Chapter 14 - Australian Defence Force Cadets
14.1
Under the terms of reference, the committee was asked
to inquire into the suspension of Cadet Sergeant Eleanore
Tibble. This incident opened up for
investigation a specific area of the military justice system that deals
specifically with the ADF's work with Australia's
youth through the Australian Defence Force Cadets (ADFC) programme.
14.2
The suspension and subsequent death of Eleanore
Tibble highlighted accountability and
management issues in the ADFC. This is an organisation staffed mainly by
volunteers. The case also brought to light the uncertain legal relationship
that exists between the ADFC and the ADF. This chapter examines the status of
the ADFC in relation to the ADF and the bearing that this has on both the
accountability of cadet staff and the way in which the ADFC or the ADF handle
allegations of misconduct by cadets.
The Australian Defence Force Cadets—structure and organisation
14.3
The ADFC includes all three cadet organisations—the
Australian Air Force Cadets, the Australian Navy Cadets and the Australian Army
Cadets. As mentioned above, these organisations are largely volunteer
organisations and involve approximately 27,000 young Australians aged between
12½ and 20 years. They participate in their chosen cadet organisation at
approximately 490 locations around Australia.
The cadets are led by over 2,600 volunteer staff.[877]
14.4
Air Commodore Peter
McDermott advised the committee that those staff members are drawn from a wide
variety of professions in the general community:
...they volunteer their time for a series of reasons. Some are
parents who want to be actively involved in their teenagers' activities; some
have been recruited into the organisation for their special skills; some have
been cadets themselves and want to give something back to the organisation; and
for some it represents their chosen form of volunteerism in the Australian
community.[878]
14.5
It is important to state at the outset that neither the
cadets nor many of the staff of the ADFC are members or reserve members of the
ADF. Not being members of the ADF means that they do not fall under the same
military justice system as the ADF.[879]
This has implications for the way in which discipline and justice are
administered within the ADFC and between the ADF and the ADFC.
14.6
The ADFC is administered by the relevant Service chief
in accordance with the enabling legislation for cadets in the Defence Act 1903, the Naval Defence Act 1910, the Air Force Act 1923 and the subordinate
cadet force regulations last amended in 1977. The administration of those cadet
corps is effected through the respective cadet policy manuals. The control that
Service Chiefs have over their respective cadet organisation is essentially an
administrative control rather than a command control.[880] This provides the authority for
administrative action and inquiries (rather than disciplinary) into serious
incidents within the cadet organisations.
14.7
In relation to the accountability of cadet staff, the
cadet manuals explain that administrative processes may be used to deal with
improper conduct, but the extent of that administrative action is counselling
or dismissal. There is no provision for disciplinary action against staff.[881] Similarly, cadet manuals provide for
administrative action against cadets by staff for failure to abide by the code
of conduct.[882]
14.8
There have been significant changes to support the
administration and training of cadet staff in recent years. Many of these
changes are the result of the death of Eleanore
Tibble on 27 November 2000.
14.9
Immediately prior to her death, Eleanore was the
subject of administrative action by staff of No 5 Wing for allegedly
fraternising with an adult cadet instructor. The ADF's handling of the
investigation into her suspension has provided the background to the committee's
examination of the current status of the cadet organisations.
Cadet
Sergeant Eleanore Tibble—a case study
14.10
Cadet Sergeant Tibble
took her own life at her home in Tasmania
on 27 November 2000 at the
age of 15. At the time of her death, she understood that she was to be
discharged from the Air Cadets as a result of an allegation that she had
fraternised with an adult cadet staff member.
14.11
She was unaware that two weeks prior to her death, the
Deputy Director Reserve Personnel Cadets had given a direction to the Officer
Commanding 5 Wing that she was to be retained in the cadets because the
discharge proposal was unfounded. That direction was never carried out.
Investigation
and handling of initial allegation of fraternisation
14.12
At the time the allegation of fraternisation was made
against Eleanore, the relevant policy instruction was outlined in Chapter 7 of Defence Instruction (Air Force) AAP 5110.001
Air Training Corps Manual of Management Fourth Edition of 27 November 1994,
'Conditions of Service for Cadets'. The policy provided that a cadet may be
discharged by a CO if the member is unsuitable to be a cadet.[883] Unacceptable behaviour that may
determine an individual's suitability for retention in the AIRTC included
'unhealthy or unacceptable fraternisation with other members'.[884]
14.13
In line with principles of natural justice, however,
the policy expressly provided that a cadet should not be discharged for that
reason (or a number of others) without having been notified in writing by their
CO of the reason for intended discharge and he or she being given the
opportunity to contest the discharge.[885]
14.14
The committee received evidence from Mrs
Susan Campbell,
Eleanore's mother. In light of the above policy, the main concerns expressed by
Mrs Campbell
related to the treatment of Eleanore by the Tasmanian Squadron Air Cadet Corps
(TASAIRTC) following the initial allegation in August 2000 and prior to her
death.
14.15
Mrs Campbell's
concerns are that principles of natural justice were not applied to her
daughter, procedures appropriate to counselling minors were not followed and
that Eleanore was discriminated against and victimised. Mrs
Campbell
was particularly concerned about the initial interview of Eleanore conducted by
a senior staff member on 5 October
2000. She believed that Eleanore was given no prior notice of the
interview, agenda or issues to be considered in order for her to prepare.
Importantly, Mrs Campbell
also stated that the interview took place without her knowledge or consent as
the mother of a 15-year-old cadet and Eleanore was not provided with an
'airman's friend' for support during that interview.
14.16
At the conclusion of the interview on 5 October 2000, a senior staff member
advised Eleanore that he would speak to her again after he had consulted the
CO. However, Eleanore received no further advice until 30 October 2000. This was a telephone direction
to resign or have her service terminated, with no reasons provided for that
direction. Mrs Campbell
stated that Eleanore was informed that she had brought dishonour upon the
Flight and that Eleanore understood from the phone call that she had no right
of appeal against the direction to resign (or her service would be
terminated).
14.17
It is evident to the committee that the timeframe of
this process and the fact that Cadet Sergeant Tibble was never advised that
ADFC Headquarters had directed that she be retained in the cadets some two
weeks prior to her death, demonstrates a lack of procedural fairness and
sensitivity toward children. The other person involved in the alleged
fraternisation was never formally interviewed or 'charged' with any offence
because he had resigned from the organisation thereby leaving the organisation
with no authority over him.
14.18
Since Eleanore's death, Mrs
Campbell
has expressed concern and frustration about the difficulties in gaining access
to her daughter's file or staff from the TASAIRTC and her inability to obtain
information other than applying through Freedom of Information (FOI).[886]
Investigation
following the death of CSGT Tibble
14.19
In cases such as Eleanore's, there is no mandatory
direction for the cadet organisations or the overarching Service to conduct an
investigation either into the death of a cadet or the circumstances surrounding
a suspension. Because of this, Mrs Campbell
advised the committee that the resulting investigation by the RAAF was due to
her making a submission to the military justice audit conducted by Mr
James Burchett
QC in 2001.[887] The Tasmanian Coroner
investigated Eleanore's death.
14.20
Mr Burchett
assessed Mrs Campbell's
submission as being outside the terms of reference of the audit but
nevertheless, referred the matter to RAAF Headquarters. After doing so, Group
Captain Stunden was appointed as
Investigating Officer (IO) on 30 March
2001. Terms of reference for an internal investigation were
subsequently drafted addressing the administrative processes surrounding the
suspension of Cadet Sergeant Tibble.
14.21
In addition to interviewing Mrs
Campbell,
the IO interviewed relevant officers at the Kempton Police Station responsible
for investigating Eleanore's death for the coroner and all relevant Air Force
and Air Training Corps personnel other than the other person involved in the
allegation of fraternisation who, as mentioned earlier, had resigned.
14.22
Virtually all Mrs
Campbell's
original concerns were confirmed by the IO. In particular, the IO found that:[888]
-
an appropriate person was not in attendance at
the interview on 5 October 2000 to provide Eleanore with support;
-
Eleanore was not given adequate opportunity to
provide her version of events;
-
the senior staff member did not follow up on his
clear commitment to Eleanore and advise her of the outcome of subsequent
discussions with the CO;
-
TASAIRTC officers did not exhibit any
appreciation that they were dealing with an adolescent and that the
circumstances required special skills and attention;
-
TASAIRTC officers showed no obligation to
explain to the 15-year-old cadet exactly what it was that she had done wrong;
-
the way TASIARTC staff dealt with Eleanore could
be viewed as victimisation; and
-
the inordinate delays in the process were
unacceptable.
Procedures
for dealing with a minor
14.23
The IO's finding that TASAIRTC officers did not exhibit
any appreciation that they were dealing with an adolescent is a serious matter.
The committee's fundamental concern is that the numerous people involved in
this case failed to recognise or understand that this may have been a case of
child sexual assault and no action was taken to address that possibility.
14.24
In the committee's view, this failure to take prompt
action where child sexual misconduct may have been at issue represents a
serious human rights breakdown by TASAIRTC (as in a loco parentis
relationship). Furthermore, as time passed and investigations were undertaken
after her death, this matter was not at the forefront of the ADF's concerns.
There appears to have been a complete failure on the ADF's part to comprehend
the significance of what had happened and to appreciate that they had a duty of
care to protect a minor from harm.
14.25
On 9 May 2005, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission tabled a report which dealt with the circumstances of Eleanore Tibble's dismissal. It considered whether the Commonwealth of Australia
breached her rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Commission's
findings strengthen those of the Committee's.
Mr John von Doussa, President, HREOC, found inter alia, that TASAIRTC or TASAIRTC
officers:
-
failed to recognise the need to consider the
interests of the child as paramount;
-
failed to take into account as a primary
consideration Ms Tibble's best interests;
-
failed to protect Ms Tibble from humiliation
that might result in psychological harm; and
-
failed to take all appropriate administrative,
social and educational measures to protect Ms Tibble from 'neglect or negligent
treatment'.
14.26
Of particular interest to the committee, is the
Commission's response to the Commonwealth's submission to the Commission's
preliminary findings that officers failed to take account of the serious nature
of allegations of a sexual nature involving a child. After considering the
submission, the Commission found that:
There was no
understanding by the officers involved (and I would add, the lawyers who
apparently gave legal advice that 'Ms Tibble should be asked to resign') that there may have been an issue of
child sexual abuse. That likelihood was plainly raised by the initial belief
that there had been a sexual relationship involving a 15 year old girl, and
then by her statement in the Record of Interview, that she had not reported the
relationship because of fear of threats from her superior.
Instead of immediately
taking steps to ensure the protection of the child, the likely victim of a
situation which those in loco parentis had the obligation to prevent, the
processes which took place sought to discipline the victim. This is a serious
human rights failure which occurred.
It is one thing that the failure occurred in the first place, perhaps
as a consequence of inadequate guidance in policy manuals and inexperience and
lack of training of the officers concerned. It is quite another thing that long
after the event, after investigation and time for consideration and change of
policies, that formal submissions directed at minimising and trivialising the
failures should be made which still fail to recognise and acknowledge the
significance of what happened. It is reasonable to assume that formal
submissions made by lawyers in a matter of the seriousness of this one would be
thoroughly considered submissions made on instructions from a senior level in
the Department of Defence.[889] (emphasis added)
14.27
These concerns are consistent with other evidence
received by the committee in relation to the handling by the ADFC or the ADF of
allegations against cadets and cadet staff.[890]
That evidence concerns a cadet who is still a minor and therefore, the
committee does not consider it appropriate to discuss the detail of that
complaint. However, the committee is of the view that similar to the case of Eleanore Tibble, officers in the ADFC, following allegations made against a
young cadet, failed to recognise and fulfil their duty to place the interests
of that cadet first. It notes the apparent condoning of harassing behaviour
toward the accused cadet by other cadets and a failure of the organisation to investigate
the allegations adequately (at least in the view of the parents of the cadet
and the committee). In this instance, the suspected offence was also reported
to the Police. However, this does not detract from the actions and allegations
surrounding the cadet unit that needed also to be dealt with.
14.28
The Defence Force Ombudsman has also recently
investigated the complaint of a young person (under the age of 18) of an
incident involving unacceptable behaviour at a Navy training establishment in
mid-1996. His findings again suggest the need for the ADF to take strong and
immediate action to rectify serious problems in their practices and procedures
for dealing with matters involving young people and sexual impropriety. The
Ombudsman recommended that:
-
the RAN provide training to RAN Police Coxswains
on investigative technique, and monitor their investigations, to ensure that
interviews are tape recorded, records are complete, questioning is undertaken
appropriately, and that young persons are treated in a manner that acknowledges
their age, level of experience and need for support in such situations; and
-
the RAN instructions in relation to the
investigation of alleged sexual assault be revised to require that such cases
be referred to the civilian police at an early stage.[891]
14.29
The committee is highly critical of the ADF's lack of
appropriate action where allegations were made of a sexual nature involving minors.
There appears to be two major issues in the handling by the ADF of
allegations that personnel including cadets have been mistreated. Firstly,
there is no real awareness of the correct way to approach such
allegations—particularly the prompt reporting of any suspicion of child sexual
assault to civilian police. Secondly, there are no effective mechanisms in
place to address such issues in a systematic and efficient manner.
Acknowledgement of shortcomings and
remedies
14.30
The Chief of Air Force advised the committee that with
hindsight, an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the suspension
of Eleanore should have been initiated earlier but it was assumed that the
coroner's investigation would suffice:
It would appear that there was a meeting in early December, a
week after the tragic death of Ellie, and the discussion was that there would
be a coroner's inquiry, and because there was a coroner's inquiry I think there
was an assumption that all the matters to do with this would be taken up in
that coroner's inquiry. With the benefit of hindsight, I think that was a
mistake. In my view it was absolutely imperative to investigate the processes
that surrounded the suspension of Ellie
Tibble and why she was not reinstated when
it became clear that the relationship was a friendship.[892]
14.31
The Air Force has advised the committee and Mrs
Campbell on
a number of occasions that it deeply regrets the death of Cadet
Sergeant Tibble and acknowledges that there
were significant defects in the manner in which this matter was handled. The
Air Force acknowledges the shortcomings to have included:[893]
-
inadequate record-keeping;
-
deficiencies in policy in relation to the
requirement to involve parents and guardians during counselling and interviews
with cadets; and
-
deficiencies in training for Australian Air
Force Cadets staff in personnel management and in particular in managing and
developing adolescents.
14.32
In addition, the Minister for Defence, in a letter to Mrs
Campbell
dated March 2002, stated that 'to the extent that the actions surrounding the
handling of Eleanore's suspension contributed to Eleanore's death is a matter
of deep regret'.[894]
14.33
All but one recommendation arising out of the IO Report
have been implemented. The outstanding recommendation relates to administrative
action against one of the staff members involved. That matter is still
continuing and subject to further review.
14.34
The
Chief of Air Force advised the committee that following the findings and
recommendations of the Stunden Report, administrative support manuals and
guidelines have been revised and updated to clearly state procedures and
processes to be followed in the management of young people in the cadets,
including:[895]
-
cadet
instructions strengthened to provide specific guidance to adult volunteer staff
in the management of adolescents; and
-
revision
of cadet policy manuals to include codes of behaviour for staff that detail the
administrative procedures and practices to be followed when dealing with
minors, including mandating occasions when communication is required with
parents or guardians.
14.35
The
training of adult volunteer staff has also been updated and made more relevant,
including:[896]
-
training
programs for cadet officers and instructors that place particular emphasis on
developing skills to work effectively with adolescents; and
-
training
modules in a range of subject areas, including equity and diversity, legal
principles and implications for cadet members, the psychology of adolescent
behaviour, the management of behaviour modification, the management of due
process, and occupational health and safety.
14.36
The
Chief of Air Force also advised the committee that existing staff are receiving
instruction on the above subjects, and the modules have been incorporated into
the initial training program that all staff undergo on joining the cadets. The
training is also now included in cadet recruitment, promotion and command
courses to ensure ongoing awareness at all stages of the training and
development continuum.[897]
14.37
In
addition, the ADFC is also moving forward with a number of activities which are
preventative in nature relating to suicide awareness and crisis response involving
the Directorate of Mental Health and the Defence Community Organisation.[898]
14.38
The
committee was advised that the Air Force investigation took into account Mrs Campbell's concerns about the handling of the
allegations of fraternisation and the subsequent suspension of her daughter. Mrs Campbell was provided with a full and uncensored
copy of the final report of the inquiry.[899]
14.39
Mrs Campbell was given the opportunity to review the
proposed changes in policy and training from a parental perspective. One of the
suggestions Mrs Campbell made was for cadets to be allowed access to
Defence Community Organisation staff in circumstances where they felt they
could not raise issues with their instructors. Air Force agreed with Mrs Campbell, and that change was also incorporated into
cadet policy.[900]
14.40
It is sad to all concerned, and devastating to the
family, that it took the death of a young cadet to initiate such action on the
part of the ADF.
14.41
Similar to a number of other issues contained in this
report, the committee is of the view that administrative investigations into
situations that involve such serious circumstances and particularly those
involving a death should be mandatory, not discretionary. However, whilst the
administrative investigation by the RAAF could have been initiated immediately
following the death of Eleanore, the committee is generally satisfied with the
steps taken by the Air Force following the investigation process and the
subsequent changes to policies and procedures in relation to cadets.
14.42
The HREOC also examined the measures taken by the
Department of Defence to rectify deficiencies in its policy and procedural
manuals and training program for Australian Air Force Cadets staff. It
considered that the Policy Manual does not provide 'adequate guidance to
officers that situations can arise, particularly where sexual impropriety is
suspected, where the primary interest of cadets make it inappropriate that any
of the disciplinary measures contemplated...be undertaken.'[901]
14.43
The committee notes this finding and supports HREOC's
recommendation that the Manual contain advice that:
...those who have the responsibility of dealing with cadets that
they should always be alive to the possibility that inappropriate behaviour by
a cadet may be the result of influence or pressure from a superior to which the
cadet has succumbed. In those situations the primary interest of the cadet
require sympathetic support and protection—not warnings or counselling that is
predicated on blameworthy conduct having occurred.[902]
14.44
The Commission also recommended that the syllabuses for
training programs for officers and instructors should be 'checked to ensure
that instruction is given on what is required and when to ensure that the best
interests of cadets who are minors are the primary consideration when dealing
with allegations of inappropriate conduct'. It suggested further that the
conduct of training instruction are matters upon which expert advice should be
sought including from an expert in the human rights of children.[903]
Monitoring
of implementation—preventing a recurrence
14.45
The Committee
recognises that extensive and appropriate changes have been put in place by the
Australian Air Force Cadets in relation to the management of a minor who is
thought to have breached the standards of behaviour.
Recommendation 38
14.46 To ensure that the further development and
implementation of measures designed to improve the care and control and rights
of minors in the cadets are consistent with the highest standards, the
committee suggests that the ADF commission an expert in the human rights of
children to monitor and advise the ADF on its training and education programs
dealing with cadets.
Resources available to the ADFC
14.47
As mentioned above, the ADFC is essentially a volunteer
organisation for staff members although some remuneration is provided. Cadet
staff members generally volunteer approximately 4 hours per week, a weekend per
year and a camp of one week's duration per year. The reality of that
commitment, however, often equates to significantly more hours and the
committee is aware that the remuneration provided in many cases is not
commensurate with the actual expenses incurred by staff.[904]
14.48
Often, cadet staff members are required to use their
full recreation leave entitlement from their full-time positions to accommodate
cadet commitments and activities. Whilst this is done in recognition of the
worthiness of the organisation, the only time left for formal staff training is
additional weekends. The committee is aware that residential courses are also
utilised for new staff, but this still requires a new staff member to secure
sufficient leave from full-time positions. Given that ADFC staff members are
not reservists, they are not entitled to any Defence leave to participate in
cadet activities. As a result, there is often a very high staff turnover from
trying to balance family life, full-time employment and volunteering with the
cadets.
14.49
In terms of administration, it is also worth noting
that cadets and staff meet in the evening on their allotted day each week. For
many cadet staff, this means that any follow-up of administrative matters has
to be done in business hours during their full time jobs. In the absence of any
centralised administrative arrangements, it is not surprising that delays might
occur when parents attempt to contact senior staff members if it is not on the
evening of their child's allocated day of the week.
14.50
As is inevitable when dealing with adolescent children,
the committee is aware that formal complaints are made against staff and other
cadets. Each of these complaints needs to be investigated with sensitivity and
the principles of natural justice need to apply.
14.51
In evidence to the committee, the Chief of Navy
acknowledged that the cadet organisations have very little capacity to
investigate allegations against cadets or staff when they arise.[905] The committee notes the ADF advice
that, when such allegations arise, they are normally investigated by someone
appointed from within the ADF.[906] The
committee understands from other evidence that those investigations generally
only take place after lengthy lobbying and campaigning by the parents involved.
14.52
These issues have also been identified by the Defence
Force Ombudsman. As a result of several serious complaints made to the
Ombudsman's Office in recent years, concerns have been raised about the
adequacy of Defence's administration of people under the age of 18 years. This
has prompted the Ombudsman to conduct an 'own motion' investigation into such
matters.[907]
14.53
The Ombudsman's investigation will cover both Service
personnel and Defence Force Cadets and the focus of the investigation is to
determine whether there are:
-
procedures in place which take appropriate
account of the lack of maturity and inexperience of young people and their
limited capacity to deal effectively with major issues and stresses which can
arise as a consequence of defence related activities; and
-
mechanisms in place to ensure staff understand,
implement and monitor these policies effectively, including dealing with any
problems or complaints which might arise.
14.54
The committee will be particularly interested in the
report and findings of the Ombudsman on these matters.
14.55
The committee is aware that there are different
arrangements in each of the three cadet organisations. For example, the Navy
cadets are assisted by management and administrative support from the Navy by
way of the appointment of a local naval authority. Army Cadet Headquarters has
an army chaplain posted there, and can also call on the assistance of Army
psychology. Air Force cadets now have the assistance of the DCO. Air Force is
also piloting an arrangement whereby a chaplain and psychologist are located at
headquarters as cadet staff (not members of the ADF).[908] Whilst these arrangements are
positive and to be encouraged, they do not address the administrative stress on
cadet staff.
14.56
The committee also notes the relatively recent
announcement of an additional $18 million to the ADFC. However, that injection
of funding will not specifically address these issues. It will fund upgraded
accommodation, adventure training and new technology[909] (although new technology may go some
way toward addressing administrative delays).
14.57
The committee is firmly of the view that the policy and
training changes outlined above are very important but, for the reasons just
mentioned, the committee is concerned about the implementation of the revised
policies and training for staff and cadets. The committee is not convinced that
there is adequate capacity for the cadet staff to conduct their work and
implement the recent changes within the arrangements as they currently stand.
Future
status and administrative arrangements for the ADFC
14.58
As mentioned above, the case of Cadet
Sergeant Tibble also raised the issue of the
status of cadet staff and therefore, the accountability of staff. In that case,
the adult staff member involved with Eleanore resigned from the organisation
leaving no recourse for the TASAIRTC. The committee accepts that had there been
grounds for prosecution under criminal or civil law action could have been
taken. But, short of such action, accountability and the capacity of the ADFC
in relation to its staff has proved limited.
14.59
The committee also accepts the rationale that ADFC
staff are largely volunteers who are not preparing for combat and therefore
should not be subject to all aspects of the military justice system.[910] The committee, however, is concerned
that there are significant numbers of minors under the control and
responsibility of people for whom there is no complete legislative framework.
14.60
Whilst there may be a common law employer relationship
between the cadet staff and the Commonwealth, in the context of Defence Force
Regulations, what that actually entails is enormously vague.[911] The Australian Government Solicitor
has advised the ADF that there are issues with the relationship between the ADF
and the ADFC and that the regulations (dating back to 1977) should be amended
to ensure that the rights and responsibilities of Defence and cadet staff are
clearly defined.[912] Air
Marshal Houston acknowledged the need to
update regulations:
The problem we have at the moment is that there are deficiencies
in the existing arrangements. We have to codify the arrangements in much more
detail so that they stand up to close scrutiny. They would not stand up at the
moment. There is not sufficient guidance or policy and there are lots of issues
with the 1977 legislation, because it essentially established the cadets as a
volunteer organisation. We need to put more substance into it so that it stands
up.[913]
14.61
In an attempt to address these issues, the committee
understands that the Director-General Cadets is developing a submission to the
Minister proposing amendments to the regulations. The committee considers
resolution of this issue to be vitally important and should be an urgent
priority for the Government.
Recommendation 39
14.62 The committee recommends that the ADF take steps
immediately to draft and make regulations dealing with the Australian Defence
Force Cadets to ensure that the rights and responsibilities of Defence and
cadet staff are clearly defined.
Recommendation 40
14.63 The committee recommends that further resources be
allocated to the Australian Defence Force Cadets to provide for an increased
number of full-time, fully remunerated administrative positions across all
three cadet organisations. These positions could provide a combination of
coordinated administrative and complaint handling support.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page