Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I would like to focus on a few areas. The establishment of the authority is very welcome, as is the attendance of the witnesses here today. We are now nearly at a point where we as a committee should be considering a six-montly type process where we would get an update and have this type of exchange to track back on many of the issues that Ms Feehily has highlighted today.

As so much of the authority's work is at commencement stage, it is very difficult for members to form any real judgment on it at this point without being unfair to the witnesses.

There is no question but that over time the Policing Authority will become one of the powerful parts of the entire system. That will rankle people in other areas because the authority creating that space for itself will mean that others will have to give in some way. I hope the witnesses are successful and that the Policing Authority comes to play a meaningful role. I wish them all the best in that regard.

I want to pick up on one or two issues. I am sorry to be direct but on a point made already, and I listened to the reply, I do not believe it is right that the authority engaged in the process mentioned with the Garda Commissioner to devise the plan. To be clear about where I am coming from, the authority's mission statement refers to the purpose of overseeing the performance of the Garda Síochána and its functions with regard to policing services. If, at a point in the future, an issue comes under investigation or challenge, it cannot be best practice for people within Garda management to be able to say that, for example, they held a one-day work session and that issue originated with the Policing Authority. That would present a major conflict. The witnesses might say that is splitting hairs but it would present a very different and much more problematic conflict in terms of an authority endorsing and signing off on a plan. Even though it would mean that the process of approval will be elongated in the future, I ask the witnesses to reconsider that in terms of their practice in future years.

My next point is on how one views the Garda Síochána as a force. It is not equivalent to other State services in terms of people applying at different levels and this goes to the recruitment issue. In a service with ranks and a command structure and where, because of the nature of the work involved, there is a necessity to maintain a command structure, I seriously question the notion of people being able to jump quantum levels, so to speak, within that structure. For example, somebody at a rank in the command structure one day could jump multiple levels above the person who previously had been a rank above them in that structure. That might be a new structure for the Garda Síochána, which the authority might examine in the future, but in terms of some of the functions the gardaí have to perform in their role, which is very different to a person coming in to an administrative type job, there are many benefits arising out of the existing command structure in terms of force discipline. The State cannot have it both ways. If we want to recognise the Garda Síochána as separate and stand alone, with the restrictions that apply to it, as highlighted by the Garda Representative Association, GRA, over the years, we cannot mess around with that in the way the witnesses outlined, which would mean we would have an appointments process that would undermine a command structure.