Tag: Fine Gael

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 12/12/17 – Department of Finance – State Claims Agency – Irish Air Corps

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 128

To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Question No. 129 of 14 November 2017, if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the State Claims Agency commissioned a retrospective report covering 1980 to 2007 to be carried out by the formation safety office Air Corps on much of Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnell, which was issued on 6 February 2014; if the State Claims Agency carried out actions on receipt of the report such as issuing findings to the Minister for Defence, the Health and Safety Authority, the chief of staff of the Defence Forces or Casement Aerodrome authorities; and if it withheld it for future use or not as it saw fit in legal proceedings being pursued against the State. [53000/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

The SCA have informed me that in answering question 129 of 14 November 2017 it interpreted the request to relate to its audit programme carried out by its Risk Unit. They have also informed me that in August 2013 on receiving a claim in which it was alleged that personal injuries were caused by exposure to toxic substances in Baldonnel, the SCA emailed Litigation Branch and Claims Administration asking that a Liaison Officer (L.O.) be appointed to assist the SCA‘s investigations. The SCA also requested that the appointed LO prepare a detailed claims report setting out the background and circumstances of the claim. The SCA, although not privy to the decision, understands that the Formation Safety Officer was tasked with this request. The SCA subsequently received a report, in April 2014, titled “Chemical Exposure Report (1994-2005) (plaintiff name) Case” which was the only report furnished by the Defence Forces and related specifically to the period 1994-2005. As the report was requested by and provided to the SCA in the context of a claim, it is legally and professionally privileged, referring as it does to all the circumstances of the plaintiff’s claim. This report was prepared entirely for the conduct of the legal proceedings and its use was confined accordingly.

*****

Further explanation: Almost 2 years before multiple whistle-blowers made protected disclosures to the Minister for Defence and over two years before the Health & Safety Authority investigated appalling Irish AirCorps chemical health & safety, the State Claims Agency were aware (after interviewing serving personnel in 2013/2014) that there were continuing serious chemical health & safety breaches in Baldonnel causing ongoing unprotected exposure & injury to personnel.

Rather than be responsible, save lives and do the right thing by informing the Health & Safety Authority that there were ongoing breaches of health and safety legislation at Baldonnel. This included the lack of provision of chemical training and the lack of provision of PPE (both recommended by Forbairt in 1997). The State Claims Agency callously and indeed negligently decided to sit on the report.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 12/12/17 – Department of Defence – Departmental Reports – Irish Air Corps

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 61

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the chemical exposure report 1994 to 2005 produced in 2014 by a person (details supplied); if a copy of that report was made available to the independent reviewer to allow them carry out a full assessment of the way in which the Air Corps dealt with recent whistle-blowers’ statements; if not, the reason therefor; and if its publication will be authorised. [52875/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

I can confirm to the Deputy that my attention has been drawn to the Chemical Exposure Report 1994 to 2005. As I outlined to the Deputy in my reply to Parliamentary Question number 547 of 26 September 2017, the report was undertaken in the context of ongoing legal proceedings. As the report is subject to legal privilege, it was not appropriate to make it available to the independent reviewer. The material used for the purpose of the review by the independent reviewer is listed in an appendix to his report, which is available on my Department’s website.

As the Chemical Exposure Report 1994 to 2005 is subject to legal privilege, it will not be published.

*****

So to paraphrase. An arm of the state withholds an internal legacy health & safety report from a state appointed independent third party investigator, who was appointed to review legacy health & safety of the same arm of the state.

Question : Did Christopher O’Toole know that this document was being withheld and if not why was he not informed. If Christopher O’Toole was informed that this document was being withheld then why did he not state this in his report?

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Enterprise Risk Management Recognition for the Defence Forces

Defence Forces personnel being presented with certificates from the State Claims Agency in McKee Barracks in recognition of compliance with health and safety management system audit process.

In photo from left to right: Comdt Thomas Farrell (OC Gormanston, Defence Forces), Sgt Gerald O’Gorman (Unit Safety Officer, 30 Inf Bn, Kilkenny, Defence Forces), Fiona Kearns (Senior Enterprise Risk Manager, SCA), Comdt Noel Maher (Defence Force Safety Officer), Cpl Ross Hayden (Unit Safety Officer Air Corps Military Training College), Ciarán Breen (Director, SCA), Brig Gen Peter O’Halloran Assistant Chief Of Staff, Capt Bronagh McMorrow (Unit Safety Officer CIS Group DFTC), Pat Kirwan (Deputy Director, SCA), Comdt Conor Ryan (Formation Safety Officer, DFTC), Paul Burke (Enterprise Risk Manager, SCA)

See State Claims Agency website below…

Delay – Deny – Die

Dáil Éireann – Questions from Opposition Leaders or their representatives to the Government – 30th November 2017

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 14/11/17 – Department of Finance – State Claims Agency

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 129

To ask the Minister for Finance the reason the State Claims Agency did not seek assistance from the Health and Safety Authority immediately when it discovered in 2013 and 2014 that serious and ongoing breaches of health and safety legislation, including lack of risk assessments, lack of chemical training and lack of personal protection equipment, were causing ongoing harm to personnel of all Air Corps ranks and none; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48048/17]

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)

The NTMA have advised me that the State Claims Agency did not undertake audits in the Defence Forces in 2013 and 2014.

*****

Mr. O’Snodaigh did not ask about audits in the Defence Forces in this instance.

He asked why the “State Claims Agency did not seek assistance from the Health and Safety Authority immediately when it discovered in 2013 & 2014 that serious and ongoing breaches of health and safety legislation, including lack of risk assessments, lack of chemical training and lack of personal protection equipment, were causing ongoing harm to personnel of all Air Corps ranks and none.”

We wonder is the Minister of Finance also being mislead by the State Claims Agency’s culpability & negligence in this scandal.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 14/11/17 – Defence Forces – Air Corps Equipment

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 531

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the reason he indicated (details supplied) further to the reply to Parliamentary Question No. 1383 of 7 November 2017, when the question related to the current gloves being used by Air Corps personnel for protection against toxic chemical exposure was found to have been inadequate and if there was an oversight on procurement of health and safety personal protective equipment; and if he now will answer the question posed. [48165/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

The Deputy will appreciate that it would be wholly inappropriate for me to comment in respect of any matters relating to ongoing litigation and I deemed the wording of his previous question to be such as to potentially encroach into the remit of the Courts in relation to the litigation referred to in my reply.

However, I wish to assure the Deputy that I have been advised by the Military Authorities that Air Corps personnel are provided with protective gloves as part of their Personal Protective Equipment which conform to European standards.

I have also been advised that the Air Corps Formation Safety Office selects and approves all gloves for use by all personnel in the Air Corps.

*****

Minister Kehoe must be reminded of the F1-11 Deseal / Reseal scandal in the Royal Australian Air Force whereby thousands of personnel were injured by chemical exposure. 

In this scandal the RAAF personnel did have PPE but it was discovered, well after the fact, to be inadequate and in some instances PPE gave only 4 seconds of protection. We strongly urge that Minister Kehoe is not complacent on this issue and that he ensures that the foundations of further injury to Air Corps personnel are not being currently laid.

Minister Kehoe MUST ensure independent oversight of PPE selection or at the very least competent verification that the PPE chosen is adequate for the task . 

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 7/11/17 – Defence Forces – Air Corps Equipment

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 1383

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his views on the recent discovery at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel that gloves provided to personnel to protect them from toxic chemical exposure had been found to offer inadequate protection; if harm has been caused to personnel as a result of this inadequate protection; and if there was independent oversight into the process of choosing and purchasing health and safety personal protective equipment. [46383/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

The Deputy will be aware that the State Claims Agency is currently managing six claims taken between 2013 and 2016 by former and current members of the Air Corps against the Minister for Defence for personal injuries alleging exposure to chemical and toxic substances whilst working in the Air Corps in Baldonnel in the period 1991 to 2006. Given my responsibilities and the fact that the Minister for Defence is the Defendant in these claims, you will appreciate it would be inappropriate for me to make any comment in relation to these cases whilst such litigation is ongoing.

*****

It appears that Minister Kehoe & the Department of Defence have taken to hiding behind the fact that legal cases are ongoing regarding LEGACY Health & Safety failings in the Irish Army Air Corps, in order to avoid answering questions regarding CURRENT Health & Safety failings in the Irish Army Air Corps.

The CURRENT problem of gloves used by spray painters quickly disintegrating in contact with solvents has NOTHING to do with ANY ongoing court cases.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Suicide, cancer and organ failure – today we list all the alleged victims of the Air Corps chemical scandal

FOR THE LAST year, TheJournal.ie has been covering allegations made by former members of the Irish Air Corps that exposure to harmful chemicals during their careers has led to the untimely deaths of many of their colleagues.

It’s the contention of a number of Air Corps members that the effects of the chemicals contributed to dozens of workers at the Baldonnel Airfield becoming ill.

In a protected disclosure made by one of the workers earlier this year, it has also been alleged that the partners of male members of the force suffered serious fertility issues and a number of miscarriages. Other children, according to the protected disclosure, are living with life-changing illnesses and, in some cases, have died.

Today, after receiving details verified through death certificates of each of those who has passed away, we can publish details of 45 deceased members: their ages, their causes of death and what position they held in the Air Corps.

Read full article on The Journal website below…

Delay – Deny – Die

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 24/10/17 – Department of Defence – State Claims Agency

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 437

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the number of years the State Claims Agency has been auditing the Defence Forces. [44987/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

The State Claims Agency have conducted Health & Safety Management System audits of the Defence Forces since 2006. These type of audits were completed in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2015.

*****

It now comes to light why the State Claims Agency are fighting Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors with surprising vigour and happy to let personnel die rather than assist them.

The State Claims Agency, and by association the National Treasury Management Agency, are equally culpable & negligent in the Air Corps toxic chemical scandal which shows their state wide Health & Safety Management System audit regime is built on sand.

DELAY – DENY – DIE

Dáil Éireann Written Answers 18/10/17 – Defences Forces – Protected Disclosures

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 38

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his views on a person’s (details supplied) contention contained within their report on health and safety procedures at Casement Aerodrome that they lacked the powers, experience and competence to investigate the allegations made by the whistleblowers; the reason the scope of a review was so limited despite assurances made by him in Dáil Éireann that the review would adequately deal with the allegations made in the protective disclosures received by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44025/17]

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)

QUESTION NO: 47

To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his plans to commission a second review of claims by former Air Corps staff that say their exposure to toxic chemicals from the late 1980s to the early 2000s caused chronic illnesses in view of the fact that the person commissioned to perform the first review (details supplied) has stated that they were not in a position to consider the substances in use or implications for human health arising from such use in view of the fact these issues are outside their competence. [43976/17]

Séan Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)

QUESTION NO: 165

o ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the reason the report into allegations contained within protective disclosures relating to Casement Aerodrome fails to address that staff are at greater risk of serious illness as a result of their service at Baldonnel; and his views on whether these serious matters can only be properly assessed through a thorough health study and survey of current and former members. [44041/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 38, 47 and 65 together.

The health and welfare of the men and women of the Defence Forces are a priority for me; that is why I ensured that protected disclosures alleging exposure to chemical and toxic substances were investigated by an independent third party. The reviewer’s report has indicated that he felt that given the breadth of the remit of the Terms of Reference he commented in general terms on the Defence Force safety regime.

It must be remembered that prior to the receipt of the disclosures, litigation had first been initiated in relation to the subject matter of the disclosures. This therefore complicated the approach to be taken in developing any parallel process. Notwithstanding this significant challenge, I put in place just such a parallel process. In light of the legally complex situation, I believe it was appropriate that an experienced legal professional was appointed.

It was the view of the independent reviewer that the Courts are best placed to examine issues in relation to allegations which were already subject to litigation. This is so given the historic nature of the complaints, and, significantly, that it potentially affects the reputations and good names of individuals. What the report shows is the difficulty in putting a parallel process to the courts in place.

The report also notes that the Health and Safety Authority is the appropriate statutory body to deal with such allegations.

I have furnished the report to those who made the protected disclosures and, before considering any further steps, I will await their views.

Separately and in parallel to the independent review, following an inspection in 2016, the Air Corps has 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.

*****

DELAY – DENY – DIE