represent a real problem.”

Some of the data includes information relating to 115 premature deaths collated by Gavin Tobin, who has been campaigning for health care and other support for Air Corps personnel who were exposed to toxic chemicals when they served.

The rest of the data has been collated by the Irish Examiner from a trawl through death notices. While it is estimated that since 1980 around 700 to 800 serving and former personnel have died, it was only possible to verify information in relation to 411 of them.

Read full article by Neil Michael at the Irish Examiner https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41800541.html

*****

Delay – Deny – Die

Chemical concerns: Former Air Corps staff allege toxic exposure

“I never thought it would be so hard to get the right people to do the right thing for the right reasons,” 54-year-old former Air Corps technician, Gavin Tobin, told Prime Time.

Mr Tobin is one of around 20 men taking a case against the State – his case was lodged in 2014. He says he was exposed to hazardous chemicals in the period from 1991 to 1994 while working for the Air Corps and was not provided with personal protective equipment (PPE) or training in the handling or use of hazardous chemicals.

Gary Coll, 52, a technician who joined the Air Corps two years after Mr Tobin, told Prime Time they barely had the proper facilities to wash their hands.

“You had cold water. That’s all they had in any of the bathrooms. There was cold water and maybe a carbolic bar of soap or something.”

Air Corps technicians routinely used heavy-duty chemicals, for example, in stripping, cleaning or repainting engine parts.

“The chemicals that we’re considering here are mainly organic solvents,” says retired Toxicological Pathologist Professor Vyvyan Howard.

Prof Howard, who has examined around ten people who claim they were affected, is an expert witness for the plaintiffs.

“These compounds would cause what we call a diffuse neuropathy or a diffuse damage to the brain,” says Prof Howard. They “can also affect other organs like the liver”.

Before he became Taoiseach, Micheál Martin championed the example of Australia, which also had cases involving chemicals exposure within the Royal Australian Air Force.

The RAAF chemicals exposure issue related to the sealing and resealing of fuel tanks on F1-11 fighter bomber planes.

“It was prolonged repeated exposure to volatile organics, solvents, which were in the workplace … They were exposed without appropriate protective equipment,” said Australian immunologist Professor Peter Smith.

In 2000, within weeks of Australian authorities being alerted, an investigation began and the following year a Health Care Scheme was introduced for those thought to be affected.

“They dealt with the problem and wanted to make sure there was no ongoing further issues with current service personnel. And they wanted to make sure that people that had exposure were looked after,” Professor Smith said.

In 2017, Deputy Martin told the Dáil, “The Australian government’s approach was markedly different to that of the Irish government, which is to deny repeatedly and resist and, more or less, say to the whistleblowers that it does not accept anything they are saying.”

Read full article by Paul Murphy at RTE
https://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/2026/0226/1560464-chemical-concerns-former-air-corps-staff-allege-toxic-exposure/

*****

Delay – Deny – Die