James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Our next topic is the arson attacks. I welcome our first group this afternoon, namely, the Hope and Courage Collective. I am delighted that the two representatives are with us today. I remind witnesses to turn off their mobile phones or switch them to flight mode so they do not interfere with the sound system. Sometimes they interfere with the recording of a meeting.

The primary purpose of this and the next session, when we will hear from senior gardaí, is to discuss recent arson attacks on centres or on buildings rumoured to be centres for international protection applicants and temporary protection applicants. There has been significant media coverage of these and people are well aware that it has been happening. Quite simply, we want to hear what can be done to address it. From the Hope and Courage Collective, I formally welcome Ms Niamh McDonald, director, and Mr. Mark Malone, research and communications lead.

As is usual, I remind witnesses of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. If their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they may be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative they comply with any such direction. I will give a slight qualifier to that because of the context of today's meeting. Witnesses from An Garda Síochána will attend a later session. Normally, we advise witnesses not to engage on a party that is not in the room. However, if witnesses wish to make suggestions or points - I am not for a minute telling the witnesses what to say - that An Garda Síochána could or should answer, that would be allowable because gardaí will be in the room later and the points can be put to them for a response. I am not highlighting An Garda Síochána, but it is an exception as it will be before the committee later so that would be appropriate. We also understand it is a commonsense system.

The way we operate is that once we have heard the opening statements from witnesses, we use a rota system for members' contributions. Generally, each member has six minutes, including for questions and the witnesses responses. After six minutes, I will move on to the next member in the order they have indicated.

I invite Ms McDonald to make her opening statement.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

I thank the justice committee for the invitation to present today. I am the director of the Hope and Courage Collective, and with me is Mark Malone, research and communications lead. The Hope and Courage Collective has extensive experience combating hate and supporting communities to be strong in the face of far-right mobilisation. Today, I will focus on three things: the dynamics of the far right; the role social media companies play in spreading lies, hate, and disinformation; and how we can tackle the business model of social media companies. We want to leave the committee in no doubt that the severity of what we are seeing leaves us fearful for people's lives, especially those of people from marginalised communities such as migrants, people seeking asylum, LGBTQIA+ people and members of the Roma community, to name a few.

The intensity of hate, lies and misinformation on social media has been on the increase for a number of years. The Hope and Courage Collective has consistently warned of the real-world implications of the violence which is manifesting across society. Most recently, in Kildare last week we saw how a lie became the truth when outside agitators whipped up fear using disinformation they shared on social media platforms calling for a mobilisation outside an accommodation centre where there had never been any protests before. In the mobilisation, calls for violence were made against those residing in the building. Residents of the centre could not access it. Local people residing in the area from different cultural backgrounds were threatened when just trying to get home. People on the ground said it was terrifying for the people in the centre, as well as for those supporting them and those who live in the vicinity. Local gardaí had no plan for how to keep people safe, despite the fact that it was easy to identify the leading extremists in the crowd who had initially shared the disinformation and fear.

I will turn to the dynamics of the far right. There are a number of factors aiding the growth of the far right. Extremists are weaponising the very real issues communities are facing by sowing hate and division. Communities need to be engaged and supported to ensure no matter who you are, where you come from or how you identify, you have what you need to flourish. Ireland is a wealthy country and the resources are available to ensure everyone has what is necessary. The narrative coming from the Government, especially since January 2024, focused on getting tough and cracking down on immigration, followed by a rowing back in the context of policies supporting people seeking asylum. It has been reported that there are empty beds in the asylum system, while people seeking refuge are sleeping on the streets in freezing conditions, with no access to sanitation or food. This get tough narrative is dominating media headlines and distracting everyone from the real issues people are facing on the ground, while also appeasing and emboldening the far right.

Over the past five years, there has been an exponential growth of lies, hate, and disinformation. This is part of a well documented playbook, which has the purpose of creating the illusion that there is more support for the far right than actually exists. Extremists do this by organising events and by creating hateful content to share with their followers. For example, on YouTube, videos from extreme right content producers in Ireland have received more than 13.5 million views. Extremists then set out to stir up debate online and in the media by baiting politicians, community leaders and journalists into reacting. The movement is primarily driven by white supremacists and fascists who encourage anger, hate and disgust in followers by actively normalising tactics of public humiliation, intimidation and violence. Since November 2023, the increase of the intensity of online violent rhetoric has led to physical confrontation and politically motivated violence, as evidenced by recent arson attacks. Since the riots, every community we have worked with has expressed a sense that tensions and fear are rising locally.

I will turn to social media companies. The spread of hate is intensified and normalised through social media platforms. These are giant corporations that offer a product to make a profit. Division and hate sell. For almost 15 years, many of these organisations have grown to be almost monopolies with international reach. They have deliberately sought to rebuff regulation. Communities and individuals are harmed day in and day out by this business model and there is no recourse against or accountability of the companies that profit from this harm. Harm is coded into how these platforms function, yet at Government level, there seems to be an unwillingness to address the business model of hate. We can say with certainty that if social media companies had not provided extremism with such a massive platform, we would not be experiencing such levels of disinformation and violence today. This business model is a direct attack on our democracy. Some of the richest people in the world lead these organisations that wield power and influence over billions of people across the globe.

The Hope and Courage Collective is a trusted flagger with all social media platforms. To date, all have failed to live up to commitments given in December 2022 to engage with local experts, with one notable exception, TikTok. In 2023, the trust, safety and integrity teams and resources across Meta, X and Google were slashed, precisely at a time when co-ordinated action was needed to combat hate and violent content. Recently, representatives of X in Ireland told another Oireachtas committee that it has only 250 content moderators for the whole of the EU. There has been no meaningful accountability levelled at social media platforms, while our communities unjustly carry the burdens of social division and hate. Many people in our communities are running a dangerous gauntlet of hate and extremism that is amplified by social media, often outside their front doors, on a daily basis. However, those heading the platforms are repeatedly granted the privilege of meeting Oireachtas committees behind closed doors, away from the public view of those suffering the harms of their recommender systems. This committee has the responsibility and power to create a positive global impact by reigning in the harms of social media platforms. The platforms have played a significant role in facilitating genocide, turned a blind eye to potential child abuse and have directly supported white supremacists to spread hate in towns and villages, not only throughout Ireland but also across the globe.

What can we do? We need to prevent the amplification of hateful, dangerous and violent content. To date, the sole focus has been the removal of hateful content after it has been amplified. This process does not work because by the time dangerous content is taken down, the damage has already been done. We have also learned that we cannot trust social media companies to take down hateful content despite clear violations of their own community standards. Turning off the recommender system by default would reduce the amplification of content, thus reducing harm. This would not prevent people posting on social media, but it would reduce the amplification of hateful and dangerous posts. The right to freedom of speech is not the same as the right to amplification by global social media platforms. It is completely possible to protect freedom of speech while also reducing amplification and that can be achieved by turning off social platform recommender systems by default. We ask that the committee write to the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin, as a matter of urgency and ask her to set out her approach to holding these companies to account.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms McDonald for her opening remarks. As I indicated, we will have a round-robin session whereby each member will have a six-minute slot to engage the witnesses. Deputy Ó Riordáin indicated first, so he will open up the questioning and engagement.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all our guests for being here and for their ongoing work. I am particularly aware of Ms McDonald's proactive work in the community in which she operates. The Hope and Courage Collective is really going to help us all turn the tide.

I want to focus on what the political system is not doing. I appreciate what Ms McDonald said about the social media companies. As a committee, we should listen to what she said about communicating with the Minister.

Last week, a debate on the arson attacks took place in the House. During it, quite a number of political groupings focused on issues with the immigration system, the failures of that system, communication issues and all the rest of it. I feel we have reached the point where there is almost a legitimacy being given to those who block roads, board buses or protest outside people's homes. I was a bit taken aback that the outcry about those in one particular location, who were seen quite clearly to be intimidating women and children getting off a bus, did not last long in the public mindset.

It is not today or yesterday that these arson attacks started. They have been going on since 2018, as far as I know. I think there have been 23 such attacks, but I stand open correction on that. Whenever these attacks are equated with what happened in Alabama in the 1950s, people say it is going too far. I do not know about that, because arson attacks are all about intimidation. Ms McDonald referred to public humiliation and public representatives. That is a thing as well. The point is that you cannot speak about this or you cannot say anything about it or you will be targeted and dumped on.

I agree with what Ms McDonald said about Government rhetoric. I do not want to be unfair to the Government because it is are part of the solution and many voices in government have been strong. However, this month in particular, I have heard the phrases "clamping down", "cracking down" and "deportations will increase". This means that the discussion is not about violence; it is about immigration. I know that our guests have done work with individual political parties. What more can political parties do? I am mindful of the fact that this year we are going to have local elections, European elections and, most likely, a general election. What more needs to be done by political representatives and parties?

We have debated this matter within the political system for a long time. Do our guests believe we should engage with this stuff or resist platforming it? The more you engage with it, the more you are possibly doing the job of those involved because that is what they want. They want people to engage, react and debate. Then, all of a sudden, you find yourself wrestling a pig, so you cannot win. After that, you find yourself ignoring the issue. I am not sure if that works any more.

I have two main questions. What reaction do our guests want from the political system across the Government and the Opposition? Should we ignore or engage?

Mr. Mark Malone:

I will answer the second question first. It is important to have an understanding. You need to make the choice on the basis of understanding the dynamics that are at play. To a large degree, the far-right activity we are seeing is a very deliberate reconstruction of what Irishness is meant to be. It is a large portion of what the politics of this is all about, so there is a role for every political organisation to restate its values in the context of what it is about.

In terms of being able to push back, a very thin reinterpretation of what we could describe as ethno-nationalism that is playing out, the anti-mobilisations that are very explicitly designed to try to create an othering that reduces Irishness to a very defined, closed concept. There is clearly a role for political organisations to restate their vision for what they want the country to be that stands in direct opposition to that very narrow interpretation per se.

The Deputy made reference to the policing operation in Roscrea.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Mr. Mark Malone:

We are not policing experts, but it is quite clear that the operational decision made there was not child centred. Where there is a known situation, for example, where children are going to be brought in to an emergency accommodation centre, there is an onus to have a multiagency approach to policing. Ms McDonald would probably speak to that a bit better. In circumstances where you know you are going to be bringing children into a location, you should not reach the stage where there is public order policing because that is clearly traumatic for children. There is a bit of thinking through needed here, and maybe questions could be asked about policing approaches to static protests or mobilisations that set themselves up as deliberately seeking to create spaces of conflict and how these can be engaged with directly.

The problem we have in the context of social media is that there does not seem to be an understanding on the part of the Government and political parties in general of the extent, scale, prevalence and dynamics involved in what has played out over the past four or five years. We have written a bit about the great replacement conspiracy theory. I will quote a portion of the report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on Christchurch masjidain on 15 March 2019, which was published in December 2020. The report relates to a shooting incident where someone walked into two separate mosques. As a result of that person's actions, there were 51 deaths and 40 injuries. I recommend that every member of the committee reads the report. I will read from the report, because of an important context to this later on. It states:

We are satisfied that by January 2017 the individual had a terrorist attack in mind. We are also satisfied that when the individual came to live in New Zealand on 17 August 2017, it was with a fully-developed terrorist ideology based on his adoption of the Great Replacement theory and his associated beliefs that immigration, particularly by Muslim migrants ...

It also states:

We see the terrorist attack as resulting very much from an unhappy conjunction of his personality ... his financial circumstances ... his underlying political views (particularly his ethno-nationalist views and his belief in the Great Replacement theory) ...

Towards a conclusion, in terms of the broader context, the report states:

Before 15 March 2019, there had been many extreme right-wing terrorist attacks in Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, which showed that ideological thinking along the lines of the Great Replacement had the capacity to motivate some people to extreme violence.

In 2019, the Irish Freedom Party was launched in the RDS. I will not name individuals involved, but the leader of that organisation introduced a person who was involved with the UK Independence Party, UKIP, and who started his speech by asking if those present had heard about the great replacement theory. This is an organisation that is hosted by YouTube. That video is labelled by YouTube as being related to the great replacement theory and far-right content. The video has been viewed 15,000 times, and the YouTube channel has over 2,000 views. That is organisation, one or two others and a network have, over the past four or five years, been pushing the great replacement theory very specifically or recontextualising of the plantation in Ireland. That terrorist ideology is deeply imbedded in the movements we look at. So we have seen and speak about, and as we have all witnessed, there has been a rise in frequency and intensity of anti-migrant mobilisations. There has also been a growth in the number of arson attacks. There have been 23 arson attacks since 2017, the vast majority of which happened in the past 18 months. We have also seen a riot where a distributed network of folks were able to marshal and put many people on to the streets really quickly in anger and disgust. So the direction of travel is fairly obvious to us.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

i am sorry for interrupting, but my time is short. Ms McDonald has yet to answer.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, the Deputy's time was up a few minutes ago but I let the conversation run. I call Deputy Daly because I know he has to speak in the Chamber on another matter. We will have a second round, and Deputy Ó Ríordáin can come back in.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I must go to the Chamber so I will ask Ms McDonald three questions and she can use the rest of my seven minutes to reply.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Yes.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ms McDonald mentioned that funding for the trust, safety and integrity teams was the first to be cut and that there are now only 250 content moderators for the whole of the EU.

If she knows, could Ms McDonald tell me what the original number was? How many content moderators were in place for the whole of the EU beforehand?

Ms McDonald mentioned the recommender system. Is there a bias in that towards more hateful and divisive content or is it just a general type of system? A number of platforms were mentioned, including, for example, Telegram. What is its reach compared with some of the other social media sites? We all know about some of the activists who are online, but what about any sharing of videos or whatever by elected representatives? What is her view on those? Has there been as much of that? I apologise in advance in case I have to slip out.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

We had between 2,500 and 5,000 content moderators prior to the significant cuts made in 2023 through a market demand. The global market asked for a streamlining of the social media companies and their response was to cut trust and safety teams.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Have those cuts directly resulted in an increase in hateful content?

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Absolutely. We feel they definitely have. We had signed up to code of content on countering illegal hate speech online. We made an agreement with the social media companies in December 2022 that they would engage with us to look at changes in patterns, that they would meet with us, that we would be able to report the content and that it would be taken down if it broke the social media community standards. Since November 2022, when this intensity really happened here, the response from all the social media companies, except TikTok, has been very lax. Sometimes it will be taken down. Much of the time, however, they tell us that it does not break their community standards.

We had a professional relationship with Twitter and good engagement with it, but there has been no engagement since the cutbacks and the arrival of the new ownership. We do not think that it is a good use of our time, strategically, to engage with Twitter. We feel it is better if we can go somewhere where that we can actually get the impact that we need.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So Ms McDonald can detect the effects of the change of ownership and the deterioration that has occurred, even in Dublin and across Ireland.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Yes, there has been a massive deterioration. The recommender system takes sensitive data such as who you are, your gender, your age, where you live, your profile and all of that kind of detail. That is covered by the general data protection regulation, GDPR, as well. It takes the sensitive data and looks at what kind of salacious content it could drive to the person, for example, if they are a young man or a young woman, and how they can drive that content and just land it in your feed. The way I describe it then is that you are in this river of hate that you cannot get out of because you are in the algorithm.

We find that if we turn off the recommender system and prevent it from using those sensitive data, it cannot be delivered to your feed without you looking for it first. What happens is that as soon as you engage with it, there is automatically a flood of content. That is why we are seeing this increase in the use of certain language and of the violence, especially such language as "men of military age" and "Ireland is full", which is seeping in and becoming normalised across Irish society.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Has Ms McDonald asked the major companies to take that off and, if so, has there been much of a response to it?

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Yes. We presented to Coimisiún na Meán, which has initially proposed this within its recommendations. When the Digital Services Act was being created in the EU, it did not put this in as a policy. Coimisiún na Meán has brought this forward. It is part of its first recommendations. We fully support it. It would be a very progressive move internationally for this to happen. We are the hub of the Digital Services Act for Europe at the moment. We also have the headquarters of all the social media companies here, so it could have a significant impact in reducing the hate and violence that people are seeing, as well as the other harms that are caused.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms McDonald.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Daly is going to the Chamber. He may not be able to rejoin the meeting. I will come back to Deputy Ó Ríordáin in the second round.

I have a couple of questions of my own next. I wish to raise a couple of different topics in no particular order. We are here today to deal primarily with the arson attacks. That is the focus of the session, but there are lots of other interesting topics that naturally spill out from that. We are going to hear from the assistant Garda commissioner and the deputy Garda commissioner later, but I think the phrase that was used previously is that there is no evidence to suggest that this is a conspiracy. I struggle with that a little bit because it strikes me that there are similarities and correlations and even online contacts between different groups. What does Ms McDonald say to that? It strikes me, without having expert knowledge that it is too co-ordinated and sophisticated to be the work of a couple of random people in a couple of random towns. Do the witnesses want to comment on that first?

Mr. Mark Malone:

There are a couple of things at play. The first is that it was observable to everybody that there was an increase in the intensity of the mobilisations and the fact that they were much more explicitly anti-migrant in terms of language. Over the course of the past 18 months, there was a change in terms of both the intensity and frequency of the arson attempts. There is also a relationship between the places that were identified by small numbers of people. One would imagine that it should have been obvious that the probability of something happening in those buildings would go up once they were identified. Similarly, it is the case that there are more and more arson attacks happening, which would also suggest an increase in the likelihood of that happening. So there are questions in the context of intelligence-led policing. Our understanding is that no arson attacks were interrupted or stopped. They were all either successful or did not happen. There is something there in that sense.

The other aspect relates to stochastic terrorism, which is the idea that when the risk of something goes up, the ability to describe, find or predict any particular incident is challenging. While terrorism may be quite a strong label to put on the arson attacks, what we are talking about is a sort of dynamic situation where the playbook is about going in and whipping up localised hate, telling people that individuals are going to come into an area and sexually abuse their children or women. That is the language they were using; it is not my language. What we saw towards the end of the year was that there was a very increased likelihood that there was going to be an arson attack. There is a dynamic at play.

I totally understand and get the Garda Commissioner's previous comments, which we might hear again later, about the difficulty in ascribing a causal link in terms of an evidence chain. Those two things both coexist together. It is important in terms of the understanding. That is why we refer back to the recommender system, because the systems themselves, the companies, platforms and products are built to centre virality rather than context and accuracy. That is the problem.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Malone mentioned that there have been no attacks apprehended in mid-flight. In other words, they either did not happen or were entirely successful. Is he satisfied that there are reporting channels? If there are, are they adequate? I refer to a situation where a member of the community becomes aware, through online media, having their ear to the ground or whatever that there is a rumour of an attack on a particular place. I have heard it said in connection with recent incidents in Celbridge and Leixlip in my constituency but also around the country that people who wanted to forewarn the Garda have struggled. They wanted to say the Garda should keep an eye on a place because there is an issue. Does Ms McDonald want to answer that? As far as she is aware, is there a channel in place?

Ms Niamh McDonald:

I have had a great deal of engagement with many of the different communities across the country that are experiencing this. From what I hear back, the response by the Garda is very uneven. Many gardaí do not seem to understand the dynamics of the far right and what is happening. There seems to be a disconnect between what is happening on the ground and what is happening higher up in the force. We hear reports that gardaí are monitoring and watching the situation. When local communities try to engage with local gardaí, however, the latter do not seem to understand the dynamics.

It is not clear if they are monitoring or watching this. Celbridge is an example that we could look at. For 36 hours before the incident that occurred there, disinformation appeared online of a savage attack on someone who was inside the centre. This got whipped up by a known far-right agitator who was in the crowd that night. When the locals contacted the Garda, it stated that it knew nothing about what was happening. They did not have a policing operation or plan in place. As stated earlier, this left people who were seeking asylum and those in the community who were just trying to get home that night at risk.

We had thought that, after the riots in November, issues would be taken more seriously. I do not want to call it lackadaisical, but we are still not seeing a proactive approach. According to our feedback, gardaí are saying that they have not been given an operational plan, so they do not know how to respond.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is what I was going to discuss next. A relatively sophisticated operation would be required of the Garda, for example, monitoring social media channels, working with confidential informants and using other intelligence sources. Our Garda witnesses will have an opportunity to respond, but it strikes me that such work is not filtering down to station level. Perhaps that is a gap which needs to be addressed.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Sometimes, the Garda leans on the diversity officer to respond, but that officer is there to support people from minority backgrounds, not to respond to the far right. There does not seem to be an understanding that these are two extraordinarily separate issues. The Garda diversity officer is not trained to respond to the far right. There are different dynamics between what happens online and what happens on the ground.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely. There was an incident in Cork on 24 February. It was the second anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. There was a pro-Ukraine rally and a pro-Palestine rally, but there was also a far-right rally. I am told by people who were present that the Garda did not interfere and, effectively, gave free run to the far-right rally, which included people who had been charged before the courts for previous offences of that nature. That is troubling. Is there a pattern? Is the same happening in many other places?

Mr. Mark Malone:

It is a relatively new tactic and involves far-right organisers trying to set up mobilisations or particular manifestations where they directly engage with what they might consider left wing or woke protests. If the Chair is looking for a comment about the policing of that, then there has been no policing at all.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious of the time, so I will yield to other members. Deputy Pringle is present, and I see Deputy Ward coming in the door. I will take them in that order. I will turn to Deputy Ó Ríordáin on the second round.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My apologies, but at what time did this session start? It was listed as starting at 5.30 p.m.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are running a little ahead of time. I sent the Deputy and a few of the other members a text to let them know. If the Deputy prefers, I can come back to him after taking Deputy Ward.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. Give me a few minutes.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Our meeting always starts at 5.30 p.m.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. I can take Deputy Ó Ríordáin if the two gents want to take a few minutes.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, I am okay. I read the opening statements before coming to the meeting. They contain a fair amount on the role of social media. I thank the witnesses for attending.

As politicians, when we try to dispel misinformation, we find it difficult. For example, if I wanted to pay for something to be relayed on Facebook or another Meta platform further than is usually the case, I would have to include a disclaimer about it being political. Messages like that do not go as far as they used to. We are being limited in getting the message out there to contradict some of this misinformation. On the other hand, there are people who call themselves citizen journalists who have a far reach. Meta has controls in place in respect of journalists getting a wider reach, but if people call themselves citizen journalists, they seem to get a wider reach than the elected representatives who are trying to dispel that misinformation. Is there any way to combat this?

Mr. Mark Malone:

We can combat it by challenging the recommender systems and turning them off by default. Stuff travels because of the type of engagement. The algorithms dealing with engagement are primed for rage and other high-intensity emotions. They are not primed for context, complexity and accuracy. We have seen how stuff moves quickly through Meta, but it also happens on all the other platforms. Virality and growth at all costs are part and parcel of this. It is not exclusive to Facebook. We often see it on YouTube and X or Twitter. Actually, X is a whole other conversation. The problem is known by the companies. The concerning part is that this is a model. It is not an accident.

Another problem is the fact that there is no transparency regarding the algorithm. Companies will talk about commercial sensitivities, but this is a tool that is spreading harm in our communities and causing global damage. The companies have had a free run for approximately 20 years. They have built monopolies and accrued capital and have considerable lobbying infrastructure. They have led national and EU regulators on a merry dance for the past 15 years. We are playing catch-up. It is a little like the tobacco industry. We are seeing the fallout now. We do not get to look at what is behind the curtain and we do not know how the algorithms work. The companies also get to appear at committees behind closed doors. We do not get to see how the product works and what its ingredients are, and when the companies attend committees, we do not get to see the examination of what is happening. We can guarantee this committee that, if there is a recommendation to ensure that the recommender systems are turned off by default, there will be pushback against that.

Without even knowing whether we would get what we wanted or what we thought was needed, we would like a much greater push towards transparency. People should at least be arguing for transparency in the first instance. There does not seem to be transparency now.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Even when people report issues, they do not get any feedback. I have often reported posts. There was misinformation involved in the arson attack at Crooksling. It is a place I know well. My grandmother died there. She was in that nursing home for a long time and was looked after very well. When the misinformation started being spread, I tried to combat it on social media. One reports stuff, but there is no feedback and one does not know where the reports go. People were allowed to comment “Burn them out” or use the fire emoji. When we report something, there has to be a way of getting feedback. Have the witnesses advice on this point?

Regarding closed committee meetings, I have never been at one. That should not happen. These are social media companies and they are in the public, so any conversations we have with them should happen in public as well. I agree with Mr. Malone 100%.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

I believe X requested of the media committee two weeks ago to have a behind-closed-doors meeting, and that request was granted. I believe Meta had such a meeting in January.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

There is a lack of accountability because there has been self-regulation of social media companies for 15 years. These are global companies. They say they can regulate themselves within each district or country, but that will not happen when they have a global reach. They provide unfettered ways of sharing misinformation and disinformation. They are perfect bedfellows for hate and extremism. The salacious content that is needed for social media companies to grow is the same as what the far right needs. When there is no accountability for the arson attacks, the violence and the far right, people feel it is okay to say “Let us burn it down” on social media because such comments do not get removed. The two elements are working together with no accountability and they are continuing to grow.

This is why one of our key recommendations is to turn off the recommender systems by default. Otherwise, these platforms will be a bunch of bigots talking to themselves. Let us call it what it is. They have been given a massive platform. They have also been given new tools on Twitter or X whereby each "citizen journalist”, to use the term the Deputy mentioned, pays a monthly subscription to Twitter, giving him or her a higher rating on the algorithm, which means that person’s content gets fed in. Such individuals get longer posts on Twitter and can also use livestreaming. They can livestream hate events and anti-migrant events, attacking politicians, doorstepping people or whatever. They are being facilitated and are paying for that facilitation.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can see that. Whenever I go onto my X feed, I see an ad for Gript Media. You can see it on certain kinds of threads. I agree with Ms McDonald.

I thank the witnesses. I might contribute again, but I wish to listen to other members first.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My apologies for being late. We started a bit early. The Cathaoirleach sent me a text, but it was too late by that stage. Ms McDonald's presentation was important, given the hate speech that is out there.

One of the most important aspects of this matter relates to social media companies, as was rightly highlighted, and their recommender systems. We do not see what the algorithm says, but we know that if you put up a post that promotes hate or whatever, the social media companies actively promote it. I would imagine that if we put up a post on social media promoting loving your neighbours, it would die a death. That is not because the post is not worthwhile; it is because the social media company will not make money promoting it. That seems to be the thing. The recommender system, as was pointed out, is the way to do it. The question for the committee is how we make the social media companies accountable for that. Perhaps the committee can talk about that at a later stage.

It always strikes me that YouTube does not seem to be looked at as being a social media company. It is not seen the same way. However, YouTube seems to be the place where many of these people are organising, putting their videos up and so on. I wonder about the use of and policing of social media companies and what more we can do. Is it pushing them to make this recommender system? How do we put in place a system that is enforceable or that can make the recommender system work? We can bring the social media companies in here and meet them behind closed doors, as another committee did a couple of weeks ago. However, it will not make any difference. How do we develop that system to make a difference?

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Following up on what Deputy Pringle said, I attended at a conference on some of these issues at the weekend. The point was made that there could be an online news website that has text that is considered newsprint, video content that is considered broadcasting and a comment section that is considered an intermediary space. Three different items of legislation would apply to one website channel. That is completely unworkable. That is part of the challenge in this stuff. How do we come up with one set of rules that covers all? The Deputy mentioned that YouTube, for example, is exempt from certain rules. These are the kind of issues we are all grappling with. I just wanted to add that to want Deputy Pringle said.

Mr. Mark Malone:

There are a few things. It is probably worth noting some of the commitments the companies have already made. Ms McDonald referenced our role working with the code of conduct and countering illegal hate speech. In December 2022, one of the things that was agreed was:

IT companies and [civil society organisations] will aim to further intensify their cooperation through regular meetings, training opportunities and roundtable discussions on topics such as specific manifestations of [hate] ...

That agreement was made in December 2022 at the height of the first cycle of anti-migrant mobilisations in Ireland. We have not heard from anybody – Facebook, YouTube, Google or Twitter-X. In fairness, TikTok regularly reaches out and tries to aim to fulfil the agreements made within that, but the other organisations have not. We carry the burden. We are trusted flaggers of in respect of all these organisations. We know their terms and conditions and what they set out themselves. We see they regularly fail to live up to expectation. We also see them fail to live up to the commitments they make in the broader sense.

The thing that is concerning is we see a direction of travel. We see what has happened with X and its ownership of one year. What happens if these global products have nefarious owners over a sustained period? What does that do to the democratic process and to our societies? This is not a game. There is an economic imperative for Elon Musk to have a Trump win because of the numerous cases against his other businesses - in the context of regulation - that will impinge his profit line. What happens when there are nefarious actors? There needs to be structure, shape and power embanked in regulation and whatever forms of communication so these companies cannot make agreements and commitments and walk away, and then there is nothing. I cannot think of a single instance beyond small fines that do not have any bite at all where any of these companies have been held to account for harms they do in our societies, particularly minoritised communities.

As was mentioned, YouTube literally monetised white nationalists in Ireland. People are able to pay and donate to white nationalists in Ireland, and YouTube gets a 30% cut. The money is nothing, but, on principle-----

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Obviously, they are on YouTube to make money for themselves and to fund their ongoing hatred. Can we target the money? Would it be possible to target the money and stop it being collected as a way of addressing the issue?

I have a final question that is not related. What can we do now with regard to policing these organisations? Is there anything we can do? Could the Garda be more active in terms of looking at social media companies or more responsive to complaints relating to hate speech and so on?

Mr. Mark Malone:

Regarding finances, there are a couple of streams. There are a couple of ways money is raised online. Generally, there are platforms that allow you to pay and there are the payment systems that facilitate the movement. There is then stuff on the dark Web such as Bitcoin or whatever, which we have less visibility over. YouTube and Twitter allow monetisation. People regularly use PayPal and it is against its terms and conditions, and we have put reports in there. It is not just the social media companies; it is finance companies as well. Revolut is a big one and Stripe is a significant one. Stripe is a payment handler for pretty much every online payment. Websites for white national groups still rely on Stripe at the back-end of the website, even though it is not necessarily front and centre as in Stripe being visible. Without Stripe’s active input in the facilitation of the money transfer, it would not happen. Stripe and many of these organisations will front-end their commitment to free speech. Stripe can sell you a sex toy in the USA and allow white supremacists to get money. Where there are regulations put in place, they will work within that regulatory framework. I mentioned YouTube, PayPal and Revolut. Small fringe kind of payment systems such as Buy Me a Coffee, Patreon and SubscribeStar are all quite active as well. Money is the difficult bit to trace though. Often there is not much visibility around what is being paid. However, regarding where we see people actively using Revolut, PayPal and other quite prominent providers, those groups have terms and conditions about how they are to be used and they are not committing to them either.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are terms and conditions there.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Returning to what I said at the outset, the organisations are not present and cannot respond. I absolutely hear what is being said but I note they may something different if they were to come in. That does not take from what the witnesses said at all; it is just to put that on record.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps we should ask them to come in.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Possibly, yes.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is where I was going next. They should be asked to attend to let them respond in public.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am extremely sympathetic to the positions advanced. The only issue is the discussion is a little bit moving into where the media committee and broadcasting committee would be. As much as I would love to invite certain organisations in and have certain debates, we are constrained to the justice arena in this committee. There is obviously knock-on. Some of the speech that is being disseminated and propagated online is contributing to law and order issues, so there is definitely a link. However, that is something we might discuss at a-----

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can do it on a very defined and clear path.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, exactly, so we stay within the lines of the committee.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, I also asked about the Garda and how we actually respond to the individuals.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

There needs to better understanding of the Garda – I said this as the Deputy arrived – and about the dynamics of the far right and how it uses social media. I do not think they are fully aware across the Garda and there is an uneven response to what is happening locally on the ground across the country. I speak to people up and down the country who are trying to respond to this. It is also about holding the social media companies to account about the real everyday harms and violence that is happening and to link it. When people speak about hate and extremism, it is not linked to how social media can facilitate that. That is not part of the conversation. We want to make it part of the conversation. I am not a legislator. The recommender system is a long-term project.

I will send the European Commission’s code of conduct on countering hate and illegal speech online to the committee. Why have they not fulfilled their role around that? Why have they not engaged with experts on the ground such as ourselves in the Hope and Courage Collective to find out what the dynamics are on the ground? When we speak to particular social media companies, they will not take the wider context of what is happening on the ground rather they will look at a specific incident. We met with the social media companies I think two years ago, before the intensity we have faced over the past 18 months.

They point-blank refused to see that they have white supremacists on YouTube or on their platforms, and will refuse to see what they do outside of that. The rules and the community standards that they put in place actually facilitate that content is not removed. If they are going to make community standards, they need to be our community standards and those of our communities, the diverse communities we have and the minority communities. They are facilitating their money - that is what their community standards do. We have to row that back. They are here and have their headquarters in Ireland at the moment. They are less than 2 km away from us and as they are causing distinct violence across our communities, that needs to be reckoned.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms McDonald. While I will go to Deputy Ó Ríordáin in a second round, before doing that I will come in with something myself. It strikes me that a lot of what we are talking about is misinformation and disinformation that is being propagated, intentionally in many cases. Is there more that the State or the authorities collectively can do with regard to positive information? There is a vacuum and that is being filled with misinformation and a lot of bad actors are in that space. The example was given last week with that outrageous incident in Celbridge. Rumours spread online for maybe two or three days and then that led to confrontation and people being harassed, with residents trying to access their accommodation and being impeded from doing so. The threat of violence was hanging in the air. All sorts of rumours were flying around that I understand were not responded to by anyone in authority. Then the wider narrative around this space has not been entered into as fulsomely as it could have been the same authorities. Is that fair to say? What do the witnesses think about that?

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Communities in general are not being treated as stakeholders or with respect with regard to what is happening. The Ukraine war is over two years old, which is what the Chair just mentioned. There is not a whole-of-government approach happening towards this. We were in a crisis during Covid and we saw a whole-of-government approach. Whether we liked it or not, we were informed every day. I am not saying that we should have a press conference every day but the Government needs to be seen to have information and that people are informed of what is happening and why it is happening. From our engagement on the ground with communities, when you engage communities, see them as stakeholders and speak to what their questions and worries are, normally that kind of dissipates but when that vacuum is not filled, it is filled by hatred and extremism.

As I said before, we are seeing a narrative coming, especially from the Government since January 2024, about getting tough. It was even said on the radio this morning that too many are coming in. This does not help what we are trying to achieve on the ground. We also see a distinct lack of accommodation centres being provided and that is because there has been a weaponisation of people coming into the country seeking asylum by hate and extremism. Now there is appeasement by the Government of the far right, which is emboldening them across the country. While it may be young men at first, this will extend out to families. This is ethnonationalism. Let us call it what it is. If you are not white, Catholic and settled, you are not allowed to live in this country. This is the first crack that is within it.

At the Hope and Courage Collective, we are doing extensive research on how to talk to people about this. We use a race and class-inclusive narrative that includes everyone in our community. How do we speak to the real issues that are happening to people on the ground? The far right is distracting us right now and immigration is coming up in the polls when it should be housing, healthcare and the cost of living. We have seen this happening across Europe whether it is in Poland, Hungary or Italy. It is a complete distraction and nobody wins except hate and extremism, so we need to bring it back.

Deputy Ó Ríordáin was asking about what political parties need to do. They need to get out and campaign on housing. They need to campaign on the cost of living and speak to people on the ground about what is happening. I am not saying we do not talk about immigration but we tell our story of it and we do not let the far right, hate and extremism tell their story. We need to pull it back to what people are really facing because if we do not, nobody is going to win - none of the political parties, our democratic system and definitely not communities on the ground.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am going to take follow-up comments, if anyone wants to come in again. I will start with Deputy Ó Ríordáin and go on in the same order as the first round.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chair. I have to go out soon. I thank Ms McDonald for answering the question on the response of political parties and what they have to do. I want to flesh out this ignore-versus-tackle dynamic more. Taking what Mr. Malone said, it feels to me after his presentation that we are just waiting for somebody to be killed.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Yes, absolutely, that is it.

Mr. Mark Malone:

Yes. We have been saying quite openly to anybody who will listen for the last two years that the direction of travel is going some way to someone getting harmed or hurt. It does not have to be inevitable, and I think part of the work is trying to ensure you do not get into a blind panic. When we look at the experiences of-----

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When we look at the UK and we see two MPs being killed in the last ten years, one might say, "Well, that is the UK". However, it is not that far away. We have to take this with the utmost seriousness.

I want to touch on two other things. One is the hate crime or hate speech legislation, and where the witnesses' views are on that. Also, there is a lot of money to be made in this right-wing or far-right stuff. There are about 30 million Americans who listen to shock jock conservative radio. There is no surprise, with Fox News being on the air for such a length of time, that this sort of narrative would result in the mess that is in America at the moment. You have the onset of GB News in the UK, which is a platform for pretty anti-migrant stuff. I have to say - and the Chair may pull me up on this - we have Gript Media here in Ireland, which seems to have taken an editorial decision to heavily focus on immigration, and I am being kind there with regard to what it does. Now it has a pass here to Leinster House. There is money to be made from this stuff. How do we challenge that?

Mr. Mark Malone:

Not only is there money to be made, there is money funnelled. I am not going to name any particular media operations but I think it is better-----

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Well they believe in free speech. The wonderful thing about these organisations is that they believe in free speech, so maybe we can say what we like about them, as the Chair squirms in his seat.

Mr. Mark Malone:

We believe in free speech. Free speech is important. It really is important. Amplification is a different thing, and the right to be amplified by some of the largest companies in the world is a different thing. Being able to pay to do that is a different thing.

With regard to the money to be made, it is very clear that there are individuals who have money to be made. That is kind of difficult to challenge, or to understand the individual flows to particular influencers. It creates a dynamic where they have to keep churning out content to earn a living and to make money viably. I share the Deputy's concern, much more generally, around the sort of media infrastructures involving individual citizen journalists. Individual citizen journalists come and go. I think the raising of temperature around the very open hostility towards elected representatives right through to-----

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Judiciary.

Mr. Mark Malone:

-----people in the Roma community, to migrants on the street and homeless people, where people very openly walk up with video cameras-----

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The trans community.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

Healthcare staff.

Mr. Mark Malone:

Healthcare staff and library workers. There is an issue, I think, for the Garda to be asked about to what extent does somebody recording intimidating someone breach a criminal Act? That is not for us to solve but I think it is a question. We have seen people doing this multiple times. There is a general background temperature. We have also seen an increase in the use of the term "grooming", this labelling and accusation of paedophilia, which is deliberately about dehumanising and setting somebody up for violence. That is what it is about. That is why it is used.

There is what we talked about earlier on, stochastic terrorism. What we are seeing is an increase in the probability of something violent happening, whether an act or a more generalised rise in temperature. Every single one of the advocacy groups we work with speaks about a rise in temperature for them and the people they work with. Similarly, they all talk about a falling faith in An Garda Síochána's ability to protect them, in terms of being able to respond. We do not think this is going to be solved through policing at all. It is not. The amplification is a really big thing. We will keep hammering the recommender system, which is really important. Speaking to the Deputy's point, yes, there is a rise in temperature. It has stopped being a surprise to any of us that there are arson attacks. That would have been a weird sentence five years ago.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before the next member comes in, Mr. Malone makes a very interesting point about there being a right to freedom of expression but no guaranteed right to freedom of amplification. That is a really interesting point. Another point I will add to that is if my freedom of expression is being impaired by another person asserting a very hostile direct narrative, usually online, then that does not actually respect the freedom of expression of the first speaker.

These things are relative and I do not believe it is absolute in the sense that you can say anything, anywhere to any person, particularly not in the manner and tone in which it is directed. That itself is interfering with freedom of expression. Sometimes certain actors push too far and beyond the limits of what is envisaged. That is worth noting.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When it comes to social media, I have to get my kids to do some of the work. In respect of a solution, there are two lines I would like to tease out a little. In her opening statement, Ms McDonald said, "We need to prevent the amplification of hateful, dangerous and violent content." She also said, "Turning off the recommender system by default would reduce the amplification of content, thus reducing harm." I have a couple of questions in that regard. What is a "recommender system"? Does it exist across all platforms or does it only apply to one? Is it turned off by the individual user or by the social media company? Will our guests tell me how to do that, if I can?

Ms Niamh McDonald:

I thank the Deputy. The recommender system is automatically switched on by default. I will go back a couple of steps. Ireland is now going to be the hub of the European Digital Services Act. We are the hub of that because we have the headquarters of all the social media companies, as I said, less than 2 km down the road. That is under the remit of the media committee. As I said, recommender systems are turned on by default. That system identifies all your sensitive data. It knows if you are a man, your age, where you live, your political preferences and all that kind of stuff. Social media companies can use that data, which are covered under the general data protection regulation, GDPR, legislation, to direct particular salacious and violent disinformation content to land into your feed. We are talking about the amplification of that information. The recommender system is turned on by default. The way I describe it is that a user is brought into a river of hate. People are in that river of hate because they are constantly in that algorithm. If you are looking at advertisements or whatever else, you can become stuck, in that the same advertisements come on. What we are saying is that the river of hate lands into people's feeds. A lot of the time, people are searching for it and the harm is already done. Social media companies are currently saying they will take it down once it is reported. As the Deputy rightly said, that stuff is never taken down and when posts containing disinformation are put up, the harm is already done. We are asking for the recommender system to be turned off by default, which means we can shut down the dam and the river is not coming in.

We now have the new media regulator, Coimisiún na Meán. Ms Niamh Hodnett, who oversees social media, has proposed in her first proposal that the recommender system is turned off by default. It is the first time internationally this has happened. We in Ireland have a massive opportunity to take the global lead on the regulation of social media platforms in a way that has never happened before. Up to now, those platforms have escaped regulation internationally.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry to cut across Ms McDonald but can that be done in individual jurisdictions or does it happen across Europe or across the world? Can we in Ireland say we are going to do this?

Mr. Mark Malone:

Ireland can say it is going to do this. If we did, it would probably be sought to be given effect on a European-wide basis under the Digital Services Act. We must look at how the dance of regulation has happened. When Facebook set up originally, it spent ten years stating it was opposed to regulation. Increasingly, as the harm was coming out, it stated that we should have regulation at the level of nation states and set it up for everybody to do, which was never going to work. There was never common agreement and regulators were always running behind. The Digital Services Act was one of the first pieces of legislation at a European level to try to put some shape on that in the context.

In terms of the specifics and the question as to whether individuals are able to turn off the recommendation system, the answer is that no, they cannot. What Ms McDonald was talking about is that a part of the recommender system involves processing sensitive data about a person, which is a GDPR issue. Social media companies are doing that at a mass scale, which is a big GDPR issue. In recent months, committee members will probably have probably noticed they have to tick new boxes to keep using the services of those companies. That is about them trying to get in front of the imposition of the Digital Services Act but also-----

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Most people, myself included, just tick those boxes to keep going.

Mr. Mark Malone:

For those of us who have the platforms already, we are probably gone. It is like a tanker ship and this stuff is going in a particular direction. It is about new users and building in best practice for those coming after us, including our kids. The recommender system is one part of it. We focus on hate, reactionary politics and white supremacism. The recommender system, however, contributes to all the other things, including harmful body self-image and any of the other kinds of harms, including the addictive nature of the platforms in and of themselves, because of their persistent desire to be able to sell to advertisers and their need to keep their eyes on the prize regardless of the harm being caused. Thinking about the recommender systems as a starting point to take back control in that regard is useful. It would dampen white supremacy and the sort of narratives of that movement. We need to challenge and tackle rage models and instead put in place demand models that are based on context, accuracy and truthfulness. Why not include models that involve kindness and care, as we have talked about? If we have a code that rewards nastiness that goes viral, we cannot be surprised that nasty stuff starts to happen.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

It begins to happen in the real world.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On a procedural matter for the committee to discuss, the fact that GDPR is engaged with respect to that recommender algorithm gives the committee a hook and allows it to become seised of the issue because the GDPR comes under our remit. That is a point we might pick up again when we are offline. That might allow us to further investigate some of these issues.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On policing, our guests are probably aware that representatives of the Garda will be coming before the committee. I will ask about the policing of the arson attacks that are happening. Our guests may not know the answer to my question, which is fair enough. We have heard through the media that the Garda is stating no one person is organising all of this, which is fair enough as these incidents have been scattered all over the country. These hatemongers go to an area and spout hate and someone in that area then picks it up and decides to act on it. Somebody different will be doing that in Cork, Donegal and Kildare, but those hate merchants are the cause and drivers of it. We will ask the Garda about this but from our guests' knowledge, is there legal responsibility? Could the Garda target those hatemongers as the cause of these incidents rather than running around and looking for 50 individual arsonists, which is not going to be a solution to the problem? Those five or six people who are fuelling this should be targeted. That may be an unfair question to ask our guests because they may not be sure.

Mr. Mark Malone:

The short answer is that we are not sure. Is there a connection with people spending three or four years demonising migrants, whipping up fear about accommodation centres generally and certain places specifically? At the risk of repeating myself, we talked earlier about a handful of people turning up in an area and a place going up in flames. Where those people turn up, a place goes up in flames. There is a statistical correlation, which is different to a legal case.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They are not the ones actually lighting the fires.

Mr. Mark Malone:

They are not. To be clear, we are not here to accuse anyone of any particular arson attack. It is also quite clear from what has been said already by the Garda that there has been a wide range of the types of arson. Some cases have seen what looks like quite professional fire-setting and in other cases, people have been throwing in coal and turf. There is something to what has been said about this not being a uniform and co-ordinated pattern but there is a direct relationship between the whipping up of fear and the identification of specific locations and those places going on fire.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

We need to ask about the policing. What is the operation when those kinds of things are together? There is disinformation online in respect of accommodation centres. There may be particular extremists in areas at particular points of time and then a place goes up in flames. Is there an operation? We have not seen any interventions to prevent that. We do not know of any. That is not to say there have been none. The mystery to us is what is the operation around this. The response is uneven across the country because there is not a uniform approach or a uniform understanding of the dynamics of the far right. There are requirements of our structures in politics, the police and institutionally.

It needs to be caught up on extraordinarily quickly to understand how there is a playbook that the far right uses. We see it as three legs of a stool. They build up those emotions of disgust and replenish those emotions constantly. There is framing and messaging, including them talking about how Ireland is full or military-aged men. They give a simple, clear message. The third is mobilisation.

We were before the children and integration committee this time last year. We see a significant difference in the intensity and militancy of the protests. The numbers are slightly down but now they are using blockades to create that tension and to create what we saw in Roscrea. What is the role of the police within that? As my colleague, Mr. Malone, said earlier, when women and children are being brought into those places, is there a child-centred approach? What happened in Roscrea was not a child-centred approach. In other areas where children are due to come into centres, especially in Cork, the supervisors of staff who will support them, from the HSE, council and other areas, are afraid to send them in because of the hatred and extremism encamped outside. They will have to run this gauntlet every day. What does that mean for the health and safety of the workers?

There is a significant attack on minority communities in Ireland. It is also affecting our structures, workplaces, politics and democracy. That is not fully understood.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think that is good enough to finish on and concludes the time. I thank both witnesses and their organisation for being here. I commend the work they do.

Ms Niamh McDonald:

I thank the Cathaoirleach for inviting us in.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to members that we publish all the opening statements on the committee website. Is that agreed? Agreed.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses to the committee. The purpose of our engagement this evening relates to the arson attacks. We heard from the Hope and Courage Collective a few minutes ago. The witnesses are probably aware that the collective is a group that does advocacy in this area. It disseminates information and combats some narratives. We now turn our examination to engagement with representatives from An Garda Síochána. I welcome Dr. Shawna Coxon, deputy commissioner, and Ms Angela Willis, assistant commissioner. They are both familiar with the committee. I think we met Dr. Coxon at Templemore. I thank her for hosting us that day. Ms Willis was with us to address recent matters, including the Dublin riots. I thank her for coming before us again to address this important topic.

The witnesses will be familiar with the system but I will recap about how we operate. I will invite them, on behalf of their organisation, to make a brief opening statement. When they have done that, we will go around the committee, with six minutes per member to ask questions of the witnesses. It is a six-minute block, including both the witnesses' answers and members' questions, then we move on to the next member, so everyone gets a fair crack of the whip.

I call Dr. Coxon to deliver the opening statement on behalf of An Garda Síochána. She is very welcome.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

I thank the committee for the invitation to meet with it this evening. Arson is a very serious crime. Not only can it destroy public or private property but there is a significant danger of loss of life. For this reason, arson carries a penalty, following conviction on indictment, of up to life imprisonment. As such, An Garda Síochána takes every arson or attempted arson attack seriously. This has been the case with the arson attacks on international protection accommodation services, IPAS, centres, property rumoured to become IPAS centres or property housing refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine. In each incident, a senior investigation officer is appointed, an investigation team of detectives is formed, and an incident room is created. Technical examinations are undertaken and evidence is gathered.

As would be standard practice when similar crimes occur in different parts of the country, there is national, regional and local co-ordination between investigative teams. At a national level, the special detective unit, SDU, which is responsible for the investigation of threats to national security, is examining all of these incidents, along with national intelligence, to determine if there is any commonality in modus operandi or individuals or both. At the moment, there is nothing to suggest there is an overarching conspiracy involved in these attacks but we will continue to keep an open mind on this based on the evidence.

By their nature, arson attacks are difficult to investigate as evidence can often literally be burned to cinders.

At times, particularly if a property is in an isolated area, there is no CCTV footage.

The extent and complexity of these investigations is illustrated by our ongoing investigation into the arson attack on a property at Rosscahill, County Galway. This has seen an ongoing technical examination of a number of mobile phones, 330 investigative tasks being conducted and 250 statements taken. Despite these challenges, to date we have made a number of arrests for arson attacks or for criminal damage on IPAS or rumoured IPAS locations. This includes five being people arrested in respect of the investigation into criminal damage by fire and public order incidents on Sandwith Street on 12 May 2023 and a file is currently with the Director of Public Prosecutions. Two people have been arrested by gardaí investigating alleged criminal damage to a residential building in Killarney on 1 January 2024 and charged before the District Court in Kerry. At this location, a can of accelerant was found on the property. Three people were arrested by gardaí investigating criminal damage by fire to a building in Irishtown on 31 December 2023 and a file is being prepared for the DPP. A person was arrested and charged relating to criminal damage and burglary at a property in Ballybrack in August 2023. A file is currently being prepared for the DPP relating to an arson attack at the same property a day after the criminal damage and burglary. In several other instances, investigative files have been sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions for decision or are due to be submitted shortly. Criminal investigations are also ongoing into a large number of different potential criminal incidents including activities at public gatherings; potential harassment at public facilities, including libraries; and online incitement.

It should also be stated that not all incidents that are initially publically reported to be arson attacks turn out to be. For example, a commercial property in Dublin that was widely reported to have been subject to an arson attack during the serious public order incident in November 2023 was not subject to arson, but to criminal damage, and that is under investigation. We have also seen a significant amount of misinformation and disinformation circulating in relation to properties that are rumoured to become IPAS centres. An Garda Síochána is liaising with IPAS at local and national level around this issue. In most cases, those rumours turn out not to be true. Several properties have been targeted that were not planned to be IPAS centres at all. We informed local protestors and communities of this but this did not dissuade some people from continuing their protests. This meant that Garda resources that could have been deployed in preventing and tackling local crime were diverted to patrolling around these locations. Even more concerning, are the incidents of misinformation and disinformation that have directly caused safety concerns for local people. For instance, a leaflet was circulated in a local area by a so-called community group that had a photo of a house that it claimed was going to become an IPAS centre. This property was actually a private residence with a family living in it. We liaised with the family and provided them with security advice.

An Garda Síochána once again urges local communities or individuals who want clarity on what is happening in their local area to talk to local gardaí, public representatives or civil society representatives, rather than listen to rumour. The vast majority of protests at these locations have been peaceful, but not all have. Just last week in Celbridge, for instance, gardaí were verbally abused and had fireworks aimed at them. This is now the subject of a criminal investigation. During 2023, 45 arrests were made by An Garda Síochána relating to potential illegal activity at anti-immigration protests in the Dublin area, alone. To date in 2024, 11 arrests have been made in the Dublin metropolitan region relating to potential illegal activity at anti-immigration protests. Our extensive investigation into the serious public disorder incidents in Dublin city centre on 23 November 2023 continues. To date, we have arrested 37 individuals for offences such as arson, violent disorder and theft. We are currently reviewing more than 20,000 hours of footage from 140 different CCTV feeds and we expect to make further arrests. Our investigation into those who allegedly incited such shocking and disgraceful criminal action via social media also continues. I take this opportunity to say that the victims of the terrible knife attack and their families remain in our thoughts.

To conclude, this country has been fortunate so far that we have not suffered a death or deaths as a result of these arson attacks. We remain determined to bring the perpetrators of these highly dangerous and violent criminal acts to justice. An Garda Síochána considers any suggestion of a threat to use violence and-or perpetration of violence or intimidation in any general sense or against individuals, organisations or property, as a matter of serious concern that will be investigated. An Garda Síochána continues to appeal to people who may have information on any criminal activity, including arson attacks, to contact their local Garda station or the Garda confidential line on 1800 666 111.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the deputy commissioner, Dr. Coxon. I think I met her in Tullamore previously.

In her opening statement she said "At the moment, there is nothing to suggest there is an overarching conspiracy involved in these attacks". That is probably right and fair enough. All these incidents have happened in different locations. However, there is a common theme, in that they are inspired by such events as community action that is driven by right-wing activists coming into an area and identifying a property as being used by IPAS. What policing responsibility can be used to identify those activists? They are not carrying out the arson attacks but they are inciting hatred, or whatever legislation could be used. They are a common theme across the board. Is that being looked at as part of the investigations and procedures that are taking place? If not, why not? I will allow the witnesses to answer before I continue.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

It is absolutely being looked at. As I said in the statement, there is co-ordination of the investigations across the country but there is also an intelligence gathering process in respect of all investigations, some of which is proactive regarding these groups and what they do. It is one thing to have a right-wing sentiment. It is another to take action. Investigations into incidents that have taken places and intelligence gathering around those potentially involved in these cases continues.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I note that Dr. Coxon mentioned at a national level, the special detective unit, which I assume is a body used to investigate such crime as organised crime and subversive crime, so a lot of secrecy surrounds it. We do not actually know if investigations are taking place of the individuals. Certain individuals are inspiring all these crimes. When will we see some action on that? I understand that people have been arrested and charged with some of the arson attacks but there are people who are orchestrating the whole thing. They are not actually lighting the match, but they are encouraging everyone else to do so. When will we see some resolution of that?

I am aware of one case where someone was distributing racist literature and literature that incited hatred. It was reported to An Garda Síochána and there has not been any response. Dr. Coxon said it is important that people report stuff to An Garda Síochána. That was reported in May last year - perhaps even the year before, but it is certainly well over a year - and there has not been any response from An Garda Síochána. What is the process involved in that?

To what extent can someone obtrusively record you, in your face? Is that a breach or a potential criminal offence? What action can An Garda Síochána take in respect of that?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

I will go through the first two questions. The Deputy asked about resolution in respect of cases that involve incitement.

The threshold for criminal charges in such cases is very high. As I stated in my opening statement, we are investigating cases relating to incitement. It is a very challenging threshold to reach. In addition, the cases that involve arson and criminal damage but do not involve incitement are challenging as a consequence of the evidence involved. These things take time. We have made arrests and more arrests will be forthcoming. To get into specific cases is problematic, however, and we cannot do so. With respect to incitement and the challenges in that regard, it is a high threshold and the evidence is difficult to obtain. Even the investigative actions we are undertaking are challenging with respect to phone seizures and going through that kind of data, including online data, where the data is stored and all that. It is important to state that we are investigating these cases, however. They are not being left aside.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If a person circulates leaflets that contain clear incitement to hatred against individuals, do those leaflets constitute evidence of incitement?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

It depends. If the Deputy wishes to discuss the matter with me outside the meeting, I am happy to speak to him on any specific case. If a person brought forward information, he or she should have received information back in terms of what is happening, generally speaking.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know that, but in this-----

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

I appreciate the Deputy telling me about the case. I am happy to take that information away and look into it. It depends on what is on the leaflet and what has been done with it. As regards the Deputy's point on whether something should have been done, the person should, at least, know where that is at. I am happy to look into the matter.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses to the meeting. Dr. Coxon stated that an investigation officer is appointed to every incident. She said there does not seem to be evidence of an overarching conspiracy between a number of individuals to whom she referred. Is that the case? There seems to be an ideological connection between a number of individuals in this context.

Is it routine for phones to be seized in an investigation and for what suspects, who may be based in rural areas, are looking at online to be monitored in order to discover their motives and what may be inspiring them to go down this line? We heard earlier from the Hope and Courage Collective that the social media platforms reduced the staff they had monitoring these types of activities. Has there been an increase as a result of those people being made redundant in late 2022? Most of the redundancies were from the trust, safety and integrity teams. Has there been an increase since then? What level of communication does An Garda Síochána have with the social media platforms? The Hope and Courage Collective stated that TikTok is quite good at engaging, but some of the other platforms are not. What is the experience of the Garda in that regard?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

As regards the seizing of phones, it goes back to the Deputy's initial statement relating to the idea of an ideological conspiracy. We follow the evidence where it goes. Do people have a set mindset or are there certain things in these cases that are similar? Yes, we all know that to be the case. We are keeping our minds open, however, and looking at where the evidence takes us. The seizure of any kind of evidence is decided on a case-by-case basis in terms of the evidence available.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Has the Garda noticed an increase in this type of activity? Might that be related to the redundancies in the online monitoring and trust, safety and integrity teams?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

I will pass that question to Ms Willis.

Ms Angela Willis:

One measure relating to an increase in behaviours associated with anti-migration and anti-immigration sentiment is the number of protests there have been. In 2022, slightly more than 300 protests were recorded in the DMR alone. By 2023, that figure had increased by more than 100%, to 617 protests. That is an indication of an increase in anti-migration sentiments. As regards the online piece, one of the greatest challenges for us is the disinformation that is circulating online. As the Deputy stated, in the context of incitement people are being misled by information that is being circulated freely online. We engage with the companies involved but there are challenges for us. In the first instance, we need to serve a preservation order for the footage on the company. An associated legal process to obtain that footage must then be followed in order to use it as evidence in criminal proceedings. Ultimately, it is for the DPP to determine whether the evidence meets the criminal threshold and there is an opportunity to initiate a prosecution. That co-operation is there. The initial piece is we notify the platform that we have an interest in the footage and ask it to retain the footage for us, but then we have to come behind that with a legal framework, including a warrant and a mutual legal assistance-----

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Have all the platforms been co-operative? Have some of them been unco-operative?

Ms Angela Willis:

To be fair, they are co-operative, but the process of obtaining the evidence for presentation to the DPP is complex and can be lengthy.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Dr. Coxon stated that Garda resources which could have been deployed in preventing and tackling local crime had to be diverted to patrolling locations. This goes back to the pace of recruitment into An Garda Síochána. I refer to the difficulty, which we all recognise, of the cost of living in Dublin. I know the age threshold has been raised to allow for recruitment of an older cohort, but is it realistic to ask people who might have young families to live in Dublin on €300 a week? Is that likely? Should there be a hybrid model or a second Garda College in another part of the State? Given the pace of retirements and resignations, it seems there is a difficulty in getting boots on the ground to deal with this issue on the streets?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

The pace of recruitment has increased in recent years. Covid was a very difficult period because the pipeline stopped. There has been lots of discussion externally and internally regarding what that has meant for us. The numbers continue to increase and we are excited to see where we land this year in terms of numbers. We are open to all ideas. Procuring any kind of facility in Dublin is expensive and challenging, but we have looked at many different models to see how we can attract people. We know the cost of living in Dublin is a significant challenge for gardaí.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

All members were very taken with the presentation by the Hope and Courage Collective earlier. As regards the direction of travel internationally, we have seen in other jurisdictions what happens when far-right racist activism and that type of activity goes only in one direction and people get hurt and killed. I have been in political life for 20 years, but now I have to be worried about my address and family members. When I walk out of Leinster House, I assume there could be somebody waiting with a camera phone that is going to be placed in my face. Although it is not necessarily a weekly occurrence, very strong security barriers are regularly placed around Leinster House. One sees colleagues from all the various parties being confronted with a camera phone and having things being shouted at them. Every time I post on social media, on any topic whatsoever, I am called every name under the sun. The vast majority of that stuff is racist material. As I stated earlier, two Members of Parliament in the UK have been murdered in the past ten years. The direction of travel is serious. I am a public representative, but library workers, gardaí and those officiating or stewarding at any sort of protest have to deal with incidents that are in the same vein. Do the witnesses share my assumption that the direction of travel is going only one way?

I feel it is very hard not to describe 23 arson attacks over the course of five or six years as domestic terrorism. The level and threat of violence and temperatures are rising all the time. On the images we now see of roads being blocked, I get that gardaí cannot police every single situation in the same way, because each is different, but it sometimes seems a little odd that people are allowed to block roads or that there is a perception that they are allowed to do so. I am not saying these people are involved in arson but I cannot pretend I am comfortable with people being allowed to block roads or stand outside accommodation centres where people live and say they will burn the residents out. What do the witnesses say to those who feel these sorts of activities are under-policed or subject to inadequate surveillance? The perception is that if somebody of a different political persuasion decided to block a road, the gardaí would move him or her quickly. Does Dr. Coxon agree the temperature is rising? Is she satisfied that gardaí are adequately trained and have the knowledge, language and tools, mental and maybe physical, to deal with potential issues concerning libraries and schools? If people are convinced a certain amount of inappropriate material is being peddled in libraries, you can only imagine that they will make a jump to a primary school, thereby making it a flashpoint. Are we prepared for that? There are no barriers to what these people will do and there is no point at which they will stop. The suggestion that you cannot approach, with a camera phone, someone acting in a private capacity with his family is no longer accepted, and the family home is now regarded as a legitimate target.

Is the Garda adequately equipped to deal with the deepening of this as it becomes more poisonous? How does it deal with the accusation that anti-immigrant or anti-accommodation-centre protesters are being allowed to flout the law and therefore normalise themselves in the national consciousness?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

One of the tactics they use internationally is trying to bait police agencies into being part of footage that makes them look heavy-handed. We are very well aware of some of the tactics used abroad, and I would say it is no different here in that regard. This is an important conversation and I appreciate the Deputy bringing it up because there is a question of balance. Things are changing and we need to be mindful of the tactics people are using. We still have the right to protest peacefully, and that is the line that the protestors are walking us along. We must be sure we are the ones who decide when things are going too far. In that regard, there has been much training, and that training continues. I will let Ms Willis speak about what that looks like in Dublin specifically.

We know that protests move towards things like harassment in terms of how people are meant to feel. The challenge is that we want to engage on the basis of a continuum. You cannot just jump from saying there is a protest to pushing people along. People have the right to protest peacefully and we need to be mindful of where the line lies. The conversation is important because people have different perspectives.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could I interject, with Dr. Coxon’s permission?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

Sure.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Where somebody is blocking a road, does the Garda say that if it decides to unblock it, it could make things worse? Surely, nobody has the right to block a public road because a bus of people seeking international protection might be coming down it.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

There is case law regarding the right to block a road as part of a protest, so each situation has to be considered individually to see what that means. It means gardaí on the ground must continuously assess where things are at. It is easy to say after the event that people should have done X or Y or moved in sooner, and that is why this is an important conversation to have. Every situation will be different but I do believe gardaí are well trained in this regard. The situation is changing and the training continues. Our operational briefings continue and each situation has to be considered on its merits.

Ms Angela Willis:

On training, in 2022 we had 294 people trained in public order tactics in the Dublin region. We have now increased that to 619. We are increasing the number in line with the increased demand for the type of policing in question. Our public order policing style entails a graduated response. We operate having regard to everybody’s human rights. It is a very challenging environment. We often deal with conflicting or competing human rights that we have to uphold on all sides. The right to protest peacefully can extend to disruption and expressing views that are not popular. As the Deputy has said, there is international case law and we must be guided by that. We must tailor our response in accordance with the guidance here and abroad.

I take the Deputy’s point on blocking roads. We always make an assessment of the right thing to do at any given time. It can be very difficult for the members on the ground but they have been trained and have the equipment. We may not make an arrest at a particular event but that does not mean we will not make one afterwards. Last year, we arrested 54 people in the course of the protest activity in the Dublin region. Not all of them were arrested at the protest but many were arrested subsequently on the basis of criminal activity observed during the protest. We will never do something that will escalate it to the extent that we would cause risk to any innocent person at a protest. That is what can happen. If we come in too hard or heavy at a particular time, we end up with a riotous situation. We could never take that approach. There is always another opportunity to bring the people to justice.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am going to move on to the next slot. I will ask a few questions myself at this stage. If any members who have not already contributed want to do so, online or in person, this should get my attention.

I listened with interest to the points made on EU case law and the fact that there may be, in certain circumstances, the right to block a road. We have to be careful how we couch that because we would not want to be seen as giving a licence to anyone to do it. I realise that is not what is being done, but I understand the witnesses are saying the matter is complicated and that you have to proceed with caution in certain circumstances. I wish to put my remarks in that context, if it is not unfair to Dr. Coxon.

I abhor the activities we have witnessed and they should not be repeated. I am not comfortable seeing them happen.

There is a right to the inviolability of the dwelling. In Celbridge last week, international protection residents in a centre were prevented from accessing their home. They could not come home from work and go into the centre because there was a blockade and what has been described as a quite angry mob outside. There were people with dogs growling and there was harassment. There was a quite menacing atmosphere. The witnesses might not be fully versed on the incident, which I appreciate, but it has been suggested that it took a long time to have gardaí present on the ground. I believe there was a single Garda car. I have been told that, for 36 hours preceding the incident, there were conversations online and protests being fanned up in the vicinity. I would like to see a better, faster response if this happens again. It is happening all over the country. What occurred happened to be in my constituency but the same kind of activity is happening in many other places.

Let me move on to my first question. It concerns an issue we touched on with the Commissioner when he was here in the context of the Dublin riots and one I wish to touch on again in the context of this conversation on arson attacks. The Commissioner has often spoken about old-fashioned, intelligence-led policing. I support him in his efforts in this regard. He talked about using confidential informants, interception, telecommunications and the monitoring of online chat rooms, Telegram and WhatsApp channels and other modern social media. Members of this House are engaged in this regard informally in the course of their work. We are sometimes propelled into places we do not particularly want to be and end up seeing conversations of the kind in question playing out in front of us.

Members of the public often report to us these kinds of conversations. Is there a unit in An Garda Síochána monitoring these conversations online and proactively stepping in when, based on online chatter, it decides an incident may be about to break out in X area? Is that kind of monitoring taking place?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

I thank the Chair for clarifying the issue of blocking a road because I did not intend it as a blanket statement. Every situation has to be looked at separately and is assessed on a case-by-case basis. People absolutely have the right to access their home.

On monitoring online, I do not want to get into specific investigative units and tactics. The Chair has given me a suite of what he called old-fashioned policing and intelligence-gathering methodologies. I would say all those are relevant to An Garda Síochána.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not expect Dr. Coxon to go into operational issues. It is more whether she can reassure the committee that that is being done.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

Yes.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Very good. The next question is on the detection rate. It is a source of frustration to me, as Chair of this committee, that we have not seen more arrests, investigations and prosecutions. I know there is a sequence and people do not go straight to court. Obviously, the Garda has to investigate, detect, arrest, question and charge. There is a cycle and lead time involved. However, I have heard it said many times, perhaps not by the Garda, to be fair, and it may be commentary in the media, that it is difficult to investigate these crimes and one reason is that evidence is burned. I do not fully accept that. If we take insurance fraud, for example, it is not a new thing that buildings are burned for insurance claims. That has happened for centuries. I understand there is a school of forensic investigation whose members can go to the scene of a fire and identify the seat of the fire, whether it is electrical or chemical or has been caused by a chip pan, a cigarette or smoke. It could be a farm labourer throwing overalls covered in straw into a hot press in an old rusty cupboard, which then cause spontaneous combustion. These things happen but they are also capable of being investigated using forensic engineering techniques. I understand that in the 33 incidents around Ireland that we are discussing, it is not the case that there is nothing left but charred remains on the ground. The bulk of the building is often still intact. I do not want to trivialise or simplify the issue but it strikes me that there is a way to do this. Again, without getting into operational issues, are those kinds of techniques being employed in these cases? What are the challenges?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

When I hear people say these cases are difficult to investigate it leaves the impression that the investigation is minimal. It is quite the opposite. The investigation is comprehensive, both technical as well as more traditional. That is why I gave the example specifically of the case where there have been in excess of 200 interviews. Each and every one of these cases is being investigated comprehensively and fully, and that will continue to be the case. While a number of arrests have been made, as I pointed out in my statement, I am confident that more will be forthcoming. It is a matter of timing. That kind of forensic analysis and comprehensive investigation takes time but it is happening.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Good. The types of techniques I mentioned, involving identification of cause at the seat of the fire, as commonly used in the insurance industry and, I am sure, in police forces, are being employed. Is that correct?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

Yes. We have forensic teams that go in and do technical analysis.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Very good. We heard from the Hope and Courage Collective, and I have heard the same from my work on the ground, that there have been times when concerned members of the community who have put their hands up to warn of trouble or that something will kick off because an issue is festering somewhere have found it difficult to get through to a relevant person in the Garda. We speculated in the earlier session that an approach could be taken at headquarters or senior level. I appreciate there is a degree of sophistication as to how we monitor events that may be about to unfold but is there a protocol in place? Is that understood fully at every station level in the event that someone phones? Dr. Coxon mentioned a confidential helpline. It is useful to have that number but I have been told that people do not know what to do when they have contacted a local station. I am not saying this about any particular station in the country. I have heard from different places that the garda in charge was very busy or was dealing with other matters and did not have time to devote to the issue. I am not saying gardaí were dismissive but they may not have entertained it to the extent that the complainant had hoped. These concerned individuals could be a great asset to the Garda in terms of taking that feedback or concerns ahead of time and picking up some leads from them. Does that message need to be distributed throughout the organisation as a policy statement or working direction? How is it working at the moment?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

Given what is happening across the country, it is not a headquarters thing at all. It is quite the opposite. The reason I said in my opening statement that people should call their local Garda station is that we are finding that the best information is from local community members. People should contact their local station or community garda. Without getting into specific cases, we have had successful cases where we have been ahead of the situation and things have been pre-empted. I am sorry to hear the Chair has heard from people who have not that experience. If there is a case like that, I hope the Chair would let me know and we can look into it. That is very important. This is about more than how these cases get solved; we do not want them to occur at all. That contact with the local station and the community garda is critical. That relationship is pivotal across the country.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Garda representatives for attending. I will touch on the far-right tactics of baiting gardaí into a response and looking for a response. Sometimes when there is a perceived lack of response, that can lead to an escalation of some of the situations we have seen, most notably the Dublin riots and recent events in the Chair’s area in Celbridge where members of An Garda Síochána were verbally abused and fireworks were aimed at them. That is absolutely reprehensible and is not condoned. When members of the public perceive a lack of consequences for those actions, that can lead to an escalation of some of the problems we have seen.

James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry for interrupting, Deputy Ward. I have a commitment at 7 p.m. so Deputy Ó Ríordáin will take the Chair. We are scheduled to finish at 7 p.m. but we may go five or ten minutes over, with the agreement of witnesses and members. I thank the witnesses for coming in today.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will have to gather my thoughts now. I was on a roll.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You were talking about how St. Pat’s were going to get relegated.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is misinformation and a downright lie. To be serious again, the perceived lack of consequences for actions such as targeting gardaí with fireworks is just not on. That perception can lead to more of these situations and have a snowball effect. Has the Garda learned from this or changed and evolved its tactics for dealing with these more aggressive protests recently? I would not even use the word "protest" to describe these situations.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

I thank the Deputy for using the word "reprehensible" in relation to those who have attempted to, and at times have, injured gardaí which we have seen across the country. I will ask Deputy Commissioner Willis to speak on the Dublin experience in a moment because I know she shared with the committee the increase in training specifically in that area. When someone is not seen to be arrested in the moment it can look like the gardaí have done nothing but it is really important to realise that this could not be further from the truth. We often make arrests after the fact. Someone at the scene who has done something may think they have got away with it but that is not the case. It is important to know that they might leave the scene and be arrested around the corner. They could be arrested a week or a month later. These are not things we have let go.

On whether we have learned from our tactics, I will ask Deputy Commissioner Willis to speak about Dublin because so much has been done on that area specifically.

Ms Angela Willis:

A development we are very much looking forward to is the introduction of body-worn cameras. It will be an absolute game-changer for An Garda Síochána when they are introduced. Plans are advancing and I am glad to say they will be piloted in my area, Dublin city centre. That will change the behaviour of people who think it is okay to attack gardaí, throw fireworks at them or spit at them and to engage in reprehensible behaviour towards them or any member of the public.

We constantly review our tactics and our approach but we are bound by that graduated response. We cannot just come in at the top level until we have tried to engage, explain and encourage people to desist in their activity and then it comes to enforce. As the Deputy said, enforcement might not always happen at that particular moment because it could have the wrong effect of escalating the situation and causing harm to innocent bystanders.

To reiterate on body-worn cameras, we are the only people on the line at the moment who are not videoing proceedings. I think the body-worn cameras will really be a gamechanger for us. Obviously, appropriate technology to enable us to utilise that footage and material to evidentialise it in an efficient manner so that we are not spending hours and hours trawling through footage would be another important part of that progressive improvement in how we do our business.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I always find it very odd that it is not an offence. I feel it is a real invasion for somebody to go right up into a garda's face with a phone and incite a reaction from the garda. Is it not an offence to do that?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

No, the only thing I would say because it was brought up earlier with respect to the Deputy's question is that we have seen it with people in public life in different capacities. It could potentially fall under stalking legislation but the threshold is very high. Somebody having a camera and filming is something you see everywhere you go on the streets and there is no offence attached to it.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. I have one other point. I mentioned the arson attack when the last group of witnesses was in. It is really reprehensible when that happens. There was a recent arson attack in Crooksling, which is a place I know well. My grandmother passed away in the nursing home there. We have a lot of good memories and sad memories there. I know that a lot of people in the local community have the same kinds of memories of Crooksling. When I watched this play out from afar, I could nearly see the arson attack happen. I am not saying the people who were at the protest were the ones who carried out the arson attack. We would see the process and some of the misinformation and rumours that were going around and then we could see an arson attack. It just seems to be a pattern of behaviour. Is there anything gardaí can do to combat that pattern of behaviour to stop that happening? I know that is a very open question.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

It is comprehensive. It is not simple. A lot of these facilities have security on site. That is one piece and on-site security being upgraded has to be looked at. We certainly cannot be everywhere all of the time. This is why I go back to what I said earlier around the importance of community. As the Deputy said, if there are things that are known and we can see there is an escalating threat, we can treat it as such but we have to work together to be able to do so.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witness.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will have a second round of three minutes each if that is okay and if people are interested.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Just briefly, with regard to intelligence-led policing when it comes to policing the far right, what role do informers play in intelligence-led policing? Does the fact that something may come to light as a result of informers influence whether it would be an offence or be pursued? We have seen in this country a number of occasions, particularly in the North, that informers have been carrying out crimes with the blessing of the police force. In terms of intelligence-led policing, what impact would that have with regard to the far right? With regard to learning and understanding the operations of the far right, what training does the gardaí give its members about how the far right carries out its business?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

There are protections associated with confidential informants, but each one is looked at as well. It is not the case that a carte blanche is given and the informant is told, "Here you go, you've given confidential information." Certainly that is why I gave out the information about the confidential hotline. There are different ways in which people can give information anonymously. The Deputy is talking about a carded informant but it can happen at a lower level - somebody giving private information in a confidential way to the hotline, for example. Confidential informants are part of our intelligence picture. I will not get into the tactics in great detail here but confidential informants form part of it, yes.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would confidential informants or confidential intelligence assets be allowed to commit crimes to protect their confidential nature?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

It is not a blanket statement. You cannot hide behind a status to commit a crime. A crime is a crime and we will investigate any crime fully.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked about the training that takes place within the Garda on how the far right carries out its business. Is the manner in which it disseminates information to the community part of the training on how the far right operates?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

Yes, absolutely. It is something that continues to be disseminated because of those tactics. Even in terms of our operational briefs, it is part of what is given to members. We have had updated operational briefs for Dublin, for example, but they have been sent out across the country because people need to understand how the far right operates, what its tactics are and how we deal with them. It is part of how we deal with protests, particularly from them, as well as dealing with criminal offences.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One last question popped into my head while Dr. Coxon was speaking. She said that the incitement to hatred legislation was very difficult to prosecute. In what way? Is it the commitment it takes to build up evidence?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

The threshold is high. The Deputy asked about disseminating leaflets. Disseminating leaflets in and of itself is not a crime. It would really depend on the context of what is in the leaflets, how they are distributed and what that looks like. Within a democracy, people have the right to say things even when they are highly unpopular so there is a threshold to what level-----

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a difference between unpopular and wrong.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

There is a difference between unpopular and incitement. The threshold is high and it requires a great deal of evidence so that is the challenge.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So it is not, even if it is a lie.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

That depends.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What if there is a lie on a poster or on a leaflet?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

Does the Acting Chair mean disinformation?

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. There is a big difference between-----

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

It is like when were talking earlier about making blanket statements. It depends. If it is misinformation that reaches the threshold of incitement, it could be. It depends. It is now a low threshold where something that is a small lie-----

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For the sake of argument, if someone is distributing a leaflet around an area and online that is full of untruths and lies about immigrants and subsequently, a couple of weeks or months later, a place in that area mysteriously burns down, surely that leaflet plays into the incitement that was used to carry out that particular crime.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There would be a high threshold to reach to make a connection between those two things.

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

Yes. What the Deputy is talking about is the difference between the criminal threshold for incitement and what is wrong and what people need to be mindful of because it could be dangerous. In my opening statement I talked about misinformation leading to us having to work with a family whose home was potentially a target because of misinformation. That is very dangerous.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are people who put out that information about that home. Is that not a crime?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

It would depend on all of the circumstances and I will not get into specific cases. It could be. It may not be.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious of the time. Deputy Daly has just walked in so there is an opportunity for him to have a three-minute over and back if he wants to take it up.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have one other question on a slightly separate issue. Going back to the November riots, is there a current investigation into how the information about the wrong person was leaked to the media? Is that progressing? Does Dr. Coxon expect there to be a prosecution related to that?

Dr. Shawna Coxon:

I will turn this over to Assistant Commissioner Willis.

Ms Angela Willis:

I can confirm there was an investigation initiated into that. Again it is one of these types of investigations that we are dependent on external companies to provide us with the actual evidence that we can provide to the DPP. It is progressing but it will take some time. I hope we will be able to identify a suspect.

It is then up to the DPP to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to ground a prosecution.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose we publish the opening statements on the committee's website. Is that agreed? Agreed. On behalf of the committee, I thank the members of An Garda Síochána for taking part in our meeting today on this extremely important matter. I thank them for their evidence and their attendance.