Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Perhaps I will finish my comments. I am keen to finish the other questions Deputy Creighton raised. During the course of the peer review, Rits had some queries about the equipment in the GSOC offices. A request was made to the GSOC offices to clarify some matters relating to equipment. As I understand it, the clarifications were provided. I do know the outcome of all this but I took the view, bearing in mind the level of concern about these issues, the complexity of the matter and the nature of the reports I received, which I examined carefully, that it was important to have that engagement. It was no more than that.
Deputy Creighton also highlighted that when the chairman came before the committee, he detailed or referred to not giving me information. What he actually said is on page 6 of the transcript:

With regard to why the results were not reported, the report was in my possession only just prior to the Christmas break. I had to think very carefully about the need to report matters to the Minister and other parties. At the time I made a strategic decision not to report what could be described as suspicious activity that did not meet the threshold of an offence ... My decision-making at the time just prior to Christmas looked at the potential damage that could be done to public confidence if these suspicious activities were in the public domain. We had opened an investigation under section 102(4) and the threshold test was achieved, but, by definition, any likely offence might involve a Garda member.

I will stop there for one moment. I do not know that the threshold test was achieved or why, by definition, any likely offence might involve a Garda member. These conclusions were reached in the absence of evidence. That is a matter for the judge to look at. Clearly there was a view that there were vulnerabilities and potential threats and the conclusion was reached to invoke section 104(2). The chairman went on to say:

The level of public disquiet about allegations that gardaí might be involved in that type of activity was immense. I took the decision alone not to report at the time.

Later on he states that he regrets not informing me. I have no wish to make any more of it than it is. The commentary from both myself and An Taoiseach with regard to me not being informed arose in circumstances whereby this matter came into the public domain in The Sunday Times, whereby it was presented in a particular way and whereby I received no briefing. Under section 103 of the legislation there is a word "shall". Section 103(1) suggests the Minister shall be briefed when an investigation of this nature takes place. Section 103(2) contains provisions which allow GSOC to determine, in particular circumstances, that it will not brief me. I have heard Members saying this means the commission did not have to brief me. What it actually means is it did not have to brief me if GSOC, as a collective group, met and made a decision that one of the specific provisions under section 103(2) was invoked.