I suppose this is related to the previous line of questioning. Will the Minister provide an update on the Defence Forces' process of implementing recommendations on anti-discrimination law? He will be aware that at the end of the WRC process recommendations were made and there have been other recommendations.

The Deputy will be aware that WRC rulings are in the public domain and that the adjudicator, in his December 2020 ruling on two complaints brought by an individual, upheld one complaint on the grounds of gender discrimination in respect of promotion, owing to the treatment of absences in access to promotion contrary to section 8(1) of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 to 2015.  The adjudicator also found that there was no discrimination or victimisation against the complainant within the meaning of sections 2, 6(1) and 74 (2) of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 to 2015, as alleged in the individual's second complaint.

The directions of the ruling are currently being implemented by the military authorities with a view to ensuring all training programmes and materials for Defence Forces personnel are fully aligned, and compatible with, the provisions of the relevant equality legislation and that follow-on actions will be progressed. A Defence Forces working group is established comprising membership from the Defence Forces HR, legal and training and education HQ branches as well as representatives from the Defence Forces formations.  The working group has had 12 plenary meetings to date in addition to meetings of sub-groups. Progress is continuing in line with the timelines set out in the ruling which will be fully complied with. Basically, we are taking it seriously. There is a group in place. It has met a dozen times and they are making the appropriate changes in the Defence Forces to ensure that we are consistent with recommendations of that ruling.

To return to what the Minister said previously, I have no doubt that those who seek to abuse their positions of power, including in a sexually predatory way, are a small minority in the Defence Forces. I have witnessed in other similar institutions with a command structure how a small minority can have a large influence. Instead of tackling the problem, there is a tendency in institutions with command structures to circle the wagons, put a ring of steel around them and say that maybe the people did wrong but this is going to reflect badly on us all. They circle the wagons rather than tackle the problem.

Before the WRC case crossed the Minister's desk for a review, and the Minister signed off on the fact that there was no discrimination - and that was not the Minister personally, it was the Minister for Defence, advised by a Department with a plethora of officials down the line ------

Thank you, Deputy.

There is clearly a problem. The Minister bears political responsibility for that.

The Deputy will have another minute later.

The question is how the command structure will be reviewed.

On this case, I received a recommendation from the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces, which ruled that a person was not discriminated against when it was subsequently determined by the WRC that they were discriminated against. When a Minister gets a report from an ombudsman's office and disagrees with it, he or she undermines the ombudsman's authority and credibility. I have to trust in the systems that are in place and when recommendations come to me through an ombudsman's office or through other systems that are set up to provide accurate and detailed recommendations to a Minister, and I get lots of those recommendations all the time, it would be very unusual to go against that. One would need real cause to do it.

Thank you, Minister.

The Deputy's comments on the impact that a small minority can have on large numbers of people and a potentially corrosive atmosphere within an organisation are very pertinent and is at the core of what we need to deal with.

I was not personalising, and I think the Minister realises that. I accept that there are systems in place and that the Minister has to trust in the systems, or else he or she undermines the system. There is a system under the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces. However, it is not unfair to say that the ombudsman has been undermined, not by the Minister but by this whole saga, and, ultimately, the WRC ruling.

I have been around the courts a little in a professional capacity as well as, unfortunately, in a personal one, and various appeal stages change a decision. Nobody has a monopoly on wisdom and nobody gets every decision right all the time but there has to be an Ombudsman for the Defence Forces that people have confidence in. That confidence could be undermined at least by what went on up to now. There has to be a process that people feel that they will get a fair hearing from.

That is likely to be part of the review because everything has to be on the table. My experience of the Ombudsman for the Defence Forces office has been positive, by and large. It has to make judgment calls all the time. Cases are regularly referred to the ombudsman. The office makes recommendations, which the Minister has to accept or reject. The role of an ombudsman in the Defence Forces is important. What is important now, in the context of the stories that have been heard and the women who have come forward, is that we need to ensure nothing is off limits for an independent, experienced group of people who will be asked to review the systems, procedures, support and reporting structures and, indeed, the atmosphere in the Defence Forces in this area. We need to rely on theme to make recommendations to make appropriate changes. That is the process that we are now starting.