Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is an issue on which our committee did a good deal of work. We went to the North and to Scotland to examine their models and made recommendations. One of the issues we engaged with was separating policing from security responsibilities but what has come to pass now is that because An Garda Síochána is unique in the developed world in that its members retain responsibility over policing and security matters, it has led to a situation where, essentially, the Government still retains control policing elements because of the security aspect.

The Minster referred to Article 282. That article states: "The Executive power of the State shall, subject to the provisions of this Constitution, be exercised by or on the authority of the Government". I have to accept that the Minister has been advised by the Attorney General but the interpretation taken is very broad. There is little case law to aid the interpretation. It is unclear. It is a big call to make because regardless of whether we have an independent policing authority, if the Minister interprets Article 28.2, as has been done, as meaning the Minister has to retain control over all security matters in the interests of the State, and because we have a police service that is responsible for policing and security, all policing elements, therefore, are still controlled by Government. Ultimately, the policing authority has to refer. That is a big call to make. The Attorney General is in place because of her considerable legal expertise but there are other people with considerable legal expertise who would take a very different view. We have an area of conflict here, which is profound. The Minister has made a call but I believe it needs much more debate, such is the profound nature of the call.

In our hearings we debated whether we should have a separate security and policing apparatus in this State that would be accountable to these Houses, as is the case with many security services. The United States and British security services are accountable to their respective Houses of Parliament. The response given is very serious in terms of its implications and if the Minister's call is that he is accepting the advice of the Attorney General, and on that basis Article 28.2, it is open to challenge.

We will not get agreement on this today but I ask the Minister to take other legal opinions into consideration or at least take legal submissions and then put those legal submissions to the Attorney General. We will take Report Stage in the near future. I have another opinion before me from a person I respect in these matters and who has a very different interpretation. I would be happy to submit that to the Minister, and for the Minister to ask the Attorney General to respond to the issues raised. I respect the constitutional core role of the Attorney General and the advice that person gives to the Government of the day but these matters are so serious they deserve more deliberation by the Minister, with the Attorney General, based on the submissions that might be received.

I will press my amendments, and I know I will not get agreement on them, but I do not accept the analysis that has been given to the Minister. It is a serious interpretation to take because it means, essentially, that this is not an independent policing authority because we have a police service that has responsibility for security and policing matters, and that is a serious matter.