The Naval Service is in meltdown. For the first time in the history of the State, it is unable to fulfil its core function of sea fisheries protection. The unprecedented situation where it was not able to put ships to sea occurred not only last week but also over the summer. The issues are now in the public domain because the men and women of the Defence Forces simply will not put up with it any longer. Rather than an attempt being made to deal honestly with chronic understaffing, exhausted and overworked crews are being bullied into going to sea in unsafe conditions in order to give the illusion that we have a functioning navy. Ships which routinely were crewed by 44 personnel are putting to sea with a crew of 34.

Yesterday there was the spectacle of threatening emails being sent directing crews that notice for short-term relief no longer applied and that they had to be ready to put to sea whenever necessary. That email was issued and then rescinded. To add insult to injury, the Chief of Staff then stated there was no crisis and that the weekly haemorrhaging of expensive, experienced trained staff was all about pay. Pay has something to do with it, as does the chronic mismanagement of the Defence Forces in recent years and the move towards vanity prestige projects in an effort to cosy up to the EU military elite. A fully trained and resourced crew is taking part in Operation Sophia which is a military exercise, not a search and rescue mission.

A costly ninth vessel is being delivered, but we do not have sufficient numbers to crew the eight ships that we have. The families of Defence Forces members are living on the breadline. To cover for the shortage of crew members, on a weekly basis personnel are being bullied into finding a way around the minimum crew number of 37 and press-ganged into returning to sea on another ship after a four-week tour of duty. The Government talks about the Defence Forces being family friendly. How, in God's name, could any woman or man put up with these conditions? Even when a ship has a crew of 37, often, many of them are unskilled staff, meaning that there are not enough communications operators to maintain watch in the radio cabin and not enough engine room monitors, which means that the ship just sits there to give the pretence we have a navy. It is an absolute disgrace.

In the light of the response of the hierarchy of the Defence Forces to the crisis, can the Tánaiste express confidence in the Chief of Staff? Is it now time to suspend our involvement in Operation Sophia and bring home our crews and allow them to do the job the Naval Service was set up to do, namely, to protect our sea fisheries and coastal waters?

If I were a member of the Naval Service, I would be surprised to hear a Member of this House calling for Naval Service personnel to be brought home from the Mediterranean to focus on their main role and what they were trained for, which, according to the Deputy, is fisheries protection. Fisheries protection is not the limit of what we ask Naval Service personnel to do. The Deputy may not be proud of the Government's decision to send ships to the Mediterranean, but I am. I am even more proud of how Defence Forces personnel have responded to the challenges faced there. They have taken over 17,000 people from the water, many of them children who would not be alive today were it not for the professionalism and intervention of the Naval Service. Out of pragmatism, we have shifted from a bilateral relationship with the Italian coastguard in the Mediterranean to a collective EU effort as part of Operation Sophia. Ireland has made it clear that our role in the operation is to participate in a humanitarian search and rescue mission, rather than in an offensive or war-going capacity. We have been asked to continue to assist because of our expertise in search and rescue missions.

To make a point about pay, the Deputy has tried to twist the truth about the role of Defence Forces personnel - proud men and women - who are saving lives on a weekly basis in the Mediterranean. However, I do not believe many in the Defence Forces and, in particular, the Naval Service will appreciate the way in which she is making a case for them. Of course, there are challenges in recruitment and retention in the Defence Forces, including the Naval Service, which is why the Government asked the Public Service Pay Commission to examine these issues. The current strength of the Naval Service is slightly more than 1,000 personnel or approximately 92% of its establishment of 1,094. The personnel level of the Naval Service has not changed in recent years. Many Naval Service personnel are targeted by the private sector because they are talented and motivated; therefore, recruitment and retention are ongoing issues. However, I assure the House that safety is not compromised by decisions made at an operational level by the flag officer or the Chief of Staff and that no ship will go to sea if there are safety issues for the crew.

The proud men and women of the Naval Service will be far more surprised to hear the nonsense the Tánaiste has just come out with than the points I raised in my opening statement. I specifically stated I was not addressing the issue of pay and that the root of the crisis in the Defence Forces was mismanagement at the top level, including at the level of the Chief of Staff, on which I asked the Tánaiste to comment. The crisis was admitted to me by personnel in freedom of information requests over the summer. The Tánaiste went off on a tangent in speaking about Operation Pontus when I specifically asked about Operation Sophia which, interestingly enough, resulted in the rescue of less than half the number rescued in 82 days that the LE Samuel Beckett rescued in 12. It is not a search and rescue operation. The Tánaiste should read the letter written by Médecins sans Frontières which was published in some newspapers today. Defence Forces personnel are sick of being patronised. People with families are being browbeaten to return to duty immediately after returning from a tour of duty. Is the Tánaiste aware of this? Does he think it is worthy of comment? Is he honestly stating pay is the only reason personnel are leaving the Defence Forces and that these issues are not a factor? If he believes that, we are in bigger trouble than I thought.

Before I call the Tánaiste to respond, I would be profoundly uncomfortable if Deputy Clare Daly stated the Chief of Staff was guilty of mismanagement, which is what I think I heard her say.

I firmly believe the Defence Forces are being mismanaged at top level. I asked the Tánaiste whether he had confidence in the Chief of Staff.

That is fine. Making a general accusation is one thing but an accusation targeted at an identifiable person outside the House who cannot defend himself of herself is not in order.

It is not the first time the Deputy has targeted individuals who do not have an opportunity to defend themselves in the House. I have absolute confidence in the Chief of Staff of the Defence Forces whom I know well and with whom I worked while I was Minister for Defence. On many occasions I visited the headquarters of the Naval Service in Haulbowline with him and other members of his management team and staff.

I have made the point that there are recruitment and retention issues, some of which are linked with pay and an economy which can now offer alternatives to members of the Defence Forces. It is clear that personnel are being targeted because of their skill set. The Government is responding by examining the issue in detail. The recommendations made in that regard will be considered by the Government.

However, I cannot allow in this House the kind of accusations Deputy Daly is making against an individual who is doing an exceptional job under difficult circumstances for the Defence Forces as Chief of Staff. It is regrettable that she has chosen to target an individual in that way.