Mr. Michael Finn:

I shall deal with the Chairman's last question first. Even this morning, I was talking to one of my colleagues about an investigation into a death. Significant work was done pursuing that investigation involving following every line of inquiry. What if that investigation turns out to be a homicide or an accidental death? We will not know until we conclude that process, which is ongoing. From my experience of working as an operational chief superintendent and superintendent, every one of the investigations in which I was involved was done thoroughly and every line of inquiry was pursued. Could I honestly say that the PULSE incident reflected every one of those? That has been our weakness. PULSE started out as a system for recording crimes. Twenty years later, we have asked it to be something totally different in terms of being a tool to record everything we do. Given the way technology has evolved, PULSE is outdated. We are talking about technology from a different era. That does not mean that our investigations were not done. I would be 100% confident that we do investigate every one of those incidents. Every one with which I was involved was thoroughly investigated. Did the PULSE incident reflect the final status of that investigation? I think that is where we have let ourselves down in terms of our data and what we recorded on PULSE. Just because something starts out as an assault does not mean it will not end up in the courts as murder. Did we always go back and update the incident? That is where we let ourselves down and that is where we need to change the culture. The Chairman is right. I have gone out and spoken to every chief superintendent and superintendent across the country regarding data, its importance and how it is impacting negatively in terms of breath tests when we did not do them right and record them accurately. The same is true of homicides. I have gone out and spoken to every chief superintendent and superintendent across the country saying that we must do it right. Public confidence is eroded when we do not do it right. Today is an example with regard to homicides. I can assure members that the investigations were done and for each of the 41 investigations we are discussing, the operational end of them was done. Yes, the Policing Authority would like us to come back and give it a belt-and-braces reassurance that they were done in a way that was compliant with Article 2. Can it come out and say with confidence that it has reviewed every one of those investigations and that they were done properly? That is what we are going to do because the public and the Policing Authority demand it. I hope that when we return in six months' time, the committee will confident enough to say that it is happy we have carried out that investigation and have put this to bed in terms of any issues regarding the quality of our data.