Lynn Ruane (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 20:

In page 29, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following:

“(b) community development;”.

Amendment No. 20 seeks to insert experience and expertise in matters connected to community development to the list of types of subject matter expertise that may qualify someone for appointment to the board of An Garda Síochána. At present, the Bill provides that only persons with expertise in the functions of the Garda, organisational governance, management and public administration, or financial matters may serve on the board.

This amendment makes me think of section 10, which we considered the other day. It relates to gardaí being required in the courts for prosecutions. This is something I will seek to submit an amendment on. When we take gardaí from the duties they are trained for and have them in the courts, when somebody else could be doing that job, we take away from their role. Nobody can take on their role when they are taken off duty to attend to court matters. Amendment No. 20 relates to the expertise that may be needed on the board of An Garda and the expertise people in the community can feed into the process. While there is an argument to be made that the establishment of a board is a retrograde step, on account of its inability to provide independent and transparent oversight and accountability, it is absolutely the case that we must expand the list of types of relevant expertise to incorporate a broader and more diverse range of perspectives. Both amendments Nos. 21 and 22 have intentions similar to that of amendment No. 20, adding expertise in "human rights and equality matters” and “data protection”, respectively.

As drafted, the legislation will mean no representation on the board from persons who are impacted by the delivery of policing services daily. This amendment seeks to remedy that by including the perspectives of persons who possess expertise in the development of vibrant, safe and sustainable communities in Ireland. According to a 2015 Government framework policy for community development, community development refers to a distinctive approach to working for social and economic development and change, which involves individual and collective empowerment, enabling and supporting members of a community to work collectively to improve the quality of their lives, community and society. This approach is often based on the understanding that those affected by poverty or disadvantage are often excluded from society due to discrimination, prejudice or a lack of resources, skills, confidence or education. It strikes me that few people are better placed to provide informed and robust oversight to An Garda Síochána than community development workers, who themselves are committed to improving the quality of life in all our communities. It could go some way towards building bridges and fostering more empowering relationships between An Garda Síochána and the communities that are often most policed.

Amendment No. 21 seeks to insert experience and expertise in matters connected to human rights and equality to the list of types of subject matter expertise that may qualify someone for appointment to the board of An Garda Síochána. I have already spoken about the need to embrace a greater variety of perspectives within the board in a general sense, but there is a really robust argument to be made to include the perspectives of persons with expertise in human rights and equality matters. Policing, specifically, has the potential to significantly impact core fundamental rights, including the right to privacy. However, we also have to be mindful of the requirement under the public sector equality and human rights duty for public bodies to eliminate discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and protect the human rights of those to whom they provide services and staff when carrying out their work. It is critical, therefore, that human rights and equality interests be represented at board level in An Garda Síochána, given the significant interaction between gardaí and the public and, often, people in very vulnerable and compromising circumstances.

Amendment No. 22 seeks to add data protection to the list of types of subject matter expertise that may qualify someone for appointment to the board. The relevant section states a person shall not be recommended by the service for appointment by the Minister unless the service is satisfied the person has sufficient experience and expertise in these matters. It should be self-evident why expertise in data protection is so crucial when selecting members of the board. The Government is in the process of legislating to equip An Garda Síochána with new forms of data-gathering and data-processing technologies, including body cams and facial-recognition technology. In my contributions to the related legislation, I have highlighted the many dangers this may pose to privacy and data protection. I have highlighted evidence in the UK of systemic failures in data protection, including the leaking of body cam footage and the sharing of body cam footage on WhatsApp. We already have experience of such data protection and privacy issues in An Garda Síochána, and the introduction of new data-gathering technologies will only increase risk in these matters. Any breaches of data privacy can be devastating for the public and trust, and for An Garda Síochána itself. It is members of the board who will be tasked, according to section 12, with promoting high standards of corporate governance that ensure appropriate systems of control are in place.This is why I believe it is crucial that data protection should be a core expertise and priority of board members and that this should be baked into primary legislation. Board members should be keenly aware of An Garda Síochána's crucial role in terms of data privacy and should have knowledge and expertise that can contribute to upholding the standards of protection within An Garda Síochána.

The next amendment, amendment No. 25, states that "Nothing in this section shall preclude an individual with previous convictions from serving as a chairperson or ordinary member of the Board.”. This amendment seeks to provide that persons with a criminal record could serve as a member of the board of An Garda Síochána. At present, many barriers prevent individuals with a criminal record from serving on boards, particularly regarding the charities sector, on account of restrictive provisions within the Charities Act 2009. I understand that there is a similar provision in the Garda Síochána (Policing Authority and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2015, which also disqualifies an individual with a criminal conviction from serving on a board.

A particular argument is to be made for the need to make room for the voices of individuals with lived experience of the criminal justice system on the board of An Garda Síochána. I wish to highlight the need for expanded access to spent convictions, and inclusion more generally. I think this small amendment, though, would go a long way in allowing people who have expertise gained from experience to serve on boards. We see many people in our prison system now leaving there and going to university to study criminology, sociology, etc. I have two friends now with PhDs who cannot get any sort of work in any area they have studied in. I think they would be an asset to any board, and especially this board. At the level of the drug task forces, we have also struggled to get people onto those boards who have lived experience in our communities because of the Charities Act 2009 and, in other cases, the Companies Act 2014. I hope, therefore, that this is an amendment the Minister can see the benefit of in respect of ensuring the board is inclusive and being led by people with a wide range of expertise and insights.