An information resource for serving & former members of the Irish Army Air Corps suffering illness due to unprotected toxic chemical exposure in the workplace.
Air Corps toxic exposure survivors say they are “disgusted” by what the Defence Minister said.
Survivors of toxic poisoning in the Air Corps have demanded Helen McEntee apologise for remarks she made in the Dáil.
They have accused her of “belittling” suffering they have endured after being exposed to toxic chemicals without adequate PPE since the 1970s.
Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors campaign group spokesperson and former Air Corps technician Gavin Tobin said: “Her remarks were offensive and she should apologise.”
The defence minister was asked by Sinn Féin TD Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire on Thursday, May 7 to consider the way the Australian government supported its air crews exposed to toxic chemicals.
More than 400 Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) maintenance crew members who contracted any one of 31 prescribed illnesses – including cancer – while working for the air force were given compensation and ongoing screening and healthcare.
Almost all of the Air Corps maintenance workers in Ireland who have either died or fallen ill since 1980 have suffered or are still suffering the same illness on that prescribed illnesses list.
The comparison between the Irish Air Corps and RAAF was first brought up by Micheal Martin in the Dáil in February 2017.
Then, as leader of the opposition, he demanded the government commission an independent health outcome study of aircraft maintenance personnel “similar to that carried out by the Australian Government”.
This audit examined systems in each Defence Forces formation – including the Air Corps, which has around 30 outstanding damages claims against it from former personnel.
Watch the Director of the State Claims Agency, Mr Ciarán Breen, give misleading evidence to the Dáil Public Accounts Committee 14/05/26.
Minister for Defence Helen McEntee mislead the Dáil a week previously on the same matter.
Transcript
(3 excerpts from full PAC meeting)
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Sure. I thank Mr. Breen. I will ask specifically with regard to current and serving and also former Air Corps members. How many outstanding cases are open within the State Claims Agency regarding current or former Air Corps members?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Originally, we had 11 of those claims. We settled one claim. Following that claim, we received 13 more. Therefore, we have 24 cases now.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Are they at various stages of process? When would the earliest of those 20 have been opened?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
In the case we settled, for example, my recollection is that proceedings were served in 2014 and the case was settled in 2025. The other cases are at different levels of engagement and readiness and so on.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Would there be others from that 2014 era?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I guess many of them would probably date back to that date and maybe dates after that.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
In Mr. Breen’s expertise, why would a case to be ongoing that long?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
When I answer this, I am not being critical at all of, obviously, when I say this but sometimes a plaintiff is in a very complex action like that because we are dealing with exposure to chemicals and generally an environment that alleges toxicity. Therefore, there are complex issues of liability and causation for both sides. If we add in discovery to that as well, we can see why we would get delays of, certainly, a good number of years. In the particular case that we settled, there were periods of relative inactivity. When I say that, I just mean legally. I am quite sure there was a lot of work being done in the background.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Maybe it is not as simple as asking in whose court the ball lies for those cases, but does Mr. Breen think that would be with the State Claims Agency right now or would it be with the plaintiffs?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
When a plaintiff sues, really, the ball lies largely with the plaintiff, but we do not rely on that. What we try to do, wherever we can, if we acknowledge that the State has a liability, is try to make an approach ourselves and ask, if both sides are ready, whether we can settle this case on terms that are acceptable to both parties.
*****
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
I welcome everybody here today. Following on from Deputy Neville’s questioning on wages and staffing, it seems to be a fantastic place to work when there are so many staff on such high salaries. Would I be correct in saying the salaries the witnesses are paid are much higher than civil servants in most other parts of Government?
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
Looking at the data, the NTMA was set up 35 years ago and was designed to be a market-based private sector model to get people in to manage the asset liabilities of the State, so, yes, you would say that.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
Does Mr. O’Connor think that is fair?
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
I do, and the reason is other people set up the agency on that basis. When you look at the scale of what is managed in the NTMA, in going to the market, funding that over €200 billion, doing it in a prudent way and managing the assets of the State, you need the talent in the room. When you are talking to asset and fund managers, you need to have people on both sides of the table who know what they are doing.
We have people doing payments – and we failed on this one payment – and we have people doing derivative transactions who need to know which side of the button to press on the FX, which currency we are trading in and all those different aspects. We need to have people of the appropriate skill and experience to do those jobs. The second thing is to get those people who are competing against the banks, law firms and engineering firms, etc., so, yes, I do.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
It sounds like a very good salary to me. In that regard, there were 270 personnel within the company who also received €2.5 million last year in State-related bonuses. Am I correct in saying that is all coming from Government funding?
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
Absolutely. Regarding performance-related pay, again, that is another aspect of the pay models and other tools. It is non-pensionable performance-related pay and is common in the marketplace. We are probably a little different in that we publish the amounts and, generally, the average would be about €9,000 or €10,000 to about a third of the staff.
The one thing is we tend to disperse to more staff because all parts – the front and middle office – are important. Rather than pay large amounts to some people who might appear big, as the industry does, because it might incentivise the wrong risk-taking behaviour, we tend to disperse to between 30% and 40% of staff.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
I am interested in the State Claims Agency and the duty of care to those who have been wounded by Government policy, such as thalidomide sufferers, those with hepatitis C and now the Air Corps.
Is it the policy that staff get pay-related bonuses to help ensure that the State Claims Agency fights these cases every single step of the way and to try to break down plaintiffs and get them to withdraw their claims?
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
Before I ask Ciarán to comment on the cases and the management of claims, to be very clear, performance-related pay is set on an agency-wide basis. It is not set for one business unit over another. The approach would never be to pay performance-related pay for a specific item to incentivise somebody to do a particular…..
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
What do they get the pay-related bonus for?
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
The pay-related bonus depends on the performance of the individual in their overall duties and the performance of their business area in the wider NTMA.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
Is Mr. O’Connor telling me it has nothing to do with claims?
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
People in the State Claims Agency are one cohort, who also get…..
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
They are getting pay-related bonuses for ensuring claims do not go through. Is that not the case?
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
No, not that. It is for the performance of their duty overall to fulfil their mandate. They are not incentivised to do one specific thing over another. They must always do the job to the best of their ability.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
The State Claims Agency failed to spot chemical exposure of Air Corps personnel, even though it did health and safety audits from 2006 until 2026. Am I correct in saying that? It failed to see that, and that there was no adequate PPE.
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Maybe I can answer that because I am the director of the State Claims Agency. Our risk management team, comprising scientists, engineers and people qualified in environmental and fire safety, did carry out audits in Baldonnel in 2006 and 2007…..
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
They failed to see, however, that the staff were not wearing PPE.
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I ask the Deputy to just bear with me for a minute as I want to explain. The particular area that is the impugned area was called the old engine repair flight workshop. By the time we carried out our audits in Baldonnel, that had been demolished or it was disused. I think it was disused in 2006 and demolished in 2007 so it was never, in fact, inspected by our risk management people. They could not have been aware of any issues with that particular workshop at the time.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
Were there no certificates of compliance from 2006?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I might just explain to the Deputy what we do. Our risk management is to advise and assist State authorities. One of the things that we are most conscious about doing is to ensure that somewhere like the Air Corps, Navy or Army – just looking at them as a group – has in place safety performance management. That is what we do. We do some audits.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
When the team investigated this, however, was there safety performance management in place?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Yes
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
It was in place.
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Yes, when we went there in 2006 and 2007, we absolutely made sure that such performance management systems were in place, and they were. By the way, we did carry out spot audits of various parts of Baldonnel. Very often we commented negatively on things that we found.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
Did the team spot at that time that there was a failure to store carcinogenic and highly corrosive chemicals on the property? Did it see that?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
As I said, that flight workshop was gone when we did the audit. Generally, in terms of chemicals management, we have found that the Air Corps is adhering to proper practice.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
How many cases are there? Was it 24?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
We had 11 originally and 13 very recently.
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
I have also been told that 65 Air Corps personnel died due to the health implications of what happened there. Where are those cases?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
We only deal with cases when we have claims in front of us. That is confined to the 24 that we have.
*****
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
…..I want to return to the issue of the Air Corps. When was the first case lodged or taken?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
The earliest cases were probably lodged around 2013-2014.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
Again, for the record, why did it take so long for the case to be settled last year in 2025?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
It is obviously difficult for me to talk about any individual case because you will understand that we have to respect the confidentiality of any plaintiff. I can say this to you definitely; during that period of the time, from the time that the summons was originally served, there were delays following that in terms of how the file was progressed, not at our end.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
Were the delays on the other side?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
They were not on our end.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
It was not on the State Claims Agency’s end.
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I am not saying that in any critical way, but there were delays until we finally got to settlement.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
Were there any disclosure actions taken against that discovery?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Yes, there were. The discovery was not actually in the case that was settled. The discovery was in respect of the lead case, which actually was not the case that was first settled. The Chair will probably be aware that in that particular case both the High Court and Court of Appeal upheld our discovery applications to limit discovery, and the Supreme Court overturned that finally.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
The State Claims Agency fully complied with that? Was the State Claims Agency found to have been in breach of the Supreme Court?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
There had been a breach by the Air Corps in that it had not made proper discovery. It was ordered to make proper discovery, which it ultimately did.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
This ultimately prolonged the case…..
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Yes, that did prolong it.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
…..so Mr. Breen’s prior statement that the delays were on the plaintiff’s side…..
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Sorry, I was not impugning the plaintiff at all. I said that there were delays there…..
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
There were delays.
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
…..and I agree with you that one of them was the breach in relation to the discovery. That did delay it.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
In relation to Baldonnel, I think the State Claims Agency portrayed the issue as solely down to the engine room. Is that where predominantly the chemical exposures took place? Am I right?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Certainly based on the claims as pleaded, the references are to the exposure over a period of time relative to that particular locus.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
When was the engine room demolished?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I think it was in 2007.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
Mr. Breen said it was in 2006 earlier on.
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
No. I said that I think it was disused in 2006 and ultimately demolished in 2007.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
Was the engine room still in use up to September 2007?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I am not sure. I honestly cannot tell you emphatically, but certainly what I recollect is that it had been taken out of use and then was finally demolished in 2007.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
I have an image in front of me from Google Maps from 2009 that clearly shows the engine room still fully intact. The image is dated May 2009. Is Mr. Breen correct with the information he gave that it was demolished in that timeframe?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Sorry, I obviously was not there. I do not know when it was exactly. What I was told was that it was demolished in 2007.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
The evidence I have is that it was still fully intact in 2009. If the engine room was still in use up until September 2007, and this is the information I have, when did inspections of the engine room commence?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
We did not ever inspect that engine room on the State Claims Agency side, precisely for the reason that it was not actually in use.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
When did the avionic building on the right-hand side of the engine room cease being used?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I do not know. I do not have that information.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
That ceased being used as a classroom in 2008-2009 and that was used by the Air Corps College. It has been reported that 14 persons prematurely died from that building. The information I have is that while there is an attempt to portray it solely as an issue around the engine room, 102 people are reported to have prematurely died as a result of chemical exposure and other serious failures throughout the rest of the airbase. Would…..
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
I have just seen those stories in the media but I cannot comment on that. I do not know any causal link between those deaths and Baldonnel as an employer.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
There are serious concerns that chemical exposure was rampant throughout Baldonnel. In Mr. Breen’s view, is that something that has been established?
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
In relation to the work that we carried out, and you can imagine that Baldonnel is a very big campus and it has many different parts to it, our audits were carried out in different parts of Baldonnel. Certainly in relation to our examination, the management of chemical hazards was in accordance with best standards in terms of all of the safety performance management paperwork we saw.
*****
A full transcript of the complete Public Accounts Committee meeting on Thursday the 14th of May 2026 can be viewed below.
In this startling exchange before the Dáil Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on May 14, 2026, the Director of the State Claims Agency (SCA), Ciarán Breen, provides demonstrably misleading testimony regarding the Irish Air Corps toxic chemical exposure scandal.
During the hearing, Mr. Breen attempts to excuse the SCA’s negligent Health and Safety audits of Casement Aerodrome, which incredibly awarded the Defence Forces “best practice” compliance certificates in early 2007 while personnel were actively being poisoned without PPE. To defend these catastrophic oversight failures, Breen claims that the old Engine Repair Flight (ERF) workshop was “disused in 2006 and demolished in 2007,” and therefore was never inspected by his risk management team.
This is factually false. As highlighted by Deputy John Brady, the Engine Shop remained in use up to September 2007. Furthermore, it was not demolished in 2007; the building is clearly visible and fully intact in Google satellite images dating to May 2009. Official tender documents for the “Demolition of Old Engineering Workshops” at Casement Aerodrome prove that the tendering process only closed on July 15, 2009. Adding to the severity of this oversight, the right-hand side of the Engine Shop, the Avionics building, was actively used as a classroom by the Air Corps College throughout 2008 and 2009.
Breen’s testimony also reveals a calculated strategy by the State to geographically contain the scandal. He attempts to concentrate the chemical exposure allegations solely on the Engine Shop, claiming the legal cases are relative only to “that particular locus”.
The tragic reality is that chemical misuse was rampant everywhere in Baldonnel. While 14 individuals have tragically died prematurely from the Engine Shop / Avionics building, a staggering 102 personnel have died prematurely from the rest of the airbase. This means that 88% of the 116 recorded premature deaths occurred among men and women who served in units *outside* of the Engine Shop.
Without a doubt, Mr. Breen has misled the PAC in an attempt to rewrite history, downplay the profound incompetence of the SCA’s safety audits between 2006 and 2016, and minimize the State’s sweeping liability. It is yet another chapter in the State’s cruel playbook of “Delay, Deny, Die.”
To learn more about the campaign for truth, justice, and healthcare for exposed personnel, visit the Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors (ACCAS) website: www.accas.info
Watch Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire TD, the Sinn Fein Spokesperson for Defence, ask the recently appointed Minister for Defence Helen McEntee for an update on medical supports for exposed Air Corps personnel and watch her gaslight survivors & downplay their experience while ignoring and the issue of medical supports.
Transcript
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Question: 67. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Minister for Defence further to recent Dáil Éireann debates, her views on past health and safety measures in the Air Corps; the actions she intends to take to support former aircraft maintenance and ancillary personnel; whether she intends to ensure their medical needs are met; and the other supports that can be offered to the category affected as a whole. [33426/26]
Since our last engagement on this issue, we have had the “RTÉ Investigates” documentary, considerable reporting by Neil Michael from the Irish Examiner, and many disturbing and worrying disclosures and descriptions of what was going on. It is clear that Air Corps personnel were exposed to unsafe working conditions and to dangerous chemicals and there seems to be a strong correlation to very serious illness and bad health outcomes. These are people who served the State. They should get support. What does the Minister intend to do about it and how does she intend to ensure that they are looked after?
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
I thank the Deputy for raising this. I acknowledge the Deputy’s engagement around the issue. I welcome the opportunity to set out the position as it stands. As there are multiple ongoing cases before the courts, as I have stated previously, I am limited in terms of what I can say so that I do not prejudice any of the ongoing litigation. The Deputy has said previously that it is possible to discuss both but I always want to be careful in that regard.
The advice available to me is that any view I have here needs to be carefully expressed so that we do not undermine the current process. Each claim has to receive the necessary case-specific analysis and consideration because what is clear is that each individual case is different to a certain extent.
I had a number of briefs from my officials on this. I then requested further detailed analysis from them. I have received that and carefully considered it. I convened a meeting with the Attorney General, representatives from the State Claims Agency and officials from my Department to discuss the matter further, having sought various different advices.
There are accusations that the State is prolonging legal proceedings as a deliberate tactic but that is not the case. It is important to stress that at every step of the way, the engagement that we have had, be it through the State Claims Agency working with individuals, has been to try to find a resolution and to work constructively with them.
The State Claims Agency has confirmed to me that it has made representations to the legal representatives of the litigants to explore the possibility of mediation to find a resolution to this issue. This is the way we want to move forward – that we can mediate and find a way forward – but those approaches have been rejected pending the cases having been set down for hearing.
I would encourage all those involved. We want to find a way forward. We do not want this to have to go to a court setting. There is an offer there from the State Claims Agency to work with it and with its legal representatives. We all want to find a mutually agreeable resolution, taking into consider what people have gone through and the current individual situation for those involved in this overall. I would encourage them to take up that offer and to engage more broadly with us.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
To be honest, that is a frustrating response because the Minister is well aware that I have outlined the point in the past. I would say there are issues in relation to the handling of the State Claims Agency of these cases. It is not appropriate for us to get into individual cases. I have never asked the Minister to do so. I have never tried to discuss individual cases in this Chamber, with the Minister or her predecessor. The issue here is in relation to a category of people who were acting in the service of the State. They were supporting the Defence Forces in terms of maintenance of aircraft. As the Air Corps Chemical Abuse Survivors group outlined, there have been 130 potential premature deaths. Clearly, we need to get to the bottom of that.
I am not asking for an update on the legal side, although I think there are issues in relation to the State Claims Agency’s approach. What I am asking for is what the Minister proposes to do, and which we discussed previously, in terms of the whole category, a potential package of health supports and health safeguarding, including forms of screening, and an accountability mechanism. There has to be an accountability mechanism as well.
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
There are 22 active cases before the courts, which we are trying to engage with. Like the Deputy, I want to understand whether this is something that is happening on a wider scale but at the same time, we have to identify whether or not there is a consistent pattern here. Work has been done within the Department to see whether this is something that has been happening on a broader scale and whether there is a consistent pattern beyond the 22 people the Deputy is talking about here, and even within those cases where there is not a consistent pattern in terms of health implications or issues that have come to the fore. I am not for a second disputing the fact that the people who we are engaging with have health concerns and have had health concerns. There has never been a dispute that there needed to be better measures in place in terms of health and safety, whether it was gloves or handling. Whether the exposure had the overall effect, as has been set out by the individuals in the 22 active cases, is what is being discussed and engaged with at present. I would encourage all those to engage further in a mediation process that we have been actively trying to pursue because I think this the best route to be able to come to a conclusion for all of the individuals concerned.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
If there is a pattern, we are not going to find that out in the High Court. That will be found out through a process the Department seems to be considering. A memo was due to be brought to the Minister in the first quarter but we are past the first quarter now. That is what I recall the Minister saying. Has the Minister considered this memo in relation to a whole-category approach?
I ask the Minister to not go back into the legal cases. The clear example is in relation to Australia where the Australian air force saw that there was an issue, it engaged with the group and the people retained their right to take cases as they saw fit but there was health screening, an accountability mechanism and health supports. There is nothing preventing the Minister from doing that. When will she make a decision as to whether the Government will put in place a process such as there was in Australia – a study of health outcomes, identifying whether there is causation and ensuring support for people who are very sick? Among these people, there have been heart conditions, colorectal cancer and suicides.
Clearly there is a need for things like routine cardiac screening. These are all things that can be done without any reference to the court cases. When will the Minister make a decision on a solution for the whole category?
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
The Deputy referenced Australia. The case in Australia involved de-seal and reseal programmes. The maintenance workers were quite literally required to physically climb into fuel tanks of F111 fighter jets. They worked in extremely cramped conditions for extended periods with chronic confined exposure to concentrated hazardous substances. Nobody has suggested at any point that this is in any way aligned with the conditions in the Air Corps.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
No, but it still goes on.
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
We have said very clearly that there need to be better health and safety standards. That is something that has been made very clear and those changes have been made. As the Deputy has outlined, we have a significant number of different conditions that have come to the fore with the litigants who have been mentioned. However, it has not yet been identified whether this was specific to the exposure.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
We should find out.
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
I told the Deputy that there was a body of work being done initially to see if there is a connection. Is there an increased level of particular types of health complications? Was there an increased level within the Air Corps during that time because of that exposure?
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
When will we find out?
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
That body of work is still under way at the moment. I do not think we can say this is the same as Australia.
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
I hear the Minister saying that but when will we find out?
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
That work is under way and I will bring that to the Dáil and to the Deputy’s attention when I can. If people have been harmed here, I want to make sure we know about it. I also want to make sure that those involved in the process can engage with us and come to a conclusion on that process.
*****
During her appearance in Dáil Éireann on May 7, 2026, Minister for Defence Helen McEntee prefaced her remarks by claiming she had to limit her comments “so that I do not prejudice any of the ongoing litigation”. She informed the Dáil that she had been advised to speak cautiously to avoid undermining the judicial process, arguing that “each claim has to receive the necessary case-specific analysis and consideration because what is clear is that each individual case is different to a certain extent”.
However, despite this stated commitment to avoiding prejudice, she immediately went on the public record to make several assertions directly related to the core disputes of the active cases:
Disputing Causation: While she conceded that “there has never been a dispute that there needed to be better measures in place in terms of health and safety,” she used her platform to publicly question whether the toxic chemical exposure was directly responsible for the victims’ illnesses. She stated that “whether the exposure had the overall effect, as has been set out by the individuals in the 22 active cases, is what is being discussed and engaged with at present”. She compounded this by claiming that “it has not yet been identified whether this was specific to the exposure”.
Commenting on Legal Strategy and Avoiding Accountability: She publicly discussed ongoing legal negotiations, announcing that the State Claims Agency had offered mediation to find a resolution, but that “those approaches have been rejected” by the plaintiffs who are waiting for their cases to be set down for a hearing. In an attempt to present the State as eager to resolve the matter amicably, she remarked: “I would encourage all those involved. We want to find a way forward. We do not want this to have to go to a court setting”. As noted by advocates, this statement is a calculated attempt to victim-blame the plaintiffs for decade-long legal delays. More importantly, by aggressively pushing for confidential mediation and working to keep all cases out of a court setting, the State is actively denying the victims true justice. Settling out of court ensures that no legal precedent will ever be set, thereby allowing the State, the Department of Defence, and the State Claims Agency to entirely avoid public and legal accountability for their roles in this scandal.
Downplaying the Severity of the Exposure: The Minister also publicly dismissed comparisons between the toxic exposure in the Irish Air Corps and the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Deseal/Reseal scandal. She downplayed the Irish working environment by arguing that the Australian personnel operated in “extremely cramped conditions” inside fuel tanks and claimed that “nobody has suggested at any point that this is in any way aligned with the conditions in the Air Corps”.
Minister McEntee effectively used the excuse of ongoing litigation as a shield to avoid committing to proactive healthcare interventions for the survivors. Yet, in the exact same exchange, she felt comfortable enough to publicly cast doubt on the victims’ claims of causation, minimize the severity of their working conditions, and criticize their rejection of mediation—all while executing a strategy designed to keep the facts out of a courtroom and shield the State from accountability.
*****
It should be noted that the Minister actively refuses to hear the other side of the story. Minister McEntee is only engaging with the perpetrators and the State Claims Agency whose personnel have profited from this scandal through performance relate gratuities. Minister McEntee has refused to talk to victims as have her immediate predecessors.
The agency is to be asked a series of simple “yes or no” questions.
State Claims Agency bosses are to be grilled about what performance-related payments were paid to staff involved in safety-related audits in the air corps.
They have been summoned to appear before the Public Accounts Committee to explain how the payments were justified.
According to the National Treasury Management Agency’s latest annual report for 2024 “discretionary performance-related payments reward exceptional performance”.
The NTMA, which operates as the State Claims Agency in its management of personal injury and third-party property damage claims against the State and State authorities, made performance-related payments to 271 employees in 2025 with respect to 2024.
These payments totalled €2,584,729, with the highest individual payment was €30,000 and the lowest individual payment was €1,000.
But millions in performance-related payments have been made to State Claims Agency (SCA) staff over the past two decades.
The Oireachtas committee hearing, which follows a request from Sinn Fein TD Aengus O Snodaigh, is due to take place next month.
This is in light of allegations against the air corps over health and safety breaches since 2006.
This is when SCA auditors first carried out what was described at the time as “a comprehensive audit of the Defence Forces Health and Safety Management systems”.
This audit examined systems in each Defence Forces formation – including the Air Corps, which has around 30 outstanding damages claims against it from former personnel.
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.
Cases relating to exposure to dangerous chemicals used in aircraft maintenance are due before the courts
The State Claims Agency (SCA) is attempting to reach settlements with Air Corps members who were exposed to dangerous chemicals during their work, Tánaiste Simon Harris has said.
It follows the conclusion of a landmark court case earlier this year in which a former Air Corps technician was awarded €2 million.
In what was seen as a major test case, Gary Coll (51), from Lifford, Co Donegal, alleged his exposure to chemicals in the workshops of Casement Aerodrome caused him severe and lifelong health problems.
On the opening day of the hearing last February the parties agreed a settlement that did not include any admission of responsibility by the State.
Campaigners accused the State of dragging out the legal process for more than a decade.
The case against the Department of Defence was the first of 10 personal injuries cases due before the courts relating to the exposure of Air Corps members to dangerous chemicals and solvents used in aircraft maintenance.
Campaigners say there are many other Air Corps veterans who have died prematurely or suffered severe health problems in connection with their work.
Now, Mr Harris, who is also Minister for Defence, has signalled the State is keen to settle the remaining cases.
“I want to see a resolution in this regard,” Mr Harris told the Dáil this week. “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 Tánaiste said an engagement process with former Air Corps personnel is “now genuinely under way” and that it should be allowed proceed “to a point where there is an achievable outcome that is acceptable to all parties”.
Gavin Tobin, a former Air Corps technician, estimates there have been nearly 100 deaths that may have involved exposure to dangerous chemicals.
He rejected Mr Harris’s claim that the State is engaging with veterans and accused it of only coming to an agreement in Mr Coll’s case at the 11th hour.
“A haggle on the corridors of the High Court where the State Claims Agency attempts to destroy reputations by calling injured personnel liars is not engagement,” said Mr Tobin who has been campaigning for years on the issue and who also suffers serious health issues.
He accused the Government of “using the might of the State to threaten financial ruin” on plaintiffs if they reject settlement offers.
“Threatening bankruptcy unless we accept settlement is not an engagement process,” he said. “Nobody is engaging with us.”
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.
There were also hazardous chemicals stored in open containers at the Haulbowline Naval Base in Cork late last year
Haulbowline Larry Cummins
A health and safety inspection at Naval Service headquarters resulted in the shutting down of a cadet canteen area after emergency exits were found blocked as well as damp and mould.
An inspector from the Health and Safety Authority visited the Haulbowline Naval Base in Cork late last year discovering fire doors that weren’t being properly maintained, open attic space between buildings, and storage of hazardous chemicals in open containers.
There were serious issues with a cadet mess building on the base with lower emergency exits “blocked by stairs” along with evidence of damp and mould on walls and floors.
The health and safety inspector asked the Naval Service to conduct an immediate review of the building in terms of its “fitness for use or occupation”. In early January, the Defence Forces wrote to the Health and Safety Authority (HSA) to say it was no longer in active use.
A letter from Defence Forces Headquarters said:
“I can confirm and as per [our] action plan the Naval Service Cadets Mess is not used to accommodate any personnel following HSA inspection. Cadets [and] personnel were moved to alternative accommodation within the base.”
Read full article by Ken Foxe at the Irish Examiner
Despite repeated interventions by the Health & Safety Authority the Defence Forces cannot seem to get their houses in order.
The previous Chief of Staff, Vice Admiral Mark Mellett was at the helm of the Defence Forces when the HSA threatened legal action against the Irish Air Corps.
Subsequently, Vice Admiral Mellett heaped praise upon then Brigadier General Seán Clancy as GOC Air Corps claiming that “Sean Clancy did a great job cleaning up the Air Corps” albeit after serving 30+ years in the same Air Corps he supposedly cleaned up.
Two service branches now under the command of Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Sean Clancy, namely the Air Corps and the Naval Service, have yet again come under the spotlight for poor Health & Safety including hazardous chemical breaches.
The Defence Forces have so far been as high as the Supreme Court in attempts to defend against legal cases relating to poor health & safety and unprotected hazardous chemical exposure yet the HSA continue to find them in contravention of legislation designed to protected their personnel.
There is no accountability in this organisation when it comes to incompetence & negligence on Health & Safety issues because it simply does not have a culture of Health & Safety, a fact which successive Defence Ministers have been more than happy to ignore.
The personnel claim toxic fumes emitted from the aircraft caused their illness, and they are accusing the MOD of being negligent about the risk to their health.
The Sea King is one of the helicopter types whose exhaust fumes allegedly caused cancer among a number of former aircrew
The Ministry of Defence is being sued by crew members who have been diagnosed with cancer after serving on military helicopters.
The personnel claim toxic fumes emitted from the aircraft caused their illness, and they are accusing the MOD of being negligent about the risk to their health.
According to a report by The Times, crew members who served on board helicopters such as the Sea King, Wessex, Puma and Chinook are among those who are taking legal action.
It includes those who’ve served in the Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force from a variety of ranks.
They are saying they were exposed to concentrated levels of toxic exhaust fumes during their flights.
At least three of the former personnel affected have already passed away, while others have been diagnosed with terminal cancer.
Five former service personnel have received out-of-court settlements, including a former flight sergeant who trained Prince William in the RAF.
It is being claimed the Government knew about the risk posed by the Sea King’s exhaust as far back as 1999, but aircrew continued to fly on board without safety precautions.
A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: “We hugely value our service personnel and veterans and owe a debt of gratitude to all those who serve, often with great personal sacrifice.
“We continually review our policies to ensure they are aligned with good practice and protect our people from harm.
Service personnel and veterans who believe they have suffered ill health due to service from 6 April 2005 have the existing and long-standing right to apply for no-fault compensation under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme.”
The comparison between the Irish Air Corps and RAAF was first brought up by Micheal Martin in the Dáil in February 2017.
Aidan Farrelly (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Ciarán Breen (Director State Claims Agency)
Cathy Bennett (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Féin)
Frank O’Connor (Chief Executive NTMA)
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Féin)
Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Féin)
Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
