Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call on Deputy Niall Collins who is sharing time with Deputies Barry Cowen, Willie O'Dea and Dara Calleary.

Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann has no confidence in the Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, Alan Shatter T.D.

The cornerstone of any functioning democracy is accountability and taking responsibility for one's actions. Unfortunately, this has been sadly lacking in the Government. It has also been completely absent when it comes to the Minister taking responsibility for his stewardship of the administration of justice and the Department of Justice and Equality.

The Minister will be well aware that this is the second occasion on which we have tabled a motion of no confidence in him. On the previous occasion we took issue with his policy and direction concerning the oversight of the roll-out of community policing across the country. Many communities are still feeling the adverse effects of the roll-out of that policy and in particular the closure of Garda stations.

Since the last motion, however, we have gone from crisis to crisis and under the Minister's stewardship things have gone from bad to worse. Four separate investigations are currently going on under the Minister's remit. Mr. Justice Cooke is looking into the GSOC bugging scandal. Senior Counsel, Seán Guerin, is looking into the whistleblower dossier that the Minister sat on for a number of months. That dossier contains some very serious information, including details of events. GSOC itself is looking into the whole penalty points issue. Thankfully, we have also had the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

There were calls from many people, including the Opposition, for separate investigations into those issues, yet the Minister, the Taoiseach and their Government colleagues steadfastly refused to accede to a commission of investigation into any of those. Lo and behold, however, we will now have a commission of investigation into the telephone recording incidents. All of this is occurring against a backdrop of other ongoing scandals. They include the Minister's use live on RTE television of a confidential briefing he received on Deputy Mick Wallace. We now understand that is still subject to a ruling from the data commissioner.

We have had the sacking of the confidential recipient and have heard nothing from the Minister about what the confidential recipient said about him to the whistleblowers. The Minister is refusing steadfastly to say anything about it and is remaining silent. That is very serious. We now have the departure of the former Garda Commissioner.

As is typical of the Government whenever someone raises questions about the Minister's stewardship, it has sought to rubbish the Opposition, in this instance for tabling a motion of no confidence. We did not table the motion lightly. We are being repeatedly asked if we have confidence in the Minister and we now wish to outline why we have long lost confidence in him to oversee the administration of justice. We did not take the decision lightly yet the Government describes it as a pointless exercise and a waste of parliamentary time. We will use the time to provide the Government with an opportunity to explain the holes in its story over the last days and weeks. The Government has an opportunity to explain why the Garda Commissioner retired prematurely. The Government does not like to be accountable for its actions. We even had the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Leo Varadkar, who was a hero a couple of weeks ago when he called it straight, turn into the bad cop yesterday when he sought to rubbish the former Garda Commissioner at Trinity College Dublin. He suggested that the former Garda Commissioner sought to destroy the tapes, which is completely untrue and must be corrected. What we expect and what the public expects is that over the course of tonight and tomorrow night the Minister, the Taoiseach and the rest of the Government will use the opportunity to address the holes in their narrative of the last number of days. They were skilfully placed in the narrative and the timeline. The Government must address the premature departure of the Garda Commissioner.

Let us recapitulate the timeline. On 16 June 2013, GSOC published a report into what is now known as the Waterford assault case - the Anthony Holness case. It was in the public domain and the report was ultimately published on the GSOC website. On 11 November 2013, the former Garda Commissioner, Martin Callinan, informed the Attorney General about recordings and their potential impact on legal proceedings. On 26 November, the Ian Bailey civil case was reported on the RTE news, including the potential detail around telephone traffic. On 27 November 2013, the Garda Commissioner himself stopped the practice of telephone recordings except in the case of emergency 999 calls. On 28 February 2014, Department of Justice and Equality officials were informed of the implications of the recording practice for ongoing civil proceedings in the Bailey case. That was as part of discovery order. On 10 March 2014, the Garda Commissioner wrote pursuant to section 41 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 to the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality, which correspondence the Government published this evening. The first line of the Commissioner's letter included the words "Please inform the Minister". On 24 March 2014, the Government claims, the Minister, Deputy Shatter, was not informed until 6 p.m. and the Taoiseach sent the Secretary General to meet the Garda Commissioner. We know what evolved from that. The following day, we had the resignation.

All of this happened conveniently at a time when the Minister was in the dock politically and the Government was at sixes and sevens on the contemptuous treatment of the whistleblowers. The Government was refusing steadfastly to apologise, yet conveniently it statement that new, important and grave information had come to its attention. All of that information was in the domain of the civil and public service and, indeed, in the public domain. Nevertheless, the Government conveniently said it came out of left field and took everybody by surprise. The public is not buying it and has made up its mind on the matter. Let us remember that it has been reported since that the former Garda Commissioner was minded to apologise, but the Government would not let him. The Government must address that.

There are questions which must be addressed over the course of tonight and tomorrow night. Why did it take until 24 March 2014 for the Minister to become aware of the telephone recording practice? Why did it take until 25 March 2014 for the Minister to physically see the letter dated 10 March 2014 to the Secretary General from the Garda Commissioner? Was the Minister made aware of the contents of the letter in advance of seeing it? That is very important. There was a series of meetings. Are we to believe that the content of the letter or the fact that the recordings were widespread were not discussed at previous meetings? The Attorney General or her office knew since last November. Is it the case that she did not see fit to inform the Minister, the Government or anybody about the scale and extent of it notwithstanding how grave the Government said it was in its statement of last Tuesday? The Attorney General attends Cabinet. Does she not provide regular briefings on sensitive cases in line with normal practice? Critically, why was the Minister not involved in the meeting between the Taoiseach and the Attorney General that took place on the Sunday? These people are all in Dublin within a couple of minutes of each other. It beggars belief that the Minister was not involved. If the Attorney General and the Minister's Secretary General are involved in meetings, one would imagine the Minister would be involved.

On the Monday, there was a meeting involving the two Secretaries General, the Minister, the Taoiseach and the Attorney General but we are led to believe that the letter of 10 March was never raised. That is not plausible or credible. Brian Purcell left that meeting and went to the home of the Garda Commissioner. Are we to believe that what he was mandated to say was not discussed? Was there no discussion of the message he was to convey? We are told he conveyed the disquiet of Government and that the following morning the disquiet had not dissipated. Who knew what and when is not clear and the Government is not trying to make it clear. The Government is now being afforded an opportunity to do so. The public is appalled at the public shafting of the Garda Commissioner. The Garda Commissioner was shafted to save the Minister's skin. It is as simple as that. We must hear from the Taoiseach and we must have real leadership.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Tell them.

Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One would have imagined that on the Sunday the Taoiseach would have got the Minister, the Attorney General, the Secretaries General and the Garda Commissioner around a table when everybody was available. It does not make sense and we need to hear the truth. The bottom line is that the public has lost confidence in the Minister. His own people are reporting it to him. Throughout the country, local election campaigns are under way and the feedback is that the public has lost confidence in Deputy Alan Shatter to oversee the administration of justice. We are taking our legitimate opportunity here in the Parliament to articulate that again.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is not the sort of motion one necessarily enjoys having to speak to. We realise that on many occasions confidence motions have been used purely for political advantage and opportunity. Given the current arithmetic of the Dáil, a person would be forgiven for questioning our motives. However, it is necessary to remind ourselves of the commentary of many Members on the opposite side of the House prior to and on assuming office. The Taoiseach said Ministers would be measured by performance and results, there would be report card systems in place-----

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So much for that.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----and those who failed to live up to expectations would be replaced.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They would all be gone by now.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There would be a new politics. There would be reform in the House akin to a democratic revolution.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should have been here before.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The people would be kept in the loop, not out of it. When the Taoiseach said on election night that when Paddy needed to know, he indicated that he would inform Paddy. Recently, the Taoiseach addressed the public while speaking in the USA and said that if anyone had a suggestion, a question or a problem, that person should call him. He said his numbers were on the public record. I say to the Taoiseach that we have a problem. The people have a problem. Paddy has a problem and Paddy wants to know why, after the whistleblowers fiasco, the GSOC fiasco and the telephone-tapping fiasco, the Taoiseach has not disposed of Deputy Alan Shatter as a Minister. Paddy needs to know and Paddy must know.

I am sure Deputies will be aware of the baseball analogy and the "Three strikes and you are out" rule. While the Government has dropped report cards, new politics and the mantra of a democratic revolution, it has yet to drop the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter. The Fianna Fáil Party has been left with no option but to table this motion. While it may not succeed in its obvious intent, the motion offers the Government an opportunity to answer and to clarify many of the questions arising out of last week's shenanigans in the Taoiseach's office, the Cabinet and this Chamber. I remind Deputies of a comment made by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, at the weekend. In response to a question on the most recent issue to emerge, namely, the practice of taping telephone calls, he stated the issue became significant only when the Attorney General brought it to attention of the Taoiseach on Sunday, 23 March. Is the inference to be drawn from the Minister's statement that everything that had occurred since the previous June was insignificant?

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let us not forget the previous seven years.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That appears to be the opinion of the Minister and his colleagues in government. Incidentally, utterances made by other Cabinet members on this issue since last week appear to have had the blessing of the Taoiseach, whereas only a week previously all comments were to be made in the privacy of the Cabinet room. Unfortunately, public comments made by the Ministers for Finance, Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputies Noonan, Rabbitte and Varadkar, respectively, have done nothing but raise further questions.

To return to the nub of the issue, namely, the timeline of events in the fateful weekend before last, are we to believe, and is Paddy to believe, the coincidence that this issue landed in the lap of the Taoiseach on the Sunday before a Cabinet meeting which had, at its centre, the future of the Garda Commissioner and Minister for Justice and Equality? Are we to believe, and is Paddy to believe, that the Taoiseach, when briefed by the Attorney General on the Sunday in question, did not believe it would be worthwhile to telephone the Minister for Justice and Equality, supposedly the hardest working, most reforming Minister in Cabinet? Despite the Minister having more legislation, acumen and intelligence than any other Minister in the Cabinet, the Taoiseach did not believe it necessary to contact him. Instead, we are to believe that the Taoiseach saw fit to sleep on the matter.

We are led to believe the following scenario occurred the next morning. The Taoiseach again decided not to consult the Minister for Justice and Equality, officials in the Department of the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste or the leader of the Labour Party, his partner in government in whom he has little faith, and instead called in the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality who is supposedly answerable to the Minister for Justice and Equality, who had not yet arrived. The Secretary General, Mr. Brian Purcell, is the person to whom the then Garda Commissioner, Mr. Callinan, had written two weeks previously asking that he inform the Minister about the issue. Moreover, the Minister's staff had been engaged on this very issue with staff in the Office of the Attorney General since the previous June. Until that point, of course, the issue had been deemed insignificant. The Taoiseach then decided to despatch the Secretary General, the most senior official in the Department of the Minister, Deputy Shatter, to the home of the Garda Commissioner. Was this decision taken with the consent and agreement of the Minister? Was it the case that an official of the Department of Justice and Equality was sent because only a Minister in that Department can sack a Garda Commissioner? Given that the Taoiseach cannot do so, as he informed us last week, perhaps there was method in his madness as a visit from a Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality has an obvious inference.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The heavy gang is back.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the morning of Tuesday, 25 March, the Taoiseach will have faced his Cabinet meeting in the belief that he had solved all his problems and averted an imminent collision with his Labour Party colleagues in government. In any event, the Labour Party Ministers sealed the fate of the Garda Commissioner the previous week when they declined to give him public support. The Taoiseach will have informed the Cabinet that the Garda Commissioner was out of the way and asked if that was agreed. Once agreed, he could tick a box. He will then have stated that the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, was to give an apology to save his skin. Having obtained the agreement of his Cabinet colleagues, the Taoiseach could tick another box. He will then have asked for agreement to place on the agenda the issue of establishing a Garda authority because, while not included in the programme for Government, the measure would, given the circumstances, have to be agreed. He could then tick another box. The Taoiseach will then have asked for agreement regarding the establishment of a commission of inquiry, which made an insignificant matter into a very significant matter. Once that was agreed, he could tick another box. He will have asked if his Ministers agreed he was in full and total control of the meeting and, once agreed, he could tick the relevant box. Having replaced the old crisis with a new one and silenced the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Sport, Deputy Varadkar, who no longer had the podium and the ear of the people, he could tick another box.

This approach succeeded for a few hours until chaos broke out, holes emerged and suspicions were raised. The decision to send the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, to appear on "Prime Time" that night backfired. During the course of that programme, the sure-footed, wise and confident Minister for Finance became the bungling and inept Minister for Health whom we knew from yesteryear. Similar comments made by various Ministers have only added to confusion, notwithstanding their efforts to defend the Taoiseach, Attorney General, Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality and Minister for Justice.

The initial public perception that the issue may have been a conspiracy theory has begun to unravel and a belief is emerging that the real scenario was that one crisis was created to avert another crisis. The policy and manner in which the Government has dealt with this issue have backfired to such an extent that the Labour Party needs to revert to type, as the Minister for Finance did on "Prime Time" last week. This will mean the Labour Party returning to a practice in which it has much form, namely, seeking heads, as the Minister for Education and Skills will attest. Let us see it revert to type. To return to the three strikes and you are out rule, the Minister has had four or five strikes in respect of his handling of various affairs, as highlighted by Deputy Niall Collins. On that basis, the Government must realise that, unfortunately, the Minister is not capable of administering justice in the Department to which he had the privilege of being appointed. I ask that the House confirm this.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Paddy is not happy.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not wish to travel over ground which has been comprehensively covered by my colleagues. Last Wednesday, after two weeks of uncharacteristic silence during which he studiously avoided the media, the Minister addressed the House on two occasions. He devoted a great deal of his first speech to lavishing praise on the former Garda Commissioner, the very man he had colluded with the Taoiseach to shaft the day previously to save his skin. He then provided statistics on the fight against crime, fraud prosecutions, gangland operations, theft, murder, etc., all of which were very interesting, except that we could have obtained them with a few clicks of a mouse.

What the Minister told us was dwarfed by what he did not tell us. He did not speak a word about the confidential recipient, Mr. Oliver Connolly, and whether he was speaking on his behalf when he threatened a whistleblower. He did not utter a word about the circumstances of the Secretary General's visit to the home of the Garda Commissioner or the reason the Attorney General sat on information for four months. He did say a word about when he was first consulted about a section 41 letter or the reason it took ten days to reach his desk.

This is the performance in relation to the most serious issues imaginable from a Government that promised a constitutional revolution. It is not a constitutional revolution or even a constitutional pitch fight, it is a constitutional storm in a tea cup. I have often wondered why if the Minister for Justice and Equality, who is being lauded as some sort of reforming hyperactive genius, is so brilliant everything he has touched in relation to the most critical aspect of the administration of his Department turned to dust. Why has everything turned into an omnishambles? Why, less than six weeks ago, did the Minister for Justice and Equality come into this House and, in my opinion, mislead it-----

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Arrogance.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----telling us there was nothing to see and we should move on? Why are there now no less than four inquiries into alleged maladministration, all centring on how the Minister handled these vital issues? Perhaps the clue can be found in an article in last Saturday's Irish Independent by Fionnan Sheehan in which he stated that not a member of the Opposition, a journalist or other outside commentator but a Fine Gael TD, unnamed of course, said, referring to the Minister, Deputy Shatter: "It's his personality that's destroying him."

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not know he had one.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We would all be in trouble if that were the case.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The problem is that the Minister, Deputy Shatter, does not deal with people on an equal basis. He sees everybody at a distance from the towering heights of his own regard.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do not go there.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister's name has become a watch word for hubris, arrogance, intellectual superiority and the inability to admit even the slightest mistake.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mighty Mo.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy O'Dea should not be feeling so inferior.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Order, please.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The history books tell us that Joan of Arc was influenced by voices. The only voice to which the Minister, Deputy Shatter, ever listens is his own.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He does not do humility either. He cannot even fake that. Having refused for six months to apologise for the slurs on the characters of two honourable men, which he deliberately cast across the floor of this House and repeated elsewhere, an apology was dragged out of him by his colleagues in Government of both parties, who made it clear to him that he apologise or else. Reluctantly, the words were put in place-----

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mealy mouthed.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I sat here while the Minister was delivering those words. He delivered them with all the enthusiasm of Munster supporters cheering on Leinster in a Heineken Cup final.

I know that my colleagues on this side of the House intend to appeal to the almost absent Labour Party - the only member of that party here is a former member of Democratic Left - to do the decent thing.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Order, please.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not wish to dissuade them but I do not intend to hold my breath either.

Paul Connaughton (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is half an Independent sitting beside Deputy O'Dea.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I cannot help feeling like the Greek philosopher Diogenes, who, when found begging alms from a statue said that he was practising disappointment.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I recall the febrile atmosphere of December 1993 and the ferocious head hunters arriving in the Taoiseach's office saying they would be satisfied with nothing less than a head. They had no intention of leaving the building without a head and did not particularly care whose head it was.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did Deputy O'Dea not feel nervous at that time?

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is sad to see the ferocious head hunters of 1993 have been reduced to the chinless wonders of 2014.

Kevin Humphreys (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Deputy O'Dea recall what Fianna Fáil did in 1993?

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The sound of the gunfire deafened him.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Byrne would know all about that.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Labour Party tells us it must be satisfied in relation to the timelines. When stripped down, this means that it does not matter what the Minister, Deputy Shatter, did or did not do once he did so or did not do so within the timelines mentioned. For example, the Minister has told us that it took four months from the time the Attorney General received the information for it to be reported to the Taoiseach. The clear implication is that if the Minister happened to be wrong and timeline in that regard only took three months then the Labour Party might have a problem with that. What a pathetic position.

Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Exactly.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What a pathetic position for a once proud party.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is the most pathetic member of the House.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Byrne's party has all the credibility of Oscar Pistorius's defence.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What about 1993?

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Order, please.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In the miasma of fog, spin, obfuscation, misrepresentation and innuendo two things are clear. First, the administration of justice in this country has been reduced to a shambles. Second, the man who presided over that process is not the man to turn the tide. That is a fact.

I have nothing personal against the Minister, Deputy Shatter. The best thing he can do-----

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is to not listen to Deputy O'Dea.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----for his party, the Government and for the people, to whom all of us here are supposed to be beholden, is, having exhausted all other possibilities, do the right thing and hand in his seal of office. Frankly, he is finished as Minister for Justice and Equality. He is holed below the water line. He has lost all confidence and trust and can never do anything to restore it.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not a great performance.

Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a village somewhere looking for an idiot.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Niall Collins for tabling this motion. It is extraordinary to think that a week ago a Garda Commissioner left office or was pushed out of office yet no opportunity was given to debate it. Were it not for the opportunity presented to us by the tabling of this motion we would not have a chance to do that. It is evident from the heckles that the press office has supplied the scripts and backbenchers propose to troop in and vote confidence in the Minister. However, what Members opposite will not see in the scripts or briefings provided to them are issues on which they need to reflect. In voting confidence in the Minister, they vote absolute confidence in the manner in which issues in the Department of Justice and Equality have been handled not alone in the past few weeks but in the past three years since the Minister, Deputy Shatter, took office.

The first question Members opposite should ask themselves relates to the actions of the Taoiseach. Why, when the Taoiseach learned last Sunday from the Attorney General about one of the biggest challenges of all time to the Department of Justice and Equality did he consider it not appropriate to involve the Minister, Deputy Shatter, in his discussions and research for 24 hours? They should also question why the Attorney General felt it necessary to say to the Taoiseach that she did not want to discuss the issue on the phone and wanted to see him face to face. What does that say about the Attorney General's confidence in terms of the security of her communications? They should also question why the Taoiseach then spent the following day consulting with the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality and convened a meeting in his office at 6 p.m. that evening to which the Minister, Deputy Shatter, was invited, at which he laid out a course of events involving the Secretary General being dispatched to the Garda Commissioner to tell him of Cabinet unease despite no Cabinet meeting having been held. The Taoiseach also did not consult the Tánaiste at any stage during the 24 hours before he dispatched the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality to tell the Garda Commissioner to walk the plank. He did not consider it necessary to speak to the Minister for Justice and Equality or the Tánaiste. What does that say about relationships within government?

We are asked to believe that at that meeting the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality, who on 10 March had received a letter from the Garda Commissioner in relation to the issue which was the only item for discussion, did not think it appropriate to point out that he had received a letter from the Garda Commissioner in relation to that issue and that even when the Taoiseach told the Secretary General to go to the Commissioner's home to inform him that he was not happy, the Secretary General still did not tell the Taoiseach the Garda Commissioner had written to him on 10 March. The Taoiseach clearly does not have operational confidence in the Minister for Justice and Equality when he spent a full day researching an issue without involving him.

One must also question the level of confidence the Secretary General of the Department has in the Minister, particularly when a letter of that importance - delivered by law - was not brought to the attention of either the Taoiseach or the Minister at the meeting in question. A week has passed since this happened and the Taoiseach has had every opportunity to explain why he excluded the Minister and the Tánaiste from his negotiations. However, he has engaged in obfuscation at every turn and has not indicated why he failed to involve the Minister. We must deduce from the lack of a response that while the Taoiseach might express confidence in the Minister, he does not have confidence in him.

We are expected to believe that the Minister, Deputy Shatter, is the greatest Minister since Ministers began - that is the way it will be spun during this debate - that he is the best Minister in "Ministerland", that we should all bow down before him, that he is the great reformer and that they will probably write songs about him in the future. One of the great reforms that will be trumpeted relates to independent oversight in respect of An Garda Síochána. Only a few weeks ago, however, the Minister stated: "I have no plans to introduce a Garda authority and there is no such commitment in the programme for Government." He also stated: "To pass control of such matters to an unelected body beyond the executive and the legislature is untenable." Those were the words of the Minister a few short weeks ago in response to a parliamentary question.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Expediency.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What has happened since is that control of the Department of Justice and Equality has been taken from him. The Minister is like a learner driver - he is at the steering wheel but somebody else is in control. That is another reason that every Deputy intent on voting confidence in him tomorrow evening should be wary of doing so because he or she will be voting confidence in a Minister who is not in control of his own Department. Deputies are being asked to vote confidence in the Minister on the same day the Taoiseach appointed a committee to review his Department. The latter will be a Cabinet committee consisting of the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Minister who, I presume, will be responsible for making the tea. It will be the "Alan Shatter oversight committee" or ASOC. It will be a case of ASOC meeting GSOC. I hope ASOC has better luck than GSOC.

The Taoiseach is going to ask all Government Deputies to come into the House tonight and tomorrow night and speak in favour of and then vote confidence in the Minister at a time when he would not involve him in the biggest issue facing his Department. Today, the Taoiseach felt it necessary to establish an oversight committee - involving the Tánaiste and one week after this matter first came to light - to review the running of the Department. Again, the Taoiseach says he has confidence in the Minister but it is those opposite who are being asked to express their confidence in him. They will be asked to put their reputations on the line tomorrow by pressing the relevant button and voting confidence in the Minister, Deputy Shatter, while the generals who lead them will probably not be here to do so. They are being asked to vote confidence in a Minister in respect of whose brief some four inquiries are under way, with regard to whose Department an oversight committee has been appointed and who abused his office by sharing information on penalty points relating to a Member of this House on live television and has since shown little remorse for doing so. Confidence indicates that one supports, that one believes in and that one approves of the someone's style of operating. Those opposite are being asked to express such confidence.

Almost one year on from the previous motion of confidence in respect of this Minister, are Government Deputies of the view that his way of operating has improved? Do they believe things are now better in the Department of Justice and Equality? The Government's amendment to the motion is quite astonishing. It is four pages of an homage to the Minister. The only thing missing from it is a nomination for the Nobel Prize for literature for his novel. Are the ladies and gentlemen opposite absolutely sure that when they vote confidence in the Minister, Deputy Shatter, and give him their political and personal endorsement, he will not drop the ball once more or let them, as parliamentarians, down again? Are they sure that a situation will not arise where, following the publication of the findings from one of the four inquiries to which I refer, the Taoiseach might lose confidence in the Minister and, as was the case with Mr. Flannery and the former Garda Commissioner, say, "There is unease in Cabinet about you, Alan"? If the latter happens, that will be it and the Minister will be gone.

The Taoiseach will not have put his name to the amended motion but all of those opposite will have done so. They will cheerfully put their names to it in the next 24 hours. However, they must ask themselves a number of questions between now and 9 p.m. tomorrow. If the Taoiseach is so confident in his Minister, why did he exclude him from dealing with the biggest issue facing the Department of Justice and Equality in 30 years? Why did he put in place an oversight committee in respect of the Department earlier today? Why did he finally give the Labour Party some involvement in respect of that Department? Why is it that nine months later we are again debating confidence in the Minister, Deputy Shatter? If those opposite can comfortably answer all of those questions, then they should go ahead and express their confidence. If they have any doubts, they should remember that it is their personal and political reputations they are putting on the line.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, who is sharing time with the Ministers for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputies Coveney and Rabbitte.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:

“commends the Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, Deputy Alan Shatter, on the extensive and ongoing programme of modernisation and reform being led by him across all of his areas of Ministerial responsibility;

supports, in particular, the Minister’s major programme of reform to the criminal and civil law, including the:— Personal Insolvency Act 2012 and the establishment by the Minister of the Insolvency Service of Ireland to fundamentally reform the State’s insolvency and bankruptcy law to support people experiencing severe financial difficulties;

— Legal Services Regulation Bill 2011, a far-reaching and overdue reform of the regulation of the legal profession;

— Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Bill 2014 to strengthen and enhance Ireland’s institutions for protection of equality and human rights;

— extremely significant Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill 2013, which will provide for a DNA database, to assist the Garda Síochána in the investigation of serious crime and in identifying serial offenders across a broad range of types of criminality;

— Criminal Law (Defence and the Dwelling) Act 2011 to clarify the right of a person to use reasonable force to defend themselves in their home;

— Criminal Justice Act 2011 to provide improved powers for the Garda Síochána in combating white collar crime;

— proposed child and family relationships Bill 2014 to significantly reform family law and the protection of children in a range of family forms;

— Criminal Justice (Withholding of Information on Offences against Children and Vulnerable Persons) Act 2012 dealing with the disclosure of information about serious offences committed against children or vulnerable adults;

— National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Act 2012 to provide a mandatory vetting system for persons working with children or vulnerable adults;

— Fines (Payment and Recovery) Bill 2013 providing for a new payment and recovery system, including the introduction of attachment of earnings for unpaid fines, in keeping with a commitment in the programme for Government;

— Twenty-ninth Amendment of the Constitution (Judges’ Remuneration) Act 2011 to enable salary reductions to be applied to the judiciary;

— Thirty-third Amendment of the Constitution to establish a Court of Appeal which will be one of the most significant developments in the Irish justice system since the foundation of the State, leading to efficiencies and improved access to justice;

— Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2013, which introduced mechanisms for the attendance of the press in certain circumstances to shed light on family law and child care proceedings, provisions for the appointment of extra jurors in lengthy complex criminal trials, and to permit the appointment of two additional Supreme Court judges to tackle the delay in cases before that court and the Court of Criminal Appeal;

— Defence Forces (Second World War Amnesty and Immunity) Act 2013 to provide for a pardon and apology for the 5,000 Irish soldiers who fought for the Allies in the Second World War;

— Criminal Justice (Community Service) (Amendment) Act 2011, which promotes the use of community service rather than imprisonment in appropriate cases;

— Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) (Amendment) Act 2013 to strengthen the law in relation to the important issue of human trafficking and provide for the first time a definition of ‘forced labour’ in Irish legislation;

— Criminal Justice (Spent Convictions) Bill 2012, which facilitates the rehabilitation of offenders; and

— work under way to bring forward further legislation in such important and diverse fields as the law on criminal procedure, sexual offences, corruption, child and family law, civil liability, immigration, residence and protection, mediation, and land and tenant law;looks forward to further legislative reforms in these and other areas;

welcomes the reduction of 6.6 per cent in recorded crimes in 2013 and the 16 per cent overall reduction in recorded crimes since 2010;

welcomes the securing, in consultation with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, of sanction to commence the first Garda recruitment since 2009 and €19 million investment in new Garda vehicles;

notes secured agreement for targeted Garda strength of 13,000;

notes the steps taken by the Minister to develop and implement proposals to bring into effect the Charities Act 2009, including the establishment of the new independent regulatory body - the Charities Regulatory Authority during 2014;

supports further measures underway to modernise the courts system, including planning for a new family court and a review of the judicial appointments process;

welcomes the work under way to prepare the wording for the proposed constitutional amendment relating to marriage equality;

acknowledges the establishment by the Minister of the Property Services Regulatory Authority to set and enforce standards in the provision of property services and to provide redress mechanisms for consumers;

acknowledges the ongoing initiatives of the Minister and the Garda Síochána in tackling crime and improving community safety, noting in particular the continued success of Operation Fiacla in tackling burglary;

notes the successes of actions taken against organised crime in the State, resulting in significant drug, illicit tobacco and laundered fuel seizures;

supports the Minister’s ongoing and significant programme of investment in, and reform of, the prison system and the sentencing and management of offenders, including:— introducing structured programmes of temporary release, including the community return programme and community support schemes which have achieved 90 per cent compliance rates;

— requiring the courts to consider community service options for non-violent and less serious offenders;

— the introduction of an incentivised regimes scheme to incentivise better behaviour by prisoners;

— a programme to end the practice of sending children to St. Patrick’s Institution;

— the reduction in the number of committals to prisons by 7.6 per cent since 2011 and the average daily numbers of prisoners by 5.8 per cent in 2013;

— the provision of additional prison spaces and the upgrading of existing prison facilities including the provision of in-cell sanitation resulting in a 70 per cent reduction in the number of prisoners without such facilities since 2011; and

— the improvement of the independent oversight of prisons and of prisoner complaints mechanisms and the establishment of the Penal Policy Review Group;commends the Minister’s ongoing engagement with his counterparts in Northern Ireland and Britain in maintaining resolute opposition to the criminal terrorists opposed to peace on the island, and in developing and enhancing North-South co-operation in criminal justice and policing with the aim of improving community safety on the island of Ireland;

recognises the contribution of the Minister at an EU level in the field of Justice and Home Affairs and Defence, and in particular in the course of the Irish Presidency, the important progress made in such areas as data protection, measures to tackle organised crime, drugs and terrorism, cyber-security and action taken to address across the EU xenophobia, racism, anti-Semitism and homophobia;

welcomes the streamlined immigration and citizenship procedures in order to support the State’s economic recovery and promote better integration for non-nationals resident here, noting in particular:— the immigrant investor and start-up entrepreneur programmes;

— the new visa waiver programme;

— a historic inter-governmental agreement with the UK on the operation of the common travel area leading to the development of ground-breaking reciprocal visa arrangements; and

— the clearing of the backlog of 22,000 applications for citizenship, the new citizenship ceremony and the granting of citizenship to 68,000 applicants;commends the Minister’s initiative to establish the inter-departmental committee, chaired by Senator Martin McAleese, to investigate and to set out the facts of the State’s involvement with the Magdalen laundries, his decision to establish a scheme to provide supports for the women involved, to accept the recommendations of Mr. Justice Quirke in that regard, and the work which is under way to implement those recommendations, with priority being given to processing applications and making lump sum payments;

approves the Minister’s commitment to the refugee resettlement programme, despite the challenging economic circumstances, and notes the Minister’s initiative to establish the Syrian humanitarian admission programme;

welcomes publication by the Minister of a Green Paper on Defence in 2013;

commends the Minister on the significant achievements made in overseeing the development of a newly organised Defence Forces, stabilising the strength of those forces at 9,500; securing sanction for recruitment to achieve this; and in particular targeting female recruits and recognising the changing nature of Irish society generally;

welcomes the priority assigned to funding and support for key equipment requirements - with the first of two new naval vessels due for delivery in the coming weeks;

supports Ireland’s continued representation in a range of UN peacekeeping missions with over 400 personnel deployed in 14 locations;

notes the major re-organisation of the Reserve Defence Forces initiated by the Minster, delivering significant efficiencies and dovetailing with the re-organised Permanent Defence Forces;

recognises the Minister’s very active approach to emergency planning through his chairmanship of the Government task force, with the Office of Emergency Planning being central to the response to recent emergency events, including flooding and severe weather;

recognises the comprehensive steps being taken to address issues of concern which have arisen;

approves the Minister’s decision to request the Garda Síochána Inspectorate to examine and report on the fixed charge processing system and welcomes the decision by the Government to implement all of the 37 recommendations contained in its report;

welcomes and awaits the outcome of independent reviews of certain allegations of wrongdoing in relation to the Garda Síochána and in relation to allegations of surveillance of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission;

notes the Government’s announcement of a commission of investigation in relation to the recording of phone calls in Garda stations;

notes the Government’s commitment to the reform of Garda oversight and accountability, which will include the establishment of an independent Garda authority, appropriate to Ireland’s needs and which will maintain appropriate democratic accountability to the Houses of the Oireachtas;

notes the intention of the Minister, in cooperation with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, to enhance the legislative arrangements for whistleblowing in the Garda Síochána;

notes that arrangements will be put in place for an open competition for a permanent appointment to the post of Garda Commissioner as soon as possible;

welcomes consideration by the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality of the powers of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission;

welcomes the review of the Garda Síochána which is currently under way under the Haddington Road agreement; and expresses full confidence in the Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, Deputy Alan Shatter.

I will begin my contribution by referring to some matters of relevance to where I personally find myself this evening. As a young law student, I, along with others, spent a great deal of time between 1971 and 1975 doing voluntary work in the free legal advice centre at St. Agnes's convent in Crumlin in Dublin. It was a great training ground and I saw, at that sharp end, how often the law failed people who needed its help, how people in poor financial circumstances were not assisted by the State in obtaining legal advice or representation when their required and how much worse the situation for them was made by a legal and court systems that were out of touch with reality. In those days we did our best to help. We provided legal advice to people, as individuals, and we campaigned, together with other voluntary organisations, for major reform of our legal system. Some things did change in the 1970s and early 1980s but much more was needed. Too little was done during that period.

I absolutely believe that our legal system should be as humane and responsive as possible. The interest in human and constitutional rights I developed as a law student and my passion to make positive change happen in this State still drive me as Minister for Justice and Equality. In the context of the office I hold, I have the privilege and opportunity to help to improve the lives of people. I am able to do this with the support of my Fine Gael and Labour Party colleagues. What needs to be done is virtually all present in the programme for Government. I refer to initiatives to be taken, policies to be implemented and legislation to be enacted. Much of the latter should have been enacted years, if not decades, ago. As we move through our term in government, we are identifying other areas which are crying out for change and which must be addressed. As a Government, we are facing up to doing that. As Minister, it is my obligation and privilege to be able to contribute to the process in this regard.

I could not do what I do, as Minister for Justice and Equality, without the strong support of Fine Gael and Labour Party colleagues, both within and outside Cabinet. Like everyone else in this House, I do not get everything right. It is extraordinary how people think that an individual can never make a mistake or that he or she can never be forgiven for making that mistake.

Jerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not have a monopoly of wisdom and neither does anyone else. I have stated as much on many occasions in the House. We all get some things wrong sometimes. If we do not address issues which require to be dealt with and if we simply remain paralysed when confronted with difficulties, however, then nothing would ever change. The status quo would continue to obtain to the detriment of people in this State. I will continue to do the best job I can as Minister for Justice and Equality.

In the context of this evening's commentary, a constant refrain has been employed. I refer to the fact that I am continually accused - in a very personalised way - of a variety of different failures. None of us is perfect. If I attempt to respond in kind in this House to the manner in which I am treated, I am labelled as being arrogant and overbearing. Apparently it is not acceptable, in any circumstances ever, for me to respond to some of the taunts and vilification directed at me. Listening to the Members opposite, one would think that I was public enemy No. 1. One would also believe that the issues we have been addressing in recent weeks only arose since 9 March 2011. Every Member of this House, including those opposite, know that is not true. The Guerin inquiry is examining a whole range of allegations relating to court cases, Garda matters, matters relating to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, all of which occurred during the lifetime of the previous Government.

The Members opposite want to maintain the continuing fiction, the basis of which is that if one says it frequently enough then it becomes the narrative that everyone believes. I keep on hearing it broadcast back to me that when all of those issues were brought to my attention I ignored them, rather than the truth which is that within 24 hours of learning of them we proceeded to act and to seek responses on all of these issues.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Who is we? It was the Taoiseach.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Now, they are being independently examined. We are now dealing with an issue of great seriousness relating to taping with within An Garda Síochána and the recording of telephone calls. I find it extraordinary that the main focus of attention on this issue has been overwhelmingly on the fact that officials in the Department of Justice and Equality failed to give me a letter received from the Garda Commissioner on Monday, 10 March 2014 and that I did not receive it until 25 March 2014. What purpose would there be, if I had received it any earlier, in concealing that fact? What purpose would there have been to do nothing about it? Do the Deputies opposite think anyone in this House wished yet another area of difficulty to arise in respect of an An Garda Síochána? Do they think there was any interest in not addressing issues when they first arose? Of course there was not. However, what Members opposite are deliberately doing to distract from the real issues is focusing on process as opposed to substance. What they are doing is creating a distraction from the reality that this was a problem created many years ago. The issue of taping of telephone conversations, the recording of telephone conversations and the background circumstances, none of which is fully clear yet, first occurred some 25 to 30 years ago. The last occasion when the system was apparently upgraded was 2008. No Members opposite want to say that there was a problem during their time in government.

What are we doing? What we have done is that as soon as the problem became fully identified we agreed to a statutory inquiry being put in place. I find it strange as someone deeply interested in human rights and constitutional law that the focus is on the particular minute when someone got a letter. Why is that not as important as the Deputies opposite believe it to be? Why? It is because apparently whatever was happening in this area was stopped in November 2013. Why is it important that we get to know what it is about? It is because this substantially has the potential - I am saying "potential" because I have no wish to prejudge the statutory inquiry - to have been a serious invasion of citizens' rights to privacy. Clearly, there is an issue relating to whether data protection legislation was violated. There is an issue surrounding the legality of the taping and recording of calls. For example, we do not know whether on some occasions conversations between lawyers and their clients were recorded. We do not know whether data was accessed if that ever happened. I cannot say definitively that it happened. We do not know whether there is on those tapes information of crucial importance and relevance to criminal prosecutions long since completed or to new prosecutions pending. We do not know, beyond one particular important set of civil proceedings, whether there could be information of relevance to litigants currently before the courts or before the courts in times past.

One serious issue in this context is the need to ensure that the rights to privacy of our citizens are protected, that the Garda always operates within the law, that there is appropriate oversight in this area and that we get to the true story. Is it the rights of citizens, the rights to privacy or the substantive issues that Members opposite have been talking about? We had Leaders' Questions in the House today. On what did the leaders of Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin focus? They said they did not believe that I, the Minister, did not get the letter on 10 March until the date when I actually received it, which was the Tuesday, which, from recollection, was 25 March. The Secretary General of my Department has issued a statement this evening confirming the truth of that. It should not have occurred and he would be the first to acknowledge it, but that is not the central issue. Why is that issue pursued?

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is because of incompetence.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is pursued for no reason other than because it is politically opportunistic for the Members opposite to do so. What is of real, great and crucial importance is that the public continue to maintain confidence in An Garda Síochána.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is despite the Minister's best efforts.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Despite all of these issues that have arisen - all of which must be properly addressed and following which action must be taken to ensure that they are not repeated - action is being taken in the context of following up the recommendations of the Garda Inspectorate's report. Again, one of the fallacies is that I did not take seriously the allegations of the whistleblowers as opposed to commissioning three different reports which have produced recommendations all of which have been accepted by Government.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Eventually.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of the crucial issues is to ensure that public respect for the Garda Síochána is maintained. We have a substantial number in the force. The overwhelming majority of members of the Garda force are fine men and women doing their public duty, seeking to protect the community against crime, investigating crime and ensuring evidence is available to facilitate the prosecution of cases before our courts.

What was the big issue in this House some years ago? Since we have been consolidating Garda stations we have been told that crime would be rampant throughout the country and that individuals were seriously at risk.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fact, the situation is that there has been a reduction in crime from the year 2010, as certified by independent statistics. This is not something I have invented, before there is another suggestion that I might be misleading people.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The figures have been manicured.

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They have been manicured.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reality is-----

Jerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy McGrath is looking after the pedicures and manicures.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reality is-----

Jerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did Deputy McGrath get a manicure?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reality is that there has been a 16%-----

A Deputy:

Put him out.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no provision in Standing Orders for a running commentary, Deputy McGrath. Please observe the rules.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You should observe them yourself.

Jerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Give him a pedicure.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reality is that there has been a 16% drop in crime from 2010 to 2013. In total, there were 272,632 criminal offences recorded in the State in 2010 and in 2013 fully 229,308 were recorded.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No one believes the Minister.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is unfortunate and that is the narrative of every issue that I raise: I am supposed to be always telling untruths.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The unfortunate-----

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry, Minister.

There is no provision in Standing Orders for a running commentary. Your commentary has been noted, Deputy McGrath. Please remain quiet and allow the Minister to reply. That applies to the rest of you as well and to those on the Government side.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The unfortunate reality is that the Deputies opposite are not willing to accept the successful engagement of An Garda Síochána in the interests of the wider community despite the controversies that have arisen. I believe that as we investigate these issues and as they are resolved it is of major importance that we stand behind the Garda force but that we ask the hard questions, ensure that these issues are dealt with appropriately in the context of inquiries being conducted and that recommendations emerging from them are dealt with.

In my remaining time I wish to touch briefly on certain issues. Reference was made today to difficulties that have now arisen in our prison system. As I understand it, they arose because following the revelations of Garda recording, the director of the Prison Service made inquiries about the telephone systems that apply throughout the Prison Service. Furthermore, as I understand it, a full statement is being issued this evening by the director of the Prison Service clarifying those matters.

For my part, I want to say this: it is not possible this evening in a brief contribution to address all of the relevant issues that fall within my brief. I appreciate the fact that no criticisms have been voiced opposite about anything that has been done or engaged in as Minister for Defence. For my part, I am committed to the reforming agenda that we have in government. I am committed to ensuring that we enact the criminal justice (forensic evidence and DNA database system) Bill, which is probably the most important Bill in the context of an An Garda Síochána that will be enacted during the lifetime of this Government.

I am absolutely committed to the children and family relationships Bill, currently before the joint Oireachtas committee for its comments. The human rights and equality commission Bill, a Bill of enormous importance published ten days ago, has been lost in all of the commentary in these areas. It is one of the biggest reforms in the area of human rights implemented in over a decade. Talking about the administration of justice, the court of appeal Bill is a major reform and radical change in our court system of great importance. The victims rights Bill will be published to protect the victims of crime and ensure they are fully informed of issues early next year. All of these matters are under preparation in my Department. Could I particularly also mention the work that is now being undertaken for a marriage equality referendum?

We have an enormous programme of reform derived from the programme for Government as well as the important reform to provide the police authority. Why do we need that authority? It is because it is absolutely clear in the context of the revelations-----

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To keep the Government intact.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----of recent days that there is a need to put in place-----

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister said an authority would be undemocratic a couple of months ago.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----new oversight structures-----

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He should read his own Dáil replies.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----so the sort of problems that developed during the lifetime of the party opposite in government-----

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was to keep the Ministers happy.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----never again occur no matter what party is in government.

Deputies:

Hear, hear.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am happy to take the opportunity to defend the Minister for Justice and Equality against the latest political attacks coming from the parties opposite. For some time, Deputies have been attempting to use a series of difficult-to-manage circumstances in our justice system to claim a political scalp instead of focusing on the reform and decisions needed to provide solutions for the future. It is all about playing the man for them. Their sole political focus remains on bringing down a Minister at whatever cost. If necessary, they disregard the facts-----

Jerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----or, in the absence of clear facts, promote assumptions of dishonesty or something worse.

I sit next to Deputy Shatter in Cabinet and I have got to know him well in recent years. Any fair-minded person who has followed his three years in government knows him to be reforming, intelligent, extremely hard working, at times combative and, most importantly, willing to take on significant social and justice reforms that successive Fianna Fáil Governments ignored to the detriment of the Irish public.

There has been a series of difficult issues to handle in the Department of Justice and Equality since the beginning of the year. Serious accusations were made by credible whistleblowers about the fixed notice and penalty points system and other legal issues. We have had a GSOC scandal, with accusations of bugging. Now we have very serious issues around the recording of conversations in Garda stations and, as of today, prisons. These have potential implications for certain legal cases.

None of these issues was of the Minister's making. Where he has made mistakes, he has apologised and, in the case of whistleblowers, corrected the record last week. Apart from that, he has focused on getting to the truth of each issue by making statements in the Dáil and at Oireachtas committees and by setting up a combination of investigations, inquiries and now a commission of inquiry in the case of the recordings.

While Fianna Fáil uses its time in the House to continue targeting a Minister, the priority for the Government is to deal with the unfolding Garda recordings issue. As the House knows, the Government has taken decisions on this issue. We have decided to establish a statutory commission of inquiry and have appointed Mr. Justice Nial Fennelly as its chair. The terms of reference will be finalised shortly. We will ensure the retention and preservation of all tapes and access to those tapes will be in accordance with the law. We expect the Cooke and Guerin inquiries to be completed later this month. A Cabinet committee on justice reform will be established immediately to reinforce the importance of this issue to the Government collectively as well as to the Minister, Deputy Shatter.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To keep an eye on him.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have agreed to the appointment of a new Garda Commissioner by open competition, which is a major reform, and to the establishment of a new independent policing authority, which had been agreed in 2006 in the Mullingar accord between Fine Gael and Labour and which is now more necessary than ever.

While all of these decisions are being made, Fianna Fáil's response is not to focus on getting the decisions or the reform right. What it regards as a good outcome from this crisis in the justice system is the resignation of a Minister. That is the end it wants.

If one considers the Minister's record in a broader sense, his legislative record it is remarkable. Since coming to office, he has enacted 21 pieces of legislation, is currently overseeing five Bills that are being progressed through the Houses and is drafting a further 14 Bills, some of which he has mentioned. He has tackled difficult and pressing issues head on like personal insolvency and the Magdalen laundries; he has dealt with two referenda on judicial pay and the court of appeal, both of which were passed by substantial majorities; he has begun a programme aimed at modernising our prison system, ending the practice of sending children to St. Patrick's Institution and securing Government approval for a new prison in Cork and the refurbishment of Mountjoy Prison; he has introduced significant reform in the justice system, especially by establishing a court of appeal; and he has introduced an innovative citizenship ceremony and cleared the backlog of applications that were left in limbo by the previous Government. As he stated, there has been a reduction of 16% in crime across the State since he took office. In addition to this significant work record, the Minister has tackled vested interests head on that Fianna Fáil never had the courage to take on while it was in government.

This Government has confidence in the Minister and his ability to continue the reform process, which is vital if we are to ensure that our gardaí have the confidence of the people and are equipped to meet the challenges of the future. That is our priority and we will not be distracted by Fianna Fáil's political gamesmanship.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In the short time available, I want to say, first, why my party continues to support and have confidence in the Minister for Justice and Equality and, second, why the outcome of recent weeks will be one of the most productive episodes in terms of implementing long-overdue reforms of policing.

The Government has agreed a package of radical reforms such as have eluded all Governments to date. These will include the establishment of a Garda authority; an open competition for Commissioner of An Garda Síochána; legislative powers for GSOC to enable it to discharge its oversight functions properly; direct access by serving gardaí to the ombudsman, thereby replacing the absurd office of confidential recipient; a commission of investigation chaired by Mr. Justice Nial Fennelly of the Supreme Court to establish the truth about current matters; legislative protection for whistleblowers; and an extension of the Freedom of Information Act to the Garda save for specified exceptions, such as security.

It was Mr. Rahm Emanuel who said: "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." He elaborated by saying: "And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." This Minister and Government have certainly confronted issues that previous Governments have avoided. We have seized the opportunity to do important things.

Jerry Buttimer (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Hear, hear.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reform of Garda oversight and accountability is not just in the public interest, but in the interests of An Garda Síochána. All my political lifetime, the perennial question of who guards the guardians - quis custodiet ipsos custodes - has been on or near the political agenda, but the political system has failed up to now to address it adequately. I put that failure largely down not just to a lack of political will, but to a lack of confidence and a belief that we must turn a blind eye when rule enforcers break the rules because they cannot succeed without the unquestioning support of the so-called right-thinking people. The occasional former Minister for justice attempted one or other aspect of the reform package now being advanced, but was unable to bring it over the line. The establishment of a Garda authority will interpose between Minister and Commissioner and will set the broad policy goals for policing in Ireland and be seen to hold the Garda Commissioner to account.

Perhaps the bravest and most significant decision taken regarding the Garda Síochána was the first, to disarm the successors to the old Royal Irish Constabulary. The first Garda Commissioner, Michael Staines, said at the time: "the Garda Síochána will succeed not by force of arms or numbers, but on their moral authority as servants of the people". Moral authority is the most precious asset in the Garda inventory but it is also the one most easily dissipated.

I believe the steps we have now taken will contribute to a restoration of faith in the integrity of our policing service and can only assist, in the longer term, in the discharge of the Garda functions of preserving the peace, protecting life and property, vindicating human rights, protecting the security of the State, preventing crime and bringing criminals to justice. It is these reforms that will endure long after the who-said-what-when frenzy abates.

Neither this debate in the House nor interviews outside of the House can answer all of the questions generated by recent extraordinary events. That is the reason the Government decided, on the advice of the Taoiseach, to establish a commission of investigation under a Supreme Court judge. Let the inquiry answer the outstanding questions. I cannot answer why it took 15 days to bring a section 41 letter to the attention of the Minister, nor can I say why the letter was not directly addressed to the Minister as envisaged by the section. However, I believe the Minister when he says he did not receive the letter until 12.40 p.m. on Tuesday, 25 March. This debate, therefore, can clear up some of the questions but, by reason of the nature of this controversy, there are other questions that must be left to the statutory inquiry.

One question we can clear up with certainty is that the former Garda Commissioner never met the Attorney General on this issue. When he met with the unit in her office that interacts with the Garda Síochána on 11 November 2013, it concerned a data retention issue brought to light by a prominent case now in the news. There was no suggestion of unlawful interception of calls. There never was a working party comprising the Garda Commissioner and the Attorney General on this matter or a working party involving the Commissioner and any staff of the Office of the Attorney General.

Much of the public dissatisfaction with how these events have unfolded has been legitimate, although some of it has been stoked up by groundless and alarmist speculation and the type of grandstanding we have seen here this evening. The Government must reflect on this and on the root causes for public unease, and we must learn our lesson. The controversy concerning the whistleblowers was unnecessarily allowed to go on for too long. I said on the radio more than five weeks ago, on 21 February, that the Minister, Deputy Shatter, would correct the record if he had been misadvised or found that he was mistaken. He did correct the record, but after an unconscionably long time. Anyway, the wisdom of an earlier ministerial apology now seems a relatively minor controversy when compared to what came to light over the weekend of 22 and 23 March. The Minister, Deputy Shatter, is not responsible for putting in place a systemic and unlawful capture of telephone exchanges in and out of Garda stations. How and why this matter was eventually exposed bears close scrutiny and, in my view, must be captured by the terms of reference of the inquiry.

I believe the authors of tonight's motion appreciate the gravity for confidence in the administration of justice of what came to light on the weekend of 23 and 24 March. However, Fianna Fáil clearly believes that if it did not go through the motions, it would be beaten to the punch by Sinn Féin. While Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin compete for who can make the most noise, the Government has decided to leave what happened to an independent statutory inquiry and to press ahead, in parallel, with the most far-reaching package of reforms of policing in recent decades. A glance at the Government's amendment shows the body of work addressed by the Minister, Deputy Shatter, since taking office. No Minister for Justice and Equality, without exception, has implemented such an extensive reform programme in three years or taken so many novel initiatives. It is important that this Minister be allowed to complete his programme. Those who would obstruct him would be wise to await the outcome of the inquiries now being commenced.

I can understand why people might be baffled by the recent series of events, but I am confident that the public will understand why the Government has taken the decisions it has taken when findings of fact are made by the independent inquiry. In the meantime, I and my colleagues in the Labour Party have full confidence in the Minister for Justice and Equality.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Earlier during Leaders' Questions, my party leader, Deputy Adams, asked the Taoiseach if the Minister for Justice and Equality would clarify tonight his role in overseeing the Ian Bailey case over the last number of years and, in particular, if he would deal with the correspondence that was sent to him by Ian Bailey and a legal team in 2012 about their concerns relating to the failure of the Garda Commissioner to co-operate fully with, and give documentation to, the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. It is very disappointing that the Taoiseach has not ensured that the Minister would avail of the opportunity to clarify his role in that. I will take the Minister through it when I can get his attention.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy has my attention.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind the Deputy, in keeping with Standing Orders, that with regard to information not contained in the motion before the House, the Minister or person responding has a right to have prior knowledge of your intention to introduce it.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is hardly a new fact. I will continue and recap the Ian Bailey case. The Minister is remarkable, he is incredible. What the Taoiseach says is true - he is the greatest Minister in the history of all mankind. He can actually have a conversation with somebody else and listen to a debate. His skills are remarkable. They are never-ending.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I heard every word the Deputy said. He is getting more abusive every week.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will chair the proceedings. The Deputy can continue but he should keep Standing Order 59 in mind, which I mentioned earlier.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the Chair's guidance.

I will recap the Ian Bailey case. This State handed over the Garda investigation files to the French authorities. That was deemed to be the thing to do. It was a remarkable decision because An Garda Síochána is not co-operating with requests from the ombudsman's office in the North regarding the killings of Denis Donaldson in Donegal and Councillor Eddie Fullerton, yet it did co-operate with this. That is the Minister's wisdom. It is a remarkable thing to do, and the Minister did it.

On foot of that, as the Minister knows, the French authorities have established a magistrate's hearing. Their representatives have been to this State investigating witnesses and they have requested that Ian Bailey be extradited to France. Indeed, our High Court agreed to extradite Ian Bailey to France for prosecution there. However, in November 2011 this State passed over documentation to Ian Bailey's legal team and among that documentation was a damning 44 page report from the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, from 2001 which clearly stipulated that there were no grounds for prosecution of Ian Bailey. That documentation was a game changer. In the subsequent Supreme Court hearing it was decided not to extradite Ian Bailey to France.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

I again have to intervene-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I must protest. These are all matters on the public record.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

In a motion of confidence or no confidence, the rules are that the wording of the motion is seen as the guiding principle for the debate. For specific issues arising after that, it is in order to refer to the reasons a Member has no confidence in the Minister or Ministers as the case may be.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will get to that if the Acting Chairman lets me.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

However, if it is intended to run a case in the House that is in the public arena at the moment, the Deputy is out of order.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will get to that in a minute. I hope someone is going to stop the clock. The Acting Chairman has taken a minute of my time with his interventions.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

I brought it to the Deputy's attention on more than one occasion.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Grand, we will move on. Getting to the point the Acting Chairman wants, in March 2012, after the Supreme Court ruling, the Minister confirmed he would be in consultation with the Attorney General about the implications of the Supreme Court hearing and the documentation that was handed over to the legal team. He confirmed it again in a response to a parliamentary question. If we jump forward from the confirmation that he is in dialogue with the Attorney General about this, 18 months later the Office of the Attorney General is informed by the Garda Commissioner's office that there are tapes in respect of the Ian Bailey case and the Commissioner's office is concerned and is seeking advice on them. Is it not extraordinary-----

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

I am sorry, Deputy. To be fair to previous speakers, every one of them-----

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is outrageous. I am clear in speaking about the issues that are leading to the Minister. The Acting Chairman has taken up about a minute and a half of my time with pure bluster.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

I ask the Deputy to withdraw that remark.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely not.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

I drew to the Deputy's attention, as is written in Standing Order 59, that it is quite in order to use the wording of the motion as a reason for having no confidence in a person or persons, and the Deputy entitled to do that. He is not entitled to run a case currently before the courts on appeal.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay, I will continue. Why did the Attorney General not deem it necessary to inform the Minister of those developments, given that he was in dialogue with the Attorney General on this case? Can the Minister outline his involvement in overseeing this case? This is one of the issues that has led to this motion of no confidence.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

The Deputy should go back to the motion of confidence and away from the case, please.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is clear where I am going. Can the Acting Chairman please stop interrupting me? The continued interruptions and bluster are outrageous.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

I am not interrupting the Deputy. I am intervening to bring to his attention the need to comply with Standing Orders.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You are out of order.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

I could have done that to the other speakers, but they did not breach Standing Orders. Again I bring to the Deputy's attention that if it is his proposal to run in the House a case that is currently before the courts, he is not in order.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Acting Chairman is absolutely shocking. He has let himself down a bagful there. We will move on. The Minister's Department is currently defending a civil action taken by Ian Bailey and his legal team. Is it not incredible that the Attorney General did not deem it necessary to bring this to the Minister's attention, considering his early confirmation of consultation with her office about this case, and the fact he is currently defending a civil action? It has been said that he has not been consulted about this, but I must say it is remarkable if that did not happen.

We will move on. I might get an extra minute and a half.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard Durkan):

The Deputy does not get an extra minute, because he is deliberately being way out of order.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fine. Let us just recap on all the issues that have led to this, including the Minister's presiding of the Ian Bailey case, which will be a scandal of huge proportions that will damage our international reputation immensely. That is becoming clearer by the day and the Minister needs to clarify his role in that. It is one of the reasons my party has no confidence in him. Let us go through the others, from the handling of the penalty points issue, the procrastination from the moment the whistleblowers went to the Garda confidential recipient, through to the decision to go for an internal Garda investigation, the repeated attempts to discredit the Garda whistleblowers, to the two year delay in referring the decision of the report to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission when it became a crisis before the Committee of Public Accounts, and then to the apology that was dragged out of him last Thursday by his colleague sitting next to him and others.

The other issue relates to how the Minister dealt with allegations that the offices of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission were bugged. I do not need to rehearse that again because it is so well known how he has handled that. There was also the sacking of the confidential recipient due to what he said to Sergeant Maurice McCabe about the Minister, his relationship with the Garda Commissioner and the way he does his business. Finally, there was the vote of no confidence from the Opposition in respect of events concerning Deputy Wallace, and the Minister's decision to use confidential information given to him inappropriately by the Garda Commissioner to attempt to discredit political opponents in front of hundreds of thousands of people on television. For all those reasons, we have no confidence in the Minister.

We are trying to move to the next steps, which deal with restoring public confidence in the administration of justice, with the establishment of an independent Garda authority, something the Minister refused to examine until it was dragged out of him, and with a freshly empowered Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. After the massive damage done, people in every village, street, town and townland are talking about the need for the Minister to go. Every Minister for Justice and Equality is a reforming Minister. That is part of their job description, but for all those new beginnings to take place, this Minister needs to step aside and let us get on with it.

Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I note the length of the amendment tabled by the Government to the motion of no confidence. It probably should be recorded in the Guinness Book of Records for the world's longest amendment. The Minister challenged people to take issue with this lengthy opus, this accolade from his Government colleagues. I do not have the time to go through it point by point, but I would like to take issue with the commendation afforded to him on the manner of his handling of the Magdalen laundries issue. Far from being comprehensive or conclusive, it was shambolic and the bare minimum that could have been delivered. That is not just my assessment of that episode. He was criticised recently by the United Nations for precisely the same reason in respect of those women.

The accusation stands that the Opposition is playing the man rather than the ball. The accusation from the Minister is that the Opposition is not interested in dealing with the substantive issues, so let us set them out. There is the substantive issue of public confidence in senior management An Garda Síochána, as well as confidence of rank and file gardaí in their own senior management; shattered public confidence in protections for whistleblowers within an Garda Síochána; issues of public confidence around the operation of GSOC and public concerns about possible surveillance of the Garda ombudsman; public alarm at the prospect of illegal taping of telephone conversations to and from Garda stations; public alarm that privileged communications between solicitors and persons in custody may have been illegally recorded; public alarm that those illegal tapes may have compromised court proceedings; and public alarm that perhaps sentences handed down may have to be revisited, or in the worst case scenario, miscarriages of justice identified. These are the substantive issues at play and they are the very reasons the Minister faces a motion of no confidence in the Chamber.

The Minister argues, with some merit, that many of the issues and dilemmas within the operation of An Garda Síochána are not new. They have their genesis in the past and the fact previous Ministers for Justice failed to tackle them. That may be the case, but the fact remains also that the Minister has been a central actor in exacerbating the public alarm and the damage done to confidence in the proper administration of justice in this State.

That is how seriously he has damaged the apparatus of justice in this State.

My colleague has referred to the Minister's position in respect of the whistleblowers. We have heard a great deal of revisionism from the Government benches in that regard. The Minister took a deliberate decision to abuse and attack those men. He misled the Dáil. He allowed false statements to stand on the record of the House . He did not correct the record until it became politically expedient for him to do so. The Minister sought to minimise the concerns that were expressed about the possible surveillance of GSOC. He pointed the finger of blame at GSOC itself in the first instance. In one celebrated episode, he almost tried to portray this affair as a form of comedy by suggesting that the clients of a coffee shop may have been listening in on GSOC. All of the time, he was facing away from the issues at play. Rather than reforming, he was dead set on protecting the status quohe now claims to be set to overturn. He did this deliberately. It is clear from his record that he is not a reforming Minister when it comes to the Garda Síochána.

The Minister suggested in his opening remarks that "I could not do what I do... without the strong support of Fine Gael and Labour Party colleagues, both within and outside Cabinet". That is probably the only statement he made this evening with which I can agree. Frankly, I am baffled that the Taoiseach and perhaps more particularly the Tánaiste can stand shoulder to shoulder with the Minister when it is so apparent that he is part of the problem in this scenario. He is not some reforming Minister who has just been unfortunate. In many ways, he is the author of his own misfortune. Certainly, he is the author of the damage that has been done to the Garda Síochána and to the administration of justice.

Other people have faced the consequences of the Minister's litany of catastrophes. The Minister sacked the confidential recipient. The Garda Commissioner is gone. A question mark is emerging with regard to the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality. The Minister has claimed that the Secretary General did not bring this letter to his attention. As recently as this morning, the Taoiseach sought to point the finger of blame at the former Garda Commissioner by suggesting that he should have written not just to the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality, but also directly to the Minister. It is not as if those on the Government benches are afraid to apportion blame. They have done that quite liberally. They are certainly not prepared to attach any level of blame to the Minister as the central actor and dynamic in this catastrophe. They are certainly not prepared to seek from him a level of accountability at the most basic level that one would expect from a Minister for Justice and Equality.

The Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, was absolutely correct when he referred to the "moral authority" that is necessary if the Garda Síochána is to operate. However, he must understand that the authority of the Garda has been damaged. More to the point, the authority and credibility of the Minister, Deputy Shatter, is now set at zero. The dogs on the street know that. I fail to see how that is not recognised by those on the Labour Party and Fine Gael benches as well.

Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to share time with Deputy Pringle.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A list of issues has emerged in recent times. The penalty points issue involved the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. We are familiar with the whistleblower tapes. The source of the information that the Minister, Deputy Shatter, had on Deputy Wallace was very suspicious. Issues have emerged regarding the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality, the Attorney General and the departure of Commissioner Callinan. A series of questions have been asked about who said what to whom and when they said it. The whole issue of justice being delayed and denied to individuals and families, who were seriously let down by this country's lack of a fair, objective and transparent system of justice, is a far more important one.

I would like to point out that these issues did not appear overnight or during the reign of the current Minister. They are part of an unfair and unjust system that has been allowed to fester under successive Governments. As far as I am concerned, a vote of no confidence in the Minister should also be a vote of no confidence in the system we have had in this country for many years. Successive justice Ministers, including the Minister, Deputy Shatter, have questions to answer. An article by Fiach Kelly in The Irish Times this week reminded me that in 2006, the late Tony Gregory asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, a parliamentary question about "the recording of all telephone calls to Garda stations". The then Minister said in his replay that he was "not aware of any plans to record all telephone calls to Garda stations". The Minister, Deputy Shatter, has said that recordings have taken place for 30 years.

I want to acknowledge the work of Deputies Clare Daly and Mick Wallace. Without them, there would have been no exposure of these injustices. I missed much of this debate because I was at a community meeting, but I presume their role was acknowledged. If they had not brought these matters into the public domain, we would not have had the initiatives that were outlined this evening. A couple of weeks ago, Deputies Daly and Wallace invited all Members of the Oireachtas to attend a presentation given by Ian Bailey and his partner. They had an opportunity to present their story to everyone here. The level of interest that Members showed in the presentation, which was horrifying and disturbing, can be judged by examining how many of them were in attendance. Apart from Deputies Daly and Wallace, Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan and I were the only two people to show up. I think there is a whole issue to be explored regarding the secrecy and undercover practices associated with this country's system.

I would like to conclude by pointing out that the constituency I represent, Dublin Cental, once had a fractured and difficult relationship with the Garda Síochána. Twenty years of really serious community policing and work by community activists restored the community's good working relationship with the force. When this relationship of trust was built up, people had enough confidence in the Garda to allow them to make calls to Garda stations. That has been undermined now. I do not think this motion of no confidence will make a blind bit of difference. It is more important for us to reform the system because it is not fit for purpose.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. Many Deputies have outlined a litany of instances that have caused us to believe the Minister, Deputy Shatter, should resign. For the same reasons, the Dáil should vote no confidence in him. It is well worth mentioning them again. I think everybody should put them on the record. They include the manner in which the penalty points scandal was dealt with by the Minister and the Garda Commissioner. The Minister made allegations about Deputy Wallace and disclosed confidential information about him that he had received from the Garda Commissioner. The Minister dealt with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission bugging scandal in a way that reflected the way the Garda Commissioner responded to it. The Minister sacked the confidential recipient because he would not deny that a conversation which showed the Minister in a bad light had taken place. Last week, the Garda Commissioner was sacked, retired, asked to retire or asked to do the good thing and turn the gun on himself. The most recent scandal relates to the bugging of Garda stations.

This evening, the Department of Justice and Equality published on its website a letter that the former Garda Commissioner wrote to the Minister on 10 March last. For various reasons, I believe the Garda Commissioner should have gone before that letter was sent - I refer to his handling of the penalty points scandal and the GSOC affair, for example - but having read the letter on the Department's website, I do not think anything in it would have warranted the Garda Commissioner being forced to resign. This makes one wonder why he was forced to resign at that time. Questions have to be asked about the timing of that decision. It must be very reassuring for the Minister that the Taoiseach has expressed confidence in him in the Dáil on a number of occasions in recent weeks. It is clear from the timescale of how things developed that for 24 hours after he became aware of the taping allegations, the Taoiseach did not have enough confidence in the Minister to consult him on the matter. The Taoiseach decided to seek reputable legal advice on the implications of the taping before discussing it with the Minister. Although the Minister is a solicitor and apparently has some legal expertise, it seems that the Taoiseach did not have sufficient confidence in him to consult him on this issue. Given that the Taoiseach has shown that he does not have confidence in the Minister for Justice and Equality, I believe this House should not have confidence in him either.