Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Feehily and Deputy Wallace.

I have some questions myself. I am minded of Senator Conway's dogs on the street. It is apparent to me, and I think other members will concur, that there is a universal view on the situation around breath tests and the falsification of the numbers carried out, that because of its universality - it did not present in a district or region, it was right across every Garda district - that could not and would not happen unless there was some direction from on high. It is not something that happened sporadically and broke out where in the course of carrying out their duties, gardaí decided to bump up the numbers. They were clearly acting under direction. From what level of seniority could such a direction issue? At what level within An Garda Síochána must it have been known that this was happening, not after the event, but either through initiation or while it was being conducted? That has given rise to serious concerns about the operations of An Garda Síochána relating to the question of breath tests and other matters. It is very serious.

Ms Feehily's report is currently under construction but it is not only Senator Conway's dogs on the street, of which I must be one, but also the spokesperson for the Garda Representative Association who, in what was certainly an unusual interview, put it firmly on the record on behalf of the GRA that its members were directed. I know that we are all concerned, and the committee has spoken of this collectively and individually on the matter. It is a very serious matter. I believe, and say so as chair of this committee, that knowledge of this went to the very top and not after its exposure but as it was in train. I would like Ms Feehily to comment on that.

My second and last question is as follows. The special rapporteur on child protection, Dr. Geoffrey Shannon, appeared before the committee last week and I have heard Ms Feehily's response. I listened very carefully to the exchange with members. I cannot quote back exactly as she replied, but to paraphrase, she said that in January Dr. Shannon had signed off on the audit that the Garda Síochána had commissioned him to carry out in relation to section 12 of the Childcare Act 1991. I appreciate that the reported was presented to the authority not by Dr. Shannon but presumably by the office of the Garda Commissioner last May, so Ms Feehily would not have had the same time as others to examine it. Ms Feehily indicated that amidst everything else which was presenting at that time, that audit was not the number 1 priority to be addressed. Nevertheless, the importance of this report cannot be relegated. Last week, Dr. Shannon very clearly conveyed to the committee that the PULSE system, as it currently functions, is unfit for purpose in terms of data recording and ensuring that there is a proper record of all instances where section 12 powers are used. They are huge powers. We referred to the 31 cases during earlier exchanges but the inadequacies of the PULSE system were referred to and applied across the several hundred cases which were under Dr. Shannon's scrutiny in the period he was examining the system.

Is it the case that there is so much presenting at the moment? If there was not, I would have expected that the Policing Authority from May to now, the end of September, would have taken appropriate steps. As a former spokesperson on children, and some of my colleagues here have held similar responsibilities in the past, I am greatly concerned that the report's audit and findings on the PULSE system is not being acted on with the speed with which it should and must. Is it the case that the Policing Authority as currently resourced is feeling the weight of all that is now presenting vis-à-vis the Garda Síochána and that sadly, as a consequence, this very important report and its findings is not getting the attention and action it deserves? I ask Ms Feehily to reply to both parts.