Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and I promise I will not be too long. The two submissions are very powerful and they speak for themselves. The committee has learned a lot from them. It does not do much to allay many of the fears we have around how An Garda Síochána operates. When Dr. Singh was before the committee he was at pains to talk about some wonderful co-operation and work at operational level from gardaí.

He refrained from adding the same to dealing with the hierarchy.

Ms West has been with the organisation for ten years. She made the point that there has been a learning curve and that everyone has taken time to adjust to certain ways of doing things, and that applies to how the analysts operate as well. However, Ms Galligan made the following point in her submission. She said that despite the nine meetings ""It was now concluded that the methodology I had utilised in comparing the records of the Office of the State Pathologist and the PULSE system were “inherently weak”, “inappropriate”, “confined” and “restricted”. Given that Ms Galligan had nine meetings that included what were described as "robust discussions", surely they would have been aware of her methodology during those meetings. She has said that these aspects were not raised at any of the nine meetings. Were they aware of the methodology used that they ended up describing as inherently weak, inappropriate, confined and restricted?