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

I do not find the question at all funny. I am in a position where I get beaten up if I do and I get beaten up if I do not. Questions were put to me, to which members expected me to respond, about my engagement with GSOC, the meetings I have had, and whether I had reservations about any particular matters. I truthfully replied to those questions. If I had taken the position that I did not believe I should reply, I would have been accused of being evasive. However, when I reply to the questions I am legitimately asked, I am then accused of beating up on GSOC and impugning its independence.

I have consistently said that it is of huge importance that GSOC, as an independent watchdog in respect of allegations of misconduct against the Garda, should operate with absolute integrity and independence. The independence it has is that it independently investigates matters without fear or favour and with no ministerial interference. However, the issue we are discussing has given rise to a whole range of problems. This committee is inquiring into these problems and the committee has asked me about particular issues. One of the issues relates to the powers exercised under section 102 of the relevant Act, the relevance of section 103, and whether I ignored in its entirety any issue that arose in that regard or whether I had any questions to raise and, if so, if I raised them. I have responded as truthfully as I can and this matter will be dealt with ultimately by a High Court judge.

I indicated earlier the real problem in all of this. There are a lot of good people working in GSOC. They have a statutory role to play, their powers are set out in statute and they have statutory obligations to comply with. GSOC is a watchdog body. The Garda Síochána performs its functions and the commission performs its functions as a watchdog. There is a very interesting debate going on away from this particular controversy, not just in this country but elsewhere, which can be summed up in the phrase: "Who watches the watchdogs?" This is not any more a suggestion that the watchdogs are not doing their jobs properly than it is a suggestion that the bodies they have to watch are not doing their job properly. However, a difficulty arises with a watchdog body where questions come up such as have arisen in this instance. If the watchdog has certain statutory obligations and if an issue arises relating to its compliance or otherwise with those obligations, does one stay schtum and say nothing or does one reference them?