An information resource for serving & former members of the Irish Army Air Corps suffering illness due to unprotected toxic chemical exposure in the workplace.
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.
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.
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.
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.
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he will take in view of the recognition in a review (details supplied) of Air Corps whistleblower claims that the author was not in a position to consider the substances in use or implications for human health arising from such use as these issues are outside their competence. [43179/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 200
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if a comprehensive inquiry will take place into the health and safety regime in the Air Corps and compliance with that regime in a period stretching back over 20 years in view of a review (details supplied). [43180/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 201
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he will take in view of the description of a review (details supplied) by its own author as an informal review; and if a formal review will now take place. [43181/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 202
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he will take in view of the finding of a review (details supplied) by its own author that it is their view that a review of the kind envisaged by the terms of reference is impractical and therefore they can only comment in general terms on the safety regime; the way in which he plans to deal with this identified impracticality; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43182/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 203
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his views on the observation in a review (details supplied) that, in the context of a work environment subject to military discipline in which obedience to the instructions of a superior is a key requirement, there are obvious difficulties for a person raising safety concerns; his further views on the view of the informants in this matter that they were not able adequately to raise safety concerns and that when they did raise concerns these were ignored; and the action that will be taken to address the difficulties and concerns of the informants. [43183/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 204
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his views on the observation in a review that the Defence Forces need to be able to demonstrate that an adequate system is in place to ensure that safety concerns can be raised by a member of any rank and to show that it has an ethos which makes safety the concern and responsibility of all; and the action he will take to achieve this. [43184/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 205
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his views on the observation in a review (details supplied) that the military authorities need to ensure that the role of the Health and Safety Authority in relation to workplace safety is understood and that there is an effective system in place to enable persons to raise safety concerns. [43185/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 206
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if the military authorities ensure that documentation and records detailing compliance with safety regimes exist and that they are readily accessible to staff as per the observation in a review (details supplied). [43186/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 207
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if he will authorise an independent and comprehensive health assessment of the informants’ claims and of Defence Forces health and safety records in dealing with hazardous chemicals over the past 25 years. [43187/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 208
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he will take in view of the recognition in a review (details supplied) of Air Corps whistleblower claims that the author was not in a position to judge whether there is now or was at the relevant time an actual level of exposure which was in fact potentially harmful. [43188/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 209
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he will take in view of the observation in a review (details supplied) of Air Corps whistleblower claims that all Defence Forces personnel are supposed to receive a routine medical at regular intervals but there appears to have been no special provision for personnel involved in maintenance work or a special alert in relation to persons that may have handled toxic chemicals. [43189/17]
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
QUESTION NO: 210
To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he will take in view of the observation in a review (details supplied) of Air Corps whistleblower claims that risk assessment material which the author saw are not comprehensive enough to provide a clear view of the basis for the assessment made. [43190/17]
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
I propose to take Questions Nos. 199 to 210, inclusive, together.
I have made it clear that the health and welfare of the men and women of the Defence Forces is a priority for me and therefore, I ensured that protected disclosures alleging exposure to chemical and toxic substances whilst working in the Air Corps in Baldonnel were investigated by an independent third party. I have furnished the report to those who made the protected disclosures and, before considering any further steps, I will await their views. In light of this and given that some of the allegations relate to matters that are the subject of litigation, commenced before the protected disclosures were made, it would not be appropriate to comment further.
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.
The Air Corps’ failure to protect workers from exposure to cancer-causing chemicals may have affected thousands of people, causing 100 deaths as well as birth defects and miscarriages, the Dáil heard yesterday.
The claim, previously made in a protected disclosure to the Department of Defence, was aired as opposition politicians increased the pressure on the Government to commission an investigation into working conditions at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnell.
Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin criticised the Government’s efforts to have whistle-blowers’ claims of health and safety mismanagement adequately investigated after the details of an independent report were reported by the Irish Examiner.
Christopher O’Toole, an independent third-party appointed to review the claims, reported that the kind of probe envisaged by the terms of reference he was given by the Department of Defence was “impractical”, given his own lack of expertise in chemical science and medicine.
However, Mr O’Toole did report that appropriate records that demonstrate the Air Corps complied with health and safety standards “are not readily available”.
Putting questions to junior Defence Minister Paul Kehoe in the Dáil yesterday, Sinn Féin Defence spokesman Aengus O’Snodaigh outlined the litany of allegations against the Air Corps, noting claims of “clusters of highly complicated medical conditions, miscarriages, and birth defects among those who worked in those conditions”.
Read full article on Irish Examiner website below…
Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
29. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if a Commission of Investigation into serious allegations of an ineffective or non existent health and safety regime in the Air Corps will be established in view of the fact that a person (details supplied) stated in their report that the allegations made by the three whistle blowers could not be adequately dealt with in the type of informal review they were tasked with carrying out. [44083/17]
28. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the action he plans to take on foot of the recent review (details supplied) of Air Corps whistle-blower claims; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44189/17]
The review shall encompass a review of all relevant documents held by the Department and the Defence Forces, any additional material as may be supplied or received by the Reviewer, and interviews of such persons as considered appropriate by the Reviewer.
The Reviewer will:
Review the allegations as detailed in the written correspondence to the Minister and determine if –
In the period covered by the disclosure, did the Air Corps comply with relevant Health and Safety standards with regard to the safe use of toxic chemicals and if not what action has been taken in the intervening period to ensure compliance.
In relation the disclosure, provide considered views and observations in relation to the allegations set out.
Provide such other considered views and observations as are considered necessary.
The Reviewer shall be provided with access to all available documentation relevant to the events and any other documentation requested by the Reviewer.
The Reviewer shall be provided with the names of all relevant persons, including serving or retired members of the Defence Forces, or other persons the Reviewer considers appropriate. The Reviewer shall endeavour to interview or take statements from all relevant persons.
The Department of Defence and the Defence Forces shall each appoint a liaison officer to provide the necessary information required in order to conduct the review and to assist the Reviewer in identifying the relevant persons to be interviewed.
The review shall be submitted to the Minister with Responsibility for Defence by the Reviewer.
*****
Please click on the link below to open the report on the Department of Defence website.
The objective of this Directive is to protect the health and safety of women in the workplace when pregnant or after they have recently given birth and women who are breastfeeding.
Contents
Under the Directive, a set of guidelines detail the assessment of the chemical, physical and biological agents and industrial processes considered dangerous for the health and safety of pregnant women or women who have just given birth and are breast feeding.
The Directive also includes provisions for physical movements and postures, mental and physical fatigue and other types of physical and mental stress.
Pregnant and breastfeeding workers may under no circumstances be obliged to perform duties for which the assessment has revealed a risk of exposure to agents, which would jeopardize their safety or health. Those agents and working conditions are defined in Annex II of the Directive.
Member States shall ensure that pregnant workers are not obliged to work in night shifts when medically indicated (subject to submission of a medical certificate).
Employers or the health and safety service will use these guidelines as a basis for a risk evaluation for all activities that pregnant or breast feeding workers may undergo and must decide what measures should be taken to avoid these risks. Workers should be notified of the results and of measures to be taken which can be adjustment of working conditions, transfer to another job or granting of leave.
The Directive grants maternity leave for the duration of 14 weeks of which 2 weeks must occur before birth.
Women must not be dismissed from work because of their pregnancy and maternity for the period from the beginning of their pregnancy to the end of the period of leave from work.
Annex I – Non exhaustive list of agents and working conditions referred to in Art.4 of the directive (assessment and information)
A. Agents
1. Physical agents where these are regarded as agents causing foetal lesions and/or likely to disrupt placental attachment, and in particular:
(a) shocks, vibration or movement;
(b) handling of loads entailing risks, particularly of a dorsolumbar nature;
(c) noise;
(d) ionizing radiation (*);
(e) non-ionizing radiation;
(f) extremes of cold or heat;
(g) movements and postures, travelling – either inside or outside the establishment – mental and physical fatigue and other physical burdens connected with the activity of the worker within the meaning of Article 2 of the Directive.
2. Biological agents
Biological agents of risk groups 2, 3 and 3 within the meaning of Article 2 (d) numbers 2, 3 and 4 of Directive 90/679/EEC (¹), in so far as it is known that these agents or the therapeutic measures necessitated by such agents endanger the health of pregnant women and the unborn child and in so far as they do not yet appear in Annex II.
3. Chemical agents
The following chemical agents in so far as it is known that they endanger the health of pregnant women and the unborn child and in so far as they do not yet appear in Annex II:
(a) substances labelled R40 (limited evidence of a carcinogenic effect), R45 (May cause cancer), R46 (May cause inheritable genetic damage), and R47 (May cause birth defects) under Dangerous Substances Directive (67/548/EEC) in so far as they do not yet appear in Annex II;
(b) chemical agents in Annex I to Directive 90/394/EEC (Protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens) ;
(c) mercury and mercury derivatives;
(d) antimitotic drugs;
(e) carbon monoxide;
(f) chemical agents of known and dangerous percutaneous absorption.
B. Processes
Industrial processes listed in Annex I to Directive 90/394/EEC.
C. Working conditions
Underground mining work.
Annex II – Non exhaustive list of agents and working conditions referred to in Art.6 of the directive (cases in which exposure is prohibited)
A. Pregnant workers within the meaning of Article 2 (a)
1. Agents
(a) Physical agents
Work in hyperbaric atmosphere, e.g. pressurized enclosures and underwater diving.
(b) Biological agents
The following biological agents:
– toxoplasma,
– rubella virus,
unless the pregnant workers are proved to be adequately protected against such agents by immunization.
(c) Chemical agents
Lead and lead derivatives in so far as these agents are capable of being absorbed by the human organism.
2. Working conditions
Underground mining work.
B. Workers who are breastfeeding within the meaning of Article 2 (c)
1. Agents
(a) Chemical agents
Lead and lead derivatives in so far as these agents are capable of being absorbed by the human organism.
The Irish Army Air Corps only started carrying out “adequate” risk assessments in the past year so for 25 years pregnant females at Baldonnel were dangerously exposed to Carcinogens, Mutagens & Teratogens.
Any pregnant females working in proximity to running aircraft or aircraft being refueled, such as in the ramp area, or downwind of the ramp were exposed.
Exhaust gasses contain Carbon Monoxide as well as TetraEthyl Lead and other hydrocarbon fumes.
Fuel System Anti Icing additives used by the Irish Army Air Corps included 2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethanol which is a known to cause reproductive and developmental toxic effects.
Furthermore pregnant females working in or entering into Avionics, ERF or Engineering Wing hangar were being exposed to further known Carcinogens, Mutagens and Teratogens including Dichloromethane, Isocyanates & Trichloroethylene to name but a few.
Due to the fact that the working dress & overalls of technicians were (and still are) brought home to be washed in domestic family washing machines it is extremely likely that pregnant spouses & partners of Air Corps personnel were also affected.
This may have lead to miscarriages, stillbirths, lifelong genetic diseases & developmental conditions such as autism in the children of personnel.
QUESTION NO: 1383
Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Séan Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Lisa Chambers (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
