An information resource for serving & former members of the Irish Army Air Corps suffering illness due to unprotected toxic chemical exposure in the workplace.
New testimony may exonerate commandant found guilty of chest poking his superior
AIR Corps bosses pressured a serving and a former member of the Defence Forces to change crucial evidence and make a complaint against an officer convicted of assault, it is alleged.
The new testimony, contained in written affidavits seen by the Irish Mail on Sunday, forms part of a legal bid by the now retired Commandant Niall Donohoe to clear his name.
In April 2015, Commandant Donohoe was found guilty of assaulting a superior, Lieutenant Colonel John Moloney, poking him in the chest and calling him a ‘piece of sh*t’ during an altercation at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel, eight years previously.
However, two of Comdt Donohoe’s former colleagues have alleged that, in the lead-up to the high-profile case, Air Corps superiors pressured them to either make a complaint against him or to change witness evidence.
Their testimony – given in sworn affidavits – has been lodged with the Court of Appeal and the case is due to come before the court in the coming months.
Read the full article by Valerie Hanley of the Mail on Sunday below.
Watch Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire TD, the Sinn Fein Spokesperson for Defence, ask the recently appointed Minister for Defence Helen McEntee her views on past health & safety measures in the Air Corps and the actions she intends to take to support former aircraft maintenance and ancillary personnel.
Transcript
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Question: 87. asked the Minister for Defence further to recent Dáil 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 as a whole. [72051/25]
This is probably the Minister’s first time debating this particular matter but the issue of the potential adverse health outcomes for former aircraft maintenance personnel in the Air Corps has been discussed a lot over the years. Many people who served in aircraft maintenance believe many have suffered very severe health outcomes, including untimely deaths, because of exposure to dangerous chemicals. What is the Minister going to do about that in respect of the category generally, not individual cases?
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
As this is my first time answering a question on this matter as Minister for Defence, I want to take this opportunity to say that the health and well-being of the men and women of Oglaigh na hÉireann is of the utmost importance. In fact, it is paramount and front and centre in everything we do, as it is to the Chief of Staff and Secretary General.
I am very clear in my view as Minister that those who serve the State with such professionalism and integrity should be able to do so in a modern and well-equipped Defence Forces that is also a safe place to work, as all places should be. In that regard, as I mentioned previously, I announced a substantial investment of €1.7 billion in the Defence Forces over the next four years. It is not just about technology and equipment or new naval vessels. There is an investment specifically in the men and women and the equipment they use on a day-to-day basis. It is very important we invest in them directly and ensure they are working in safe spaces.
I acknowledge the Deputy’s ongoing commitment to this issue. I am aware that, further to an offer made to him in this House by my predecessor, the Tánaiste, he availed of an opportunity to meet with some of my senior departmental officials in the past two weeks to share his views on this matter. The meeting, which took place at the end of November, I understand was constructive and I will continue to engage with the Deputy on this matter. It is absolutely essential the health, safety and well-being of the men and women of Oglaigh na hÉireann are front and centre in everything we do.
I received an initial brief from my officials on the matter of health and safety in the Air Corps. I expect to have a detailed report from them in quarter 1 of 2026 regarding the matters the Deputy has brought before the House. This report will take due cognisance of the recent meeting he had with officials, as well as the views of the State Claims Agency, as it manages such litigation claims on my behalf. I also intend to seek the views of other stakeholders on what, if any, options may be open to me to pursue, further to my receipt of the report.
All that being said, and the Deputy is very much aware of this fact, I am limited in what I can say further in this regard in this House. I am the defendant in several litigation cases that are under way and being dealt with in the courts. I say that obviously not to avoid discussing it, but there is litigation and it is important I do not impede or infringe on that at all.
The Deputy will appreciate that it is an extremely complex matter. It requires very serious thought, engagement and deliberation. This is what my officials have been doing and it is something I will focus on and prioritise as well.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
The reality is that this is not an issue that has only arisen in Ireland. We know that in other jurisdictions such as Australia and the Netherlands exposure to very powerful, strong and dangerous chemicals caused adverse health outcomes for personnel in those locations. Australia took a sensible approach. Officials evaluated the situation throughthe study of health outcomes for aircraft maintenance personnel and they offered health supports. That is key to what we do on this. That is the kind of approach that makes sense – evaluate the situation, try to identify the connections between the exposure and health impacts, provide healthcare solutions and find out how it came to pass. This has been examined on a number of occasions in the past, although not all of this is in the public domain. We had the EEA air monitoring report in 1995, Forbairt report in 1997 and HSA report in 2015, but there is other documentation that not public at this point in time. Is the Minister open to doing something in addition to dealing with individual cases as a category?
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
I appreciate that we might not be on our own and similar issues have arisen in other jurisdictions. It is about going through the appropriate process and making sure that we are responding in the most appropriate way. These matters are currently the subject of active and ongoing litigation, as I have mentioned. The HSA has conducted several inspections in Baldonnel Aerodrome and there is more detail in that regard than has been provided previously. What I want to do now is make sure that I receive the report being conducted in quarter 1. That is the timeline I have been given. I will then be able to make any decision on what future actions can be taken and whether something can be done separate to the individual cases and ongoing litigation at the moment. Ultimately, I want to support the men and women of Óglaigh na hÉireann. We want to make sure that we understand exactly what may or may not have happened here. Once I have that information then we can all decide what are the next appropriate steps and where we will take it from here. I have been given that timeline and I will work closely with my officials to make sure that we achieve it.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
The Minister is right that the men and women of the Defence Forces are its greatest asset. The weight of this needs to be emphasised. The Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors, ACCAS, group has identified what it believes to be 110 untimely deaths. It has used that language advisedly because the link needs to be proven in that regard. However the group has questions and concerns over that many deaths and serious illnesses. That is the concern, and indeed in other jurisdictions there was a connection between the chemical exposure and serious illness. In the Air Corps there were many instances of no protective equipment, no masks and so on being provided.
I appreciate court cases have to happen, and people have an entitlement to that. For the industrial schools and the Magdalen laundries this did not stop an approach that offered redress, support and accountability to the category as a whole concurrently. I encourage the Minister to talk to the Departments in question – indeed she was in one of those Departments herself – about how that was approached. We can have the court cases, which people are entitled to, and we can have a redress system for the category as a whole.
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
I will treat this with the utmost seriousness. I am working closely with my officials. It is also important to stress these are cases of alleged past exposure to toxic chemicals. I want to be clear that we are talking about issues that may have happened in the past and to reassure people in that regard. In terms of the HSA and the inspection that took place, it advised in a subsequent report in 2024 that the Defence Forces had proactively rolled out training in the use of substances across the relevant personnel and noted the evidence of compliance with the contravention notice, It is important to point out where there have been inspections, where there have been engagements with the Defence Forces and where there have been changes.
As well as the report I mentioned, the tribunal of inquiry is due to start. This will have the power to investigate the response to complaints made regarding the use of hazardous chemicals within the Air Corps headquarters at the Casement Aerodrome. That is part of that as well, so there will be an opportunity within the tribunal to be able to consider adequately any of the complaint processes that have been made in light of the responses received. A number of different things are happening at the moment separate from the litigation and separate from the individual cases, with the review and the report that is being done. Obviously, there is another opportunity here throughout the inquiry for these types of concerns to be raised as well.
*****
Over 7 years ago, when she was Minister for State for European Affairs, Helen McEntee met with an ACCAS representative on the margins of the Fine Gael National Conference in November 2018 in Citywest Convention Centre.
At this brief meeting Minister McEntee was presented with a physical copy of our list of fair demands. So while Minister McEntee may be new to the defence portfolio, she has been previously briefed in person on the Air Corps toxic chemical exposure tragedy.
Watch Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire TD, the Sinn Fein Spokesperson for Defence, ask Tánaiste & Minister for Defence Simon Harris to discuss health and safety measures in the Air Corps for the third time.
Transcript
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Question:3. . Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence to outline, further to recent Dáil debates, his views on past health and safety measures in the Air Corps, and potential engagements with interested groups; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31321/25]
This question relates to issues relating to the safety measures, or lack thereof, that potentially existed in terms of Air Corps aircraft maintenance personnel over the course of recent decades. We spoke about two broad areas during our last discussion. One was the court-related issues. I flag that in response to the points the Minister made last time, several people have told me the engagement with the State Claims Agency is not anything like it should be. Even separate to that, there is the need for a policy-oriented response from the Department.
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
In fairness to the Deputy, he put me on notice that he is going to raise this issue on each and every occasion, quite rightly and understandably considering the seriousness of it. As I set out previously, and as I am obliged to set out every time this question is posed to me, and despite the constructive way in which the question has been put forward, any discussions we might seek to have or any comments I make are necessarily limited in light of the ongoing litigation in respect of this matter currently being before our courts. I have set out this position in the House previously. There is a limit to what I can say in the circumstances to avoid intrusion into the independent role of our courts in respect of these matters.
The issue of alleged exposure to chemicals in the Air Corps is, as the Deputy said, the subject of a number of litigation cases, the management of which has been statutorily delegated to the State Claims Agency. I do, though, wish to advise the Deputy – while remaining faithful to the limitations I have just set out – that at my request and following on from our discussions my officials have started to develop preliminary options and begun a process of the consideration in relation to any possible actions that may inform the general position of those who allege experiencing harm arising from potential chemical exposure. The initial exercise is under way. It is exploratory and arises from my undertaking to the Deputy during previous sessions of oral parliamentary questions. I do not want to go into too many specifics at this point. This is primarily because a considerable portion of the nature and scope of any proposal will need to take account of what can be done without cutting across the current litigation cases and in the context of agreeing these limits and appropriate consultation.
This is not in my prepared answer, but I would be very happy to have a briefing with the Deputy on this matter and to ask my officials to sit down and hear his views and thoughts. As I said, there is a challenge in respect of meeting individual people but perhaps we could have my officials engage with the Deputy concerning some of his thoughts on this matter. I know they are working to try to make progress.
I again draw the Deputy’s attention to the point I made during our previous discussion on this matter, namely, that there is an ongoing process of engagement between the State Claims Agency and current plaintiffs. I did ask that this process be given the time and space. I am interested to know what the Deputy is hearing in respect of that engagement.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
On that point, while I understand there are restrictions on what the Minister can respond to me on, a former personnel member who was a part of aircraft maintenance said there was no current active engagement between the State Claims Agency and litigants despite what the Minister had claimed in the Dáil the previous week. The former personnel member stated that nobody from the State Claims Agency had talked to any survivors since before the recent settlement of a particular case. I ask the Minister to take that information away. I know there are limits on what he can say in response to me, but I ask him to take this information with him and put it to the State Claims Agency that there is not engagement.
Aside from that, I am glad to hear what the Minister said in respect of options being looked at. In terms of what we should be looking at, this seems clear to me. There are things that need to be worked up, but one of the most fundamental things is a health review and analysis of health outcomes. Related to that, it must be ensured that people are not out of pocket as a result of the healthcare situations they have found themselves in.
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
I will very much take away the point made by the Deputy there in respect of a lack of engagement because my note tells me there is an ongoing process of engagement. Clearly, both cannot be factually true. I will, therefore, personally undertake to clarify this point with the State Claims Agency and I am happy to revert to the Deputy.
As I said, my officials have begun an exploratory process to consider what options may be available to me from a policy perspective to consider this issue further. Without straying too far, my thinking is that there are legal cases and I would like all these resolved insofar as they can be in a constructive manner. Legal cases, however, always require cause and effect and being able to prove cause and effect. Regardless of that threshold, if there are people in our country who have health needs, there are examples in the past of where we have endeavoured to meet those health needs, separate and distinct from any legal process and trying to establish cause and effect, which people have every right to try to do. These are the two separate issues I am trying to grapple with. I do think of times in the past when, without any admissions of liability, the State has taken actions to try to meet the health needs of some of its people. This is something we should explore.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
That is in the area we need to be looking at. There are potentially more things than that, but that is one of the crucial areas. It is not only the case here that other sectors or categories of people have had wrongs inflicted on them and sometimes it is difficult to put them all through the courts for a variety of reasons, but it has also been the case internationally. I have raised previously with the Minister some of the responses in Australia and the Netherlands in the context of aircraft maintenance personnel. The self-same issue has arisen elsewhere and it has been on the healthcare side of things.
Regarding what the Minister said about exploring options, I have two questions. What kind of timescale are we looking at? I would welcome the opportunity to have a briefing with the Minister and some of his officials, but, equally, it would hardly be appropriate if it was simply Members of this House who had that opportunity. There are representative organisations, such as the Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors organisation and potentially others. It would be only right that at some stage in this process they would have the opportunity to have an engagement.
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
When the time is right and the advice to me is that it is appropriate for me to have meetings, I will be very happy to engage. I obviously have the Deputy in a separate and distinct category as the spokesperson on defence for the largest Opposition party. I am happy to engage with him to see if we can constructively make progress. I will ask, and I have already asked, that we look at the examples in the other jurisdictions referred to by the Deputy. I do not have an exact timeline in relation to this matter. I am informed there are significant complexities in this regard. Perhaps at a meeting or a briefing we could tease through some of this issue in a bit more detail and then no doubt return to it at the next session of parliamentary questions as well.
Watch Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire TD, the Sinn Fein Spokesperson for Defence, ask Tánaiste & Minister for Defence Simon Harris to discuss health and safety measures in the Air Corps for the second time.
Transcript
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Question:154. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence to outline, further to recent Dáil debates, his views on past health and safety measures in the Air Corps, and potential engagements with interested groups; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18076/25]
Over the course of many years, it seems many Air Corps personnel, primarily young working-class people who took jobs in the maintenance department of the Air Corps, were exposed to very hazardous and dangerous conditions with very few, or effectively no, safety precautions, certainly nothing by way of masks, adequate ventilation and so on. There are huge concerns about the health implications this has for those former personnel, and I will detail that later. I want to specifically ask the Minister if he has engaged with any of those affected or their representative groups and how he intends to ensure their health is safeguarded and supported.
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
I thank the Deputy for raising the matter and for constructively discussing it with me at the last parliamentary questions session on defence matters. I have had engagement with my officials to try to tease through some of this since we last discussed this. As I set out on the last occasion this was raised in the House, and I feel obliged to repeat now, any discussion we have or certainly any comments that I make are necessarily restricted by the existence of ongoing litigation that is active before the courts. I want to see a resolution in this regard. I am advised there is currently active engagement between the State Claims Agency and litigants to determine if mutually agreeable resolutions can be found to their cases. I want to see that happen and I encourage the State Claims Agency to continue that approach, as I know it will. Trying to bring this issue to a resolution that works is important.
The ultimate priority for me and for the Defence Forces is the protection of the health and well-being of members of the Defence Forces in carrying out its essential service to the State. It is also important to me that, where possible, litigation of this nature can be concluded on reasonable terms agreeable to all parties to spare people having to take other routes. In the event that this cannot be achieved, the matter will fall to be determined by the courts but, again, I need to remain fully cognisant of my own position in that litigation.
It would be valuable in the engagement process that is now genuinely under way that it be allowed the opportunity to proceed without prejudice, and to see if we can get to a point where there is an achievable outcome that is acceptable to all parties. The question of alleged or potential historic exposure to chemicals in the Air Corps is a matter of considerable importance to me and I maintain an open mind in terms of future discussions and engagement. I have made the point that, in the past, there have been other areas where even if the State did not accept liability, people did try to meet the health needs of those impacted. I have asked that my officials continue to give thought to that issue and to keep me updated on the progress in relation to the State Claims Agency engagement and those further questions that I have asked it. I am saying in the Dáil today that I would like time to be given to that process of engagement that I genuinely believe is now under way.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
I do not accept that for one second. Over many years, this House has dealt with many issues that have been proceeding through the courts and the State rightly did not intervene as between the two different parties or try to disturb the process of the courts. However, that is totally separate from whether the State itself identifies that there is a policy issue and a need for a policy response in relation to a category of people without interfering in the court process. That has happened numerous times, for example, with regard to the Magdalen laundries and different things like that where schemes were set up. There is nothing at this moment in time to prevent the Minister, without interfering in court cases, from engaging with representatives of those who were affected to ask what the State can do in terms of an examination of the health outcomes.
The best example, although it may not be perfect, is the one I gave from Australia, the Study of Health Outcomes in Aircraft Maintenance Personnel, SHOAMP, which identified the implications because personnel were facing serious issues.
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Maybe I was not clear but I thought I was saying something similar. There is a process ongoing in relation to the State Claims Agency trying to see if the legal cases can be resolved in a way that is to the satisfaction of both parties. In addition to that, I have also asked my officials, on the basis of the last exchange we had, to give consideration to other actions we may be able to take to try to meet the health needs of people. That is the point I am making. There is an engagement process under way now between the State Claims Agency, which has a delegated function from me, so it acts on behalf of the State and the Government, to see if we can get this to a position where those who have been impacted are satisfied and the State is satisfied too. All I am suggesting today, and I am constraining myself in not wanting to say anything unhelpful or that cuts across that process, is that I want to give it a little bit of time. I am happy to engage constructively on it and I have asked my officials to continue to think further on some of the points I have made to them, many of which have been influenced by the points made to me by the Deputy in this House some six weeks ago.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
I put the Tánaiste on notice that I will be bringing this up again in six weeks and six weeks after that too. I am going to continue to pursue this. I would like it if we could bracket the State Claims Agency part and put that to one side because that is not what I am talking about. That needs to proceed and I hope it works out well, or as well as possible, for those affected.
One of the key points is that not everybody can afford to take the State to court. One of the organisations representing people is the Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors, ACCAS.
It does not comprise clinicians, and I am not a clinician, but it has identified 97 untimely deaths, and I believe it has used that phrase deliberately and carefully. It will take a health study to identify what can be connected or what is connected to chemical exposure but it seems to me, given that a direct connection was found in Australia and the Netherlands, these men, as it is almost exclusively men, perhaps with one or two women, were exposed to very dangerous chemicals. A lot of them are really sick. Many of them have died, and their families and friends believe they did so prematurely. This is very serious. I encourage the Tánaiste to engage with the ACCAS and any other relevant people to try to find a policy solution, aside from the courts solution.
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
I thank Deputy Ó Laoghaire. The differentiation he has made between the two processes is useful. The point he is making to me is that a number of people are not involved in legal proceedings, and they never wish to be involved in legal proceedings for whatever reason, but there are health issues that either have impacted them or are impacting them and their families have concerns about this, and there is a need to examine the health cause and effect, for want of a phrase, and to examine what other jurisdictions have done. This is something I will undertake to do, and I will come back to Deputy Ó Laoghaire on it. I expect he will be asking me about this again.
*****
In his response, the Minister stated that there is an “engagement process that is now genuinely under way.” This is the first time Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors have heard of any such process, casting serious doubt on its legitimacy or transparency.
The State Claims Agency (SCA) appears to be actively engaged in a cover-up aimed at ensuring none of these cases reach court, thereby preventing critical evidence from being examined. The SCA has a vested interest in the Air Corps toxic chemical exposure scandal, having overseen Health & Safety audits of the Air Corps for a decade, audits which ultimately led to the Health and Safety Authority (HSA) threatening legal action due to serious deficiencies.
What is truly underway are legal proceedings, court cases that the SCA is vigorously trying to suppress. Their objective appears to be shielding both the Defence Forces and themselves from accountability for past negligence and fraudulent Health & Safety oversight.
To achieve this, the SCA has employed tactics such as issuing Calderbank Offers, an unusual legal mechanism used to intimidate Air Corps veterans with the threat of financial ruin. This allows the State to leverage its vast resources to deter legal challenges, even when those challenges are meritorious.
It is particularly galling that personnel within the SCA and the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) received performance-related bonuses for supposed improvements in Air Corps Health & Safety between 2006 and 2015, a period during which members were being actively exposed to toxic substances.
By claiming that a genuine engagement process is underway, the Minister is either being misled or is deliberately misleading the Oireachtas.
Watch Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire TD, the Sinn Fein Spokesperson for Defence, ask Tánaiste & Minister for Defence Simon Harris to discuss health and safety measures in the Air Corps; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Transcript
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Question: 6. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence to discuss health and safety measures in the Air Corps; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6440/25]
The Tánaiste will be aware of a recent settlement for Mr. Gary Coll of €2 million, without liability, after he lodged proceedings regarding exposure to dangerous chemicals while working in the Air Corps. I do not wish to discuss any case before the courts. Many people who are affected do not want to have to go to court. However, as a matter of policy, the Department of Defence has a responsibility to ensure that issues regarding former Defence Forces personnel are addressed, particularly if their health has been compromised. The Tánaiste will be aware of the organisation, Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors, ACCAS, as I sent him the group’s demands last night. Will he introduce measures to ensure the mental care of those affected?
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
There is often time for argy-bargy in the House but I want to acknowledge the constructive way the Deputy has engaged with me and my office in passing on the views and concerns of ACCAS. I will endeavour to also engage on this constructively in return. The health and well-being of the men and women working in the Air Corps and the wider Defence Forces is of the utmost priority for me, both as Tánaiste and Minister for Defence. I take my responsibility to those who commit to military service to the State very seriously indeed and I know the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces and the Secretary General of my Department are with me on this position.
As Deputy Ó Laoghaire is no doubt aware, a number of cases are before the courts alleging historical exposure to toxic chemicals in the Air Corps. As Members of this House, we must respect, and we are respecting, the separation of powers and the constitutional independence of the courts. I know we are not engaging in commentary or debate that may encroach on this independence or, indeed, prejudice a fair hearing.
As Deputy Ó Laoghaire is aware, the HSA has overall responsibility for the administration and enforcement of health and safety at work in Ireland. It monitors compliance with legislation at the workplace and can take enforcement action up to and including prosecutions. The HSA carried out inspections of the Air Corps in 2016, and in October of that year issued a detailed letter to the Air Corps setting out a list of safety measures which required attention to improve the standards in place. The Air Corps engaged with the HSA and set out in detail the response being implemented. Upon completion of the improvement plan the HSA closed its investigation.
Arising from matters contained in the report of the independent review group, the HSA completed inspections of a number of Defence Force installations at the end of 2023 and the beginning of 2024. This included an inspection of Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnell. The Defence Forces prepared an action plan to address the issues outlined in the report. The HSA subsequently conducted follow-up inspections and noted ongoing improvements. The Defence Forces are committed to complying with health and safety legislation and ensuring that the best standards are adhered to. The Deputy will appreciate that as litigation is ongoing, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further. It is important for me to say that separate and distinct from the ongoing litigation, the Defence Forces tribunal of inquiry will investigate the response to complaints made.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
It is for this reason that I communicated with the Tánaiste last night. It is important that ongoing monitoring is happening but my primary concern relates to the issues that have arisen over the past 20 or 30 years. For many years personnel in the Air Corps, particularly those in the repair shop, were exposed to very dangerous chemicals. Despite this, there were no meaningful precautions in terms of health and safety until very recent years. In the meantime, hundreds of personnel were exposed. According to ACCAS it has identified 97 untimely deaths since 2000 of Air Corps personnel that may potentially be connected. I am not sure whether the Tánaiste saw the “Prime Time” segment on this, in which Paul Flynn was interviewed from his hospital bed. Some of the people affected by this are very ill. Others have passed away. This is a matter of the gravest seriousness. We know this issue is not unique to Ireland. In Australia there was SHOAMP, which was the study of health outcomes in aircraft maintenance personnel. Will the Tánaiste put in place a similar model to assess the health of the former personnel?
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
I want to reflect on what Deputy Ó Laoghaire has said to me today, and what he conveyed to me by email on behalf of ACCAS last night. I say this without prejudice or conflation with any other ongoing issues, be they issues before the courts or issues that will rightly be examined by the tribunal in terms of how complaints are handled. The point Deputy Ó Laoghaire is making is that regardless of both of these facts, which are important issues, there are people in Ireland clearly presenting with health needs. Deputy Ó Laoghaire is asking me whether more can be done in the here and now to try to recognise this and respond to those health needs and health concerns. On foot of his constructive engagement with me, and the correspondence he has sent to me, I have asked the officials to give consideration to these matters and advise me on it. I am happy to revert to Deputy Ó Laoghaire in due course.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
I appreciate the fact the Tánaiste will reflect on it. He mentioned the tribunal. I would make the point, and the Tánaiste’s comments reflect that he may be aware of this, the tribunal only deals with the handling of complaints rather than the substance of complaints.
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Yes
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Therefore, that will not be anywhere near adequate. What ACCAS has demanded is to ensure medical care is provided as well as an assessment to identify what were the implications for health outcomes. There is also a need for a statutory investigation of some form, given the role of the State Claims Agency in failing to alert the HSA of ongoing failings when known. It should go without saying these are personnel who were part of the Defence Forces. They gave their careers and long parts of their lives to serve the State. If their health is now profoundly compromised the State has a responsibility to them. The Tánaiste says he will go away and consider it, and I appreciate this. Will he also meet those affected, ACCAS and any other organisation?
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
I will take advice on this. Generally I like to engage in politics and in public life. I will take advice on this because I am conscious of being a defendant in legal proceedings. I will check this, and if it is possible to find a mechanism or a way to do this I am certainly open to it. I am very conscious of the sensitivities around this and the realities for people’s health and lives regardless of where blame or liability lies. That is for others to determine. I am conscious of the real living impact that people who are speaking about their cases have very clearly told us and showed us. There have been occasions in this country when, separate and distinct to issues of courts and liability and without prejudice to any of them, addressing the health needs of an individual group is something that can be given consideration. I am trying to look at this constructively, having only taken up this post a few weeks ago. Deputy Ó Laoghaire has engaged constructively with me on this and I thank him for it. I am happy to come back to him on this directly.
*****
Almost 8 years ago, when he was Minister for Health, Simon Harris met with an ACCAS representative on the margins of the Fine Gael National Conference in November 2018.
At this brief meeting Minister Harris was presented with a physical copy of our list of fair demands and he urged us to contact his office the following Monday to arrange a formal meeting.
This offer of a meeting was immediately reneged upon by his office.
Every now and again when investigating poor health & untimely deaths of colleagues in the Irish Air Corps at Casement Aerodrome we come across a cluster of unexplained deaths or illness in particular work locations.
Exposures are briefly explained by location below those in RED were unexplained until personnel came forward to highlight misuse of chemicals in these locations.
Apprentice Hostel
Exposure to asbestos was the main problem in the apprentice hostel and it does not appear to have been fully removed until the mid 1990s although some efforts were made to remove the bulk of it in the late 1980s. The 1990s effort used a professional removal service while the late 1980s effort used apprentices without any PPE whatsoever. Persistent black marks on lino or floor tiles would be dealt with by calling to the nearest hangar or workshop to borrow some MEK or Trike
Avionics, ERF & Parachute Shop
Illness & untimely deaths in Avionics Squadron and Engine Repair Flight (Engine Shop) can be explained by unprotected exposure to the chemicals used in both locations and by their exposure to exhaust fumes from the Spray Paint Facility. The Parachute Shop which was part of ERF establishment also used toxic glues and exposed personnel to fumes from PU coated drysuits.
Basic Flight Training School
Illness & untimely deaths in BFTS can be explained by the IRAN inspections where DCM/Phenol paint strippers were used without PPE and the extensive use (like in heli) of corrosion inhibitors like Mastinox. Of course the fuel for the Marchettis was leaded gasoline with its own issues.
Battery Shop
Illness in the battery shop can be explained by exposure to battery electrolytes & charging fumes. The personnel walking around here with holes in their jumper, trousers and shirts from sulphuric acid was almost comical if it wasn’t such a serious risk to their health.
Cookhouse / NCOs Mess
Until now we had not been able to satisfactorily explain the unusual body count & illnesses of personnel who served in the old cookhouse kitchen, new cookhouse kitchen and NCOs Mess kitchen.
Recently we were made aware of a practice in the old cookhouse as far back as the mid 1970s whereby personnel who worked there procured solvent degreaser from up camp. We believe this degreaser again to be trichloroethylene.
This solvent was provided sometimes in 25 litre drums and sometimes in gallon containers where it was usually decanted into smaller vessels like milk bottles or coke bottles to be spread on the floor and then mopped and squeegeed until the floor was spotless.
And it turns out that this practice continued in the new cookhouse and technicians from ERF who dropped down 25 litre drums of Trike were rewarded with a wrap up of some food like steaks.
We believe this floor degreasing practice occurred in the NCOS Mess kitchen but we have no evidence yet that it occurred in the Officers Mess Kitchen but given the fluidity of personnel movements between the various catering locations it is a distinct possibility.
For some information on Illnesses caused by trichloroethylene click here.
Engineering Wing Hangar & Workshops
Illness & untimely deaths in Engineering Wing Hanagar can be explained by unprotected exposure to Paint Shop chemicals including isocyanates & thinners, Hydraulic Shop chemicals, Sheet Metal Shop chemicals, wood dust from the Carpentry Shop, welding fumes from the Welding Shop as well as paint stripper fumes and mastinox fumes from Marchetti IRANs or Alouette equivalent teardowns.
Fire Crew
Members of the fire crew would have had exposure to exhaust gasses of idling aircraft engines and would have also had exposure to fuel fumes and burning fumes from training exercises. The Fire Crew also used PFAS based fire fighting foams.
Heli Wing
Illness & untimely deaths in Heli Wing are easily explained by unprotected exposure to the chemicals used maintaining helicopters, by exposure to fuel vapours from gravity refueling, exposure to exhaust gasses from gas turbine engines and the immune sensitisation capabilities of polyurethane coated immersion suits. Toxic tubbing in Heli was also a thing.
Light Strike Squadron
Similarly illness & untimely deaths in Light Strike Squadron can be explained by unprotected exposure to refueling fumes, exhaust gasses and other lubricants, greases, hydraulic fluids and sealants used to maintain the Fougas. Toxic tubbing in LSS was also a thing.
Main Block
Illness & untimely deaths in the Main block can be explained by unprotected exposure to photographic film & printing chemicals. These photographic chemicals used in photo section drove death, illness & harm to offspring in personnel throughout the main block
Chemicals in use by workshops in Air Sp Coy Signals further exposed personnel in the mainblock to chemicals they would not have expected to be exposed to like trichloroethane etc.
Units exposed in the main block would include
Admin Wing HQ
AE Section
Drawing Office
Air Corps INT
Medical Aid Post
Sgt Majors Office
Signals Bottom Workshop
Signals Top Workshop
Signals COMCEN
Signals Orderly Room & CO’s Office
Signals PC Maintenance Workshop
Signals Stores
Station Commanders Office
Main Tech Stores
Illness & untimely deaths in Main Technical stores can be explained by the fact that the building is sited on the old Camp Stables where hundreds if not thousands of litres of toxic chemicals such as Ardrox 666 were dumped into the ground. Complaints were made by civilian & military personnel about poor air quality in MTS and studies were carried out but the reports have disappeared. There is also evidence that used chemical drums containing isocyanates were stored in MTS in an open state.
Photo Section
When photo section moved out of the Main Block to the old cookhouse in the early 1990s they brought their dangerous chemicals to this new locations. This new location was better equipped than the expellair in the main block. But faulty equipment and lack of chemical health & safety training meant illness & death continued.
Photographers who flew regularly exposure to refueling fumes, exhaust gasses from gas turbine engines and the immune sensitisation capabilities of polyurethane coated immersion suits.
Refuelers
Obviously refuelers were exposed on an ongoing basis to high amounts of refueling fumes and aircraft exhaust gasses but also to other dangerous additives like FSII.
Training Depot
On at least two occasions that we are aware of there was catastrophic damage caused to floors and walls by misuse of chemicals in ACTD.
On the first occasion in the late 1980s we are aware of a recruit using what we suspect to be a large quantity of MEK on twine backed traditional lino the last room on the left of the depot. The use of the chemical on this occasion melted the lino through to the twine backing.
On the second occasion in the mid 1990s at least 25 litres of trichloroethylene was used to clean the floor of some of the demonstration rooms that had been recently redecorated. The Trike was spread on the floor using mops and squeegees making the apprentices carrying out the job high. The next morning it was discovered that all the floor tiles had shriveled up and that all the paint on the walls up to about 1m had dissolved and flowed down the walls to the floor.
For some information on Illnesses caused by MEK click here.
*****
The physical layout of Baldonne means that the prevailing wind blows the exhaust gasses from idling aircraft over the whole camp.
There does not appear to have been any initiative whatsoever to reduce camp personnel exposure to exhaust gasses and in many cases aircraft exhaust into hangars due to the prevailing wind.
We have little information on chemical exposures at Gormanston except for tubbing and the use of JetA1 powered heaters inside hangars. We would welcome any information in this regards.
Who will be the champion ? ARF, Avionics, BFTS, ERF or MTS?
All the below illnesses are known* to be caused by dichloromethane (DCM) also known as methylene chloride.
DCM was banned after a vote in the European Parliament in January 2009. The ban came into place in 2011 but the Irish Air Corps were still happy to let unsuspecting personnel use DCM without PPE or training in 2015 & likely beyond.
The Irish Air Corps finally issued PPE to all personnel using chemicals in 2017 a full 20 years after being told to do so by state body Forbairt.
Click on image to download a 30 player PDF or organise a game online here
*****
References*
Klaassen CD, Ed. Casarett and Doull’s Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons, 6th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill 2001. LaDou J, Ed. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 3rd Edition. New York: Lange Medical/McGraw-Hill Company, 2004. Leikin JB, Davis A, Klodd DA, Thunder T, Kelafant GA, Paquette DL, Rothe MJ, Rubin R. Selected topics related to occupational exposures. Part V. Occupational cardiovascular disease. Disease-a-Month. 2000 Apr;46(4):311-322. Lynge E, Anttila A, Hemminki K. Organic solvents and cancer. Cancer Causes and Control. 1997 May;8(3):406-19. Rom WM. Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 3rd Edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Publishers, 1998. Severe Optic Neuropathy Caused by Dichloromethane Inhalation Atsushi Kobayashi, Akira Ando, Nobuko Tagami, Masahiko Kitagawa, Emi Kawai, Masako Akioka, Eiko Arai, Toshio Nakatani, Satoshi Nakano, Yoshie Matsui, and Miyo Matsumura Published Online:8 Dec 2008https://doi.org/10.1089/jop.2007.0100 Environmental and Chemical Toxins and Psychiatric Illness By James S. Brown. Publisher: American Psychiatric Association Publishing (27 Feb. 2002) Language: English ISBN-10: 0880489545
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
QUESTION NO: 75
Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence when he first received the report on the findings of the independent third party appointed to investigate protected disclosures relating to chemical exposure in the Air Corps; the steps he has taken to act on its findings since then; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24571/19]
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Three written disclosures were made, in November and December 2015 and January 2016, under the provisions of section 8 of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, relating to alleged failings in the Defence Organisation in the area of Health and Safety. Legal advice was sought on how best to progress certain disclosures as elements related to matters which are the subject of the ongoing litigation. As the Deputy will be aware, the State Claims Agency is currently managing nine claims taken against the Minister for Defence, for personal injuries alleging exposure to chemical and toxic substance whilst working in the Air Corps in the period 1991 to 2006.
I appointed an independent reviewer to examine the disclosures. Following receipt of the report of the independent reviewer, which was submitted to me on 19 June, 2016, I invited the views of those who had made the disclosures and published the report. I also sent the report to the Chief of Staff for the views and actions of the military authorities to be set out.
In parallel to the independent review, following an inspection in 2016, the Air Corps had continued to work with the Health and Safety Authority (HSA) to improve its health and safety regime. I have been informed by the military authorities that the HSA has formally noted the considerable progress made to-date by the Defence Forces towards implementation of a safety management system for the control of hazardous substances. Subject to completion of the improvement plan the HSA investigation is closed. However, it must be noted that in the Air Corps health and safety is a matter of ongoing monitoring, supervision and adjustment.
The matter of the disclosures is receiving consideration in the context of the responses I received from the parties and legal advices in the context of ongoing active litigation…..blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah 1822 men dead since Minister for Defence first notified minister considering report for a year2-years now.
DELAY – DENY – DIE
Minister for Defence was first notified of ongoing Health & Safety issues at Irish Air Corps in November 2015.
Twenty Two men have died since this date, three by their own hand. Some of these men could have been saved.
There has been ZERO medical assistance offered to Air Corps survivors.
There has been ZERO assessment of the chemical exposure effects to even serving personnel.
Minister Kehoe is happy to let serving and former Air Corps personnel die while he takes 2 years to consider his next step.
Meanwhile the State Claims Agency who were awarding the Air Corps awards for excellence in Health & Safety while they actively poisoned personnel are frustrating legal cases by tying them up in appeals.
Tune in next year for another bullshit reply in the Dail from Paul Kehoe.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
QUESTION NO: 11
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if all Defence Forces and Air Corps officers are trained in the use of respirators and-or breathing apparatus in the context of handling chemicals and toxic material; if the use of same is now mandatory; and the date on which it became mandatory. [1803/19]
This question relates to the change in the health and safety regime brought about in recent years because of disclosures from whistle-blowers, which have led to changes in health and safety in the Air Corps in particular. Are all Defence Forces and Air Corps officers trained in the use of respirators and breathing apparatus in the context of handling chemicals and toxic material which, in the past, were wrongly handled and possibly exposed people to poisoning and ill-health?
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
I am advised by the military authorities that all members of the Defence Forces are trained in the fitting of the general service respirator as part of their basic training and that tests of elementary training are conducted annually in a respirator test facility. This training is in keeping with chemical, biological, radioactive and neurological(WTF?) training that all Defence Forces personnel undergo following basic training.
I am further advised by the military authorities that only those Defence Forces personnel who are required to work with chemicals and toxins are required to undergo respiratory protective equipment training. Such training is provided to members of the Defence Forces in accordance with the relevant health and safety legislation.
With regard to the Air Corps, I am advised that it uses two types of respiratory protective equipment depending on the type of activity being carried out. These are respirators, which are air purifying, and breathing apparatus, through which air is supplied. I am advised that personnel who require respiratory protective equipment training are trained as necessary.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
I welcome the Minister of State’s statement but part of the question was when did it become mandatory. The final part of the reply seems to suggest that not all Air Corps personnel are trained in the use of respirators. When exactly did it become mandatory for all Defence Force personnel to have this training? Is the training in full use currently?
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
With regard to the Air Corps, I am surprised that people who specifically deal with chemicals are trained in the wearing of respirators only if they are involved in dealing with these types of chemicals. Full training is given to these people and they undergo relevant retraining to ensure they are fully trained.
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
The question is when that happened.
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
I do not have a specific date but to my knowledge full training is carried out in line with what is required. I will come back to the Deputy with a specific date.
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the changes in health and safety policies that have been implemented following the publication of the report of the independent reviewer, protected disclosures, Air Corps; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43404/18]
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
I have sought the information from the military authorities and will revert to the Deputy when it is to hand.
Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 173
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if a programme that monitors actual exposure of Defence Forces members to hazardous substances either via personal air monitoring or biological monitoring as outlined in the report of the independent reviewer, protected disclosures, Air Corps is in place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43405/18]
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
I have sought the information from the military authorities and I will revert to the Deputy when it is available.
You will recall my recent-replies to written Parliamentary-Questions 43-404/18 and 43405/18, wherein I advised you that I had sought the requested information from the military authorities and that I would revert to you when it was to hand.
I have now received the aforementioned information from the military authorities. At the outset I would like to advise you that while the exposure monitoring programme is referenced in the June, 2017 report of the independent reviewer, it is actually outlined (as a recommendation) in the Health & Safety Authority’s Report of Inspection to the Air Corps dated 21 October, 2016, which followed three inspections by the HSA at Casement Aerodrome during 2016.
The resultant Air Corps improvement plan confirmed the Air Corps’ full commitment to implementing improved safety measures that protect workers and ensure risks are as low as reasonably practicable. The plan was implemented over eight phases, seven of which the military authorities have advised are now complete, while phase 8 – Chemical awareness training and respiratory equipment training – is a continuous, ongoing process.
Phase 7 comprised a review of the Defence Forces policy on hazardous substances. This policy was subsequently amended in September, 2017 and, inter alia, describes the Defence Forces methodology for the assessment of risk arising from the transport, storage and disposal of hazardous substances. The new policy also provides guidance for military personnel. civilian employees and other relevant persons on the risk assessment process and control and measures to be implemented to reduce the risk of injury from the use, transport, storage and disposal of hazardous substances to a level that is as low as reasonably practicable.
Insofar as a programme that monitors exposure to hazardous substances is concerned, I am advised by the military authorities that the Air Corps have conducted and continue to conduct air monitoring studies at Casement Aerodrome and that the Air Corps are currently planning further air monitoring studies in targeted areas next year.
Yours sincerely,
Paul Kehoe, T.D.,
Minister with responsibility for Defence
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)