First, on behalf of the Labour Party, I wish to join the Tánaiste in offering sympathies on the loss of Brendan Daly, the Tánaiste's former colleague, to his family and community. I also offer my deep sympathies to the families, friends and all those affected by the tragic deaths of Andrew O’Donnell and Max Wall in Ios last weekend. The devastating losses of these two boys who had just finished the leaving certificate examination at St. Michael's College, Ballsbridge, has impacted so many. I offer my sympathies in particular to the school community at St. Michael's College, where I attended a memorial service last night for the two boys. We saw an immense outpouring of grief and support for the families and friends of the boys. It was especially poignant as it took place in the same chapel where they had their graduation ceremony just six weeks ago. I offer sincere condolences to the O’Donnell and Wall families and all affected. The Tánaiste's Department has been to the fore and has been working hard to support the families and all those other students in Ios at the same time. Last night, school principal, Tim Kelleher, gave particular thanks to Department of Foreign Affairs staff.

I also wish to join the welcome to the Palestinian ambassador, H.E. Dr. Jilan Wahba Abdalmajid. It has been my pleasure to meet the ambassador on several occasions. I join others in calling for stronger leadership from Ireland on solidarity with the people of Palestine, in particular this week, following the horrific actions of the Israel Defense Forces in Jenin. Several of us raised this issue earlier this week. I reiterate my calls for the Government to seek to pass the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018, for which there is cross-party support.

I wish also to refer to another issue related to the Tánaiste's ministerial brief. The Women of Honour group expressed serious concern about the plans for the Government’s statutory inquiry to investigate allegations of sexual assault, discrimination, harassment and bullying of women in the Defence Forces, brought forward, courageously, by the members of the group. They say they cannot support what they see as a grossly inadequate inquiry with deeply flawed terms of reference. I understand the Tánaiste will meet the group today at 5 p.m. in advance of bringing forward proposals for the inquiry to Cabinet next week. We welcome the Government's commitment to holding a statutory inquiry. I ask that the Tánaiste take on board the concerns expressed by the group and that the Government moves swiftly to establish a tribunal of inquiry based on the proposed terms of reference the Women of Honour drafted. The group is anxious to ensure that the terms include an investigation into the workplace culture pertaining in the Defence Forces. It is a key issue because, as the Labour Party defence spokesperson, Senator Wall, said, the Defence Forces are in crisis following years of neglect and there is a recruitment and retention crisis, in particular. To address that, we must ensure we are addressing the toxic culture which the allegations from Women of Honour uncovered. I ask the Tánaiste if he accepts that the calls of the Women of Honour must be heeded as part of an overall response to the recruitment and retention issues plaguing our Defence Forces today.

I share the Deputy's expressions of sympathy with the families of Andrew O'Donnell and Max Wall and the entire St. Michael's College community. It is every parent's nightmare that something like this would happen. It is deeply saddening and shocking. In time, I hope, the great memories they shared with their sons and families will give them some consolation in the very traumatic and difficult time ahead. I thank our consular staff in the Department of Foreign Affairs, who worked with the families.

I am conscious of the role of the Women of Honour in bringing forward and shedding a public light on these issues. I had several discussions with the group and other organisations and representative bodies on the form of inquiry and the terms of reference. The Attorney General met the legal representative of Women of Honour this week. I will have a further meeting with them this evening. I have an open mind regarding the issues; I am not closing anything off but a balance must be struck between trying to get things moving and timelines. I am open to people's perspectives in the House on that matter. I would like to try to get the tribunal up and running before we recess. The Deputy will be aware, from her legal background, that a lot of preparatory work must then happen, such as discovery and work-up before hearings even take place. I have discussed with the groups and others the question of a public tribunal of inquiry or a commission of inquiry and how to protect people who may wish to come forward but may not want the subject matter of their issue to be in the public domain.

That is a legitimate issue. There may be ways we can deal with that such as in camera hearings and so forth. I have listened intently to what has been said in that regard and I will be mindful of what people say in that context when I bring recommendations to the Government in respect of both the form or format of the inquiry and the terms of reference.

On the terms of reference, I do not detect a great difference between the issues. In many instances it is about how the terms of reference are interpreted as to whether they cover a range of issues or whether they do not. We have received legal advice that many of the issues that have been raised are covered. For example, the Department Ministers are covered in the terms of reference. Protected disclosures, which a number of groups raised, are covered. Civilian employees are covered. Quite a range of issues were raised which we have clarified and brought within the terms of reference, but there could be further discussions about those terms of reference.

I thank the Tánaiste for the response, in particular his comment that he has an open mind on the plans for the inquiry. That is a very fair response. I agree with him that it would be positive to move swiftly on this. I think he has said he hopes to bring the recommendations to Cabinet next week. I see that the terms of reference for the inquiry are not on next week's Dáil schedule at present. We would certainly be very happy to facilitate their inclusion in order that we could move ahead on this. I listened carefully to some of the points the Tánaiste has made about what is a creative approach to looking at how best to meet the requirements of Women of Honour - for example, through having capacity for in camera hearings and so forth. That is very welcome. We want to see progress on this, clearly, and we welcome and appreciate that there is ongoing engagement with members of the Women of Honour group. Given, however, their allegations and the immense courage they have shown in bringing forward all these issues, the allegations have to be addressed to address the bigger issue of recruitment and retention at a time when we see our Defence Forces having a falling strength, with numbers now below 8,000. That is really the greatest threat to our security. In the context of the recent and rather controversial consultative forum on international security policy, that is certainly a point we will make in our Labour submission to the forum, that we need to address the issue of falling numbers and we need to ensure we maintain our proud tradition of international peacekeeping, adherence to the triple lock and military neutrality while, of course, being very clear in our political expression of support - for example, for the people of Ukraine under such appalling bombardment from Russia this week and for the past year and more.

I am conscious that I am before Dáil Éireann. I was hopeful I would be in a position to communicate my intentions to the Women of Honour group today. I am minded to recommend to the Government a public tribunal of inquiry. It is a matter of trying to tease through the mechanisms by which we would try to protect certain people who might wish to come forward but not be in the public glare. I think the argument has been made that if we go for a commission of inquiry, that will be very much secret - at least, that is the language that has been used - or confidential, to put it that way.

Behind closed doors.

It would be behind closed doors, and people feel that the whole disciplinary process historically has been behind closed doors, hence the lack of transparency. I am jumping ahead because I have not got to the Government yet, but that is my view and I was going to communicate that today to Women of Honour and then have further discussions with them. There is only one genuine motivation here. I know, having been involved in various inquiries in the past, how time slips. If we lose two or three more months before we come back after the summer recess, we will then go forward, between preparation and discoveries, and there is a lot in this. Let us be honest: we are looking at a number of years before this work concludes. The Deputy is absolutely correct about the importance of this work for the future of our Defence Forces. It is absolutely essential that it is a catalyst for a change in culture and how we do things in the future.