Mr. Philip Carroll:

I might ask my colleagues to help out in some respects as I address the various issues raised. Deputy Ó Cuív acknowledged that the arrangements appear to be adequate and I welcome that. He asked whether there should be a separate investigation into the SIU and that was mentioned by other members. I cannot deal with such a matter but I wonder what the basis for this is. Various cases in the public domain were mentioned and there have been complaints about the conduct of some investigations and inspections. It is natural that people subject to investigations would respond like this because they are suspected of wrongdoing. Inspections may lead to penalties so, again, it is natural that some people respond as they do. There is a protocol for complaints relating to inspections conducted by the former SIU and very, very few have been made - far fewer than are mentioned by Deputies and the media. In the past number of years around one complaint per year has come through the existing protocol arrangements in the Department.

They are the figures we have, through the quality management system. What the Deputy has told us about, and what we are aware of in the media, is different from what is addressed directly to the Department. That is the reality and context that we are aware of.

In terms of governance in this new structure, we continue to have the same protocol in existence for complaints which is done through the quality management service and is independent from the investigations division. The protocol feeds back into management and comes through directly from representations made by Deputies to the Minister which is completely separate again. In addition, representations are made to the Secretary General. Now there is another opportunity with a steering group which I chair and is independent of the investigations division. The steering group makes decisions on how investigations and whether investigations are to be conducted. If that involves somebody with a gripe about the former SIU or the current investigation structures then we will deal with it as a complaint. We will determine whether the case needs to be investigated independent of the investigations division. There is an opportunity to do that.

Deputy Ferris asked about the current membership of the SIU and if they will continue to do their work. My answer is "Yes." We have not changed the membership. Please bear in mind that we established this new structure in September. We have been subject to an embargo on recruitment. Therefore, we do not have the capacity right now to expand what we believe is required - an expanding investigations division. Harvest 2020 has a growth potential in the sector of enormous proportions which needs to be protected. Therefore, the SIU needs a heavier resource than it is getting at the moment and we are looking at the matter.

We are also looking at mobility, across the Department, into and out of the unit but first we need to identify people who are suitable for this kind of work. This is difficult work and is not simple work. We hear about complaints against the SIU but nobody hears about the hostility against the SIU. We have had many members against whom false allegations have been made, allegations of assault have been made, some of them have been threatened they will be shot, they have had guns held to their heads and they have been chased down fields with slash hooks. These are the stories that people do not hear about. One does not hear about the SIU members who get Garda protection on their family homes and have telephone surveillance for protection. Nobody hears that side of the situation. We, as a Department, also have a duty of care to our staff. There are things happening that we should also be concerned about. The kind of people who make those threats are not people we would be comfortable with defending.