Author: Collie

Casement Aerodrome inquiry: Key review is a botched job

It happens in the best of homes; stuff — invoices, receipts, notes, cards and letters put by because one day they might be needed — gets lost, inadvertently destroyed or just misplaced. It’s part of the rich and familiar tapestry of domestic life. It should not happen in public organisations and authorities that spend large sums of taxpayers’ money on filing and recording systems and on the people who are supposed to run them.

But that appears to be only one of the serious issues highlighted today in our report on the independent review of claims by former Air Corps staff who say their exposure to toxic chemicals from the late 1980s to the early 2000s caused chronic illnesses. Another seems to be that the review — established by the Defence department — was itself not fit for purpose.

The review — by a retired civil servant — was charged with examining the allegations made by Air Corps workers whose claim was that the State failed to give them adequate training and protection … a fairly straightforward mission, then. No, not at all; it has been a waste of time, and for that no fault at all attaches to the retired civil servant, Christopher O’Toole. His only error, perhaps, was to accept the toxic commission at the outset.

Those are, sadly, very general terms because, as he goes on to explain, “a problem has arisen in relation to the issues raised by the informants because appropriate records to demonstrate compliance are not readily available … In the absence of such records, proof of compliance is problematic and establishing the actual situation at the time in question would be a complex task requiring the gathering of evidence and probably taking oral testimony; in effect a forensic exercise which it is not possible for me to carry out.”

The review tells those most affected — and that could be a great many Air Corps employees — and the wider public nothing about the facts at the heart of this case, leaving us still with questions about the “appropriate records” that are not available. What is necessary now is a second review, led by an independent chemicals expert — perhaps from Scotland or Wales — who can establish once and for all what happened, or didn’t happen, at Casement Aerodrome.

Read full article on Irish Examiner website below…

Delay – Deny – Die

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 04/10/17 – Department of Defence – New Recruit Chemical Training

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 234

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if chemical health and safety training is provided to new recruits and cadets as part of their basic training; and if not, if it will be made mandatory as soon as possible. [42131/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

I am advised by the relevant military authorities that basic Health and Safety training is provided to all new entrants to the Defence Forces. Where a requirement for more specific Health and Safety training is identified for an individual or group of individuals for their post, this training is provided by qualified Defence Force safety personnel. For example individuals working with chemicals will receive Chemical Awareness training as required.

*****

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Dail Éireann Written Answers 04/10/17 – Department of Defence – Air Corps Chemical Risk Assessments

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 233

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the number of chemical risk assessments on record with the Air Corps group formation health and safety office. [42130/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

As this matter pertains to litigation which is ongoing, it would be inappropriate for me to comment at this time.

*****

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Profile of Patients with Chemical Injury & Sensitivity

Patients reporting sensitivity to multiple chemicals at levels usually tolerated by the healthy population were administered standardised questionnaires to evaluate their symptoms and the exposures that aggravated these symptoms. Many patients were referred for medical tests. It is thought that patients with chemical sensitivity have organ abnormalities involving the liver, nervous system (brain, including limbic, peripheral, autonomic), immune system, and porphyrin metabolism, probably reflecting chemical injury to these systems. Laboratory results are not consistent with a psychological origin of chemical sensitivity.

Substantial overlap between chemical sensitivity, fibromyalgia, and chronic fatigue syndrome exists: the latter two conditions often involve chemical sensitivity and may even be the same disorder. Other disorders commonly seen in chemical sensitivity patients include headache (often migraine), chronic fatigue, musculoskeletal aching, chronic respiratory inflammation (rhinitis, sinusitis, laryngitis, asthma), attention deficit, and hyperactivity (affected younger children). Less common disorders include tremor, seizures, and mitral valve prolapse. Patients with these overlapping disorders should be evaluated for chemical sensitivity and excluded from control groups in future research.

Agents whose exposures are associated with symptoms and suspected of causing onset of chemical sensitivity with chronic illness include gasoline, kerosene, natural gas, pesticides (especially chlordane and chlorpyrifos), solvents, new carpet and other renovation materials, adhesives/glues, fiberglass, carbonless copy paper, fabric softener, formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde, carpet shampoos (lauryl sulfate) and other cleaning agents, isocyanates, combustion products (poorly vented gas heaters, overheated batteries), and medications (dinitrochlorobenzene for warts, intranasally packed neosynephrine, prolonged antibiotics, and general anesthesia with petrochemicals).

Multiple mechanisms of chemical injury that magnify response to exposures in chemically sensitive patients can include neurogenic inflammation (respiratory, gastrointestinal, genitourinary), kindling and time-dependent sensitisation (neurologic), impaired porphyrin metabolism (multiple organs), and immune activation

Please read full report below.

Grace Ziem – Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. James McTamney – Clinical Psychologist, Lutherville, Maryland, USA

Air Corps official denies file destruction

An Air Corps official has denied whistleblowers’ allegations that he destroyed documents central to a legal action against the State.

Six former Air Corps technicians are suing the State, alleging inadequate health and safety management of the cancer-causing chemicals they used, and that their unnecessary exposure to these substances has caused them to suffer chronic illnesses including cancer.

The State has denied this.

Health and safety reports on conditions at the time in the Air Corps headquarters at Casement Aerodrome are missing, with the Defence Forces speculating that these documents were misplaced over time.
Two whistleblowers have alleged that an Air Corps official ordered the destruction of the documents, with one of the whistleblowers naming the official in question in a protected disclosure to Paul Kehoe, the junior defence minister.

Mr Kehoe this week revealed that the named official has denied the claim.

Read full article on The Journal website below…

Dail Éireann Written Answers 26/09/17 – Department of Defence – Protected Disclosures

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

548. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if he has acted on the information relayed to him by a whistleblower that specifically named the Defence Forces official who allegedly ordered the destruction of health and safety documents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40485/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

As I have previously indicated to the House, this matter was raised with me in correspondence where certain allegations were made that the documents had been destroyed. The correspondence in question was also addressed to the Chief of Staff and to the Deputy. I requested a report from the Chief of Staff on the actions taken on foot of the accusation.

He has informed me that the officer named met with the General Officer Commanding the Air Corps. The officer concerned has refuted the allegations made and it should further be noted that documents referred to were not military documents, nor did they carry any military security classification.

*****

Can we suggest that Minister Kehoe and the Chief of Staff meet with the NCO who was ordered to destroy the Health & Safety documents to hear his testimony first hand.

Can we also suggest that the Minister & Chief of Staff meet with the Health & Safety officer who commissioned the reports to determine his recollection of the contents of the Tech Stores Air Quality Report & the Ramp Carbon Monoxide report.

Perhaps they might also ask the Health & Safety officer why the adverse findings in the 1995 ERF report and the recommendations in the 1997 Forbairt report were not communicated to lower ranks and why the recommendations for PPE and chemical training were not acted upon for 20 years.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 26/09/17 – Department of Defence – Chemical Exposure Report

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

547. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if he will waive legal privilege and publish the Chemical Exposure Report 1994-2005 in the public interest and in the interest of transparency. [40484/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

The report referenced by the Deputy was prepared in the context of ongoing legal proceedings. As the release of the report could adversely impact on those proceedings, I will not be releasing the report.

*****

Minister Paul Kehoe must note that there are many personnel who have not taken legal action but whose lives are being regularly threatened by illness flare-ups of pneumonia type illness, hypokalaemia & other incapacitating occurrences such as stroke like symptoms that are currently defying diagnosis

Being able to provide firm evidence of unprotected toxic chemical exposure through dangerous work practices, to treating doctors & consultants, may assist these medical personnel successfully diagnose & treat our colleagues.

The State Claims Agency, who is advising the Minister and his department, does not give a damn whether serving or former personnel live or die and furthermore they couldn’t give two hoots about Minister Kehoe’s political career.

Minister Kehoe needs to be fully aware that not releasing this document will cost lives.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

‘We need to be vindicated. Friends are dead or dying’ : Air Corps report due this week

IRISH AIR CORPS whistleblowers say they hope an independent report due to be published this week will corroborate their claims that safety procedures around chemicals at Baldonnel Airfield put them at risk.

In the last 12 months, at least six former members of the Defence Forces have started legal proceedings against the State, alleging that they were exposed to toxic levels of chemicals and that a lack of protective equipment has left them with lifelong illnesses.

In January of this year, Junior Defence Minister Paul Kehoe ordered that an independent investigation be conducted by former Attorney General senior official Christopher O’Toole. The complainants have been told this crucial report will be released this week.

Read full article on The Journal website below…

Disclosure review for Air Corps staff

Defence Forces whistle-blowers who raised concerns about Air Corps staff exposure to carcinogenic chemicals are to receive the review of their disclosures this week.

The Crucifixion

Last January, the Irish Examiner revealed how whistleblowers raised the health and safety issues with Cabinet members, and that the protected disclosures came years after six former Air Corps staff had brought legal action against the State, over the chronic illnesses they suffer.

The six claim their illnesses, including cancer and neurological issues, are as a result of their working environment. Four separate whistleblowers have made disclosures relating to current health and safety issues at Air Corps headquarters at Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnel, Co Dublin.

Despite the first protected disclosure coming in December 2015, a third party was not appointed to review the whistleblowers’ claims until September of last year.

A month later, the health and safety watchdog published the findings of its own investigations into conditions at Casement Aerodrome. The Health and Safety Authority threatened the Air Corps with legal action, unless it addressed concerns it raised following a series of inspections — a number of issues that mirrored the warnings of the whistleblowers.

Read full article on the Irish Examiner website below…

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 20/09/17 – Department of Defence – Defence Forces Properties

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

810. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the fact that dangerous chemicals such as ardrox 666 were disposed of for the Air Corps by a company that collected and disposed of all such highly toxic, corrosive and carcinogenic chemicals; and if the amount of chemicals purchased corresponds with the amount sent for safe disposal by the company engaged by the Air Corps to carry out such work in the past 20 years. [39259/17]

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

811. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the fact that dangerous chemicals were over the years in a systematic fashion leeched into the soil on lands at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel; if soil and or ground water samples have been taken on the 600 acre site at Baldonnel during the past 20 years; if so, the results of those tests; the action taken to prevent this practice; if decontamination of the soil occurred; and if such practice has now ended. [39260/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 810 and 811 together. As this matter pertains to litigation which is ongoing, it would be inappropriate for me to comment at this time.