Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

I wish to focus on several aspects of the Bill. It is to be generally welcomed because it consolidates previous legislation dating back to 1924. At a time when many feel overloaded with information, it is helpful that the legislative provisions can be simplified in this manner. A positive development is that the issue of human rights is built into the Bill in several places. A significant feature of section 7 is that the Garda Síochána will be statutorily obliged to have regard to the importance of upholding human rights in the performance of its functions. It is to be hoped that an awareness of this obligation will be incorporated into Garda training and that there will be opportunities on an ongoing basis to focus on that aspect. This obligation will add to the authority of the force.

We can only have confidence in our police service if it performs to the highest standards. It is not only in the public interest but in the interest of the Garda itself that this should be the case. The Bill represents a serious attempt to ensure such standards prevail. The proposed code of ethics provided for in section 16, which will be incorporated into the disciplinary framework, is critical. It grounds the conduct of the Garda within the terms of the European Convention on Human Rights which represents a good foundation stone for legislation on this matter.

The Garda human rights audit highlighted the perception of community members that insufficient resources were devoted to community policing and that community consultation was minimal. I support the provisions of section 32 for enhanced co-operation between the Garda and the local authorities through the establishment of joint policing committees. However, I have serious concerns that this measure may be inadequate in practice. The joint committees must be capable of producing a response. What is required is not another layer of analysis but rather a practical response.

The formal relationship between the Garda and local authorities is positive. As a member of a town council for 17 years, I was witness to some useful co-operation in this regard. It was clear people wanted to be reassured that local gardaí were aware of the issues and concerns in the community and to be confident they would focus on areas of heightened concern. However, it was difficult to deliver information to the public because gardaí were, understandably in some cases, reluctant to release information into the public domain. This information might relate to ongoing issues such as complaints about groups of youngsters frequenting a particular location, for example. If gardaí have devised a plan of action to counteract such problems, it is not desirable that it should be outlined in the local newspaper.

Satisfying public expectation in terms of information, therefore, was not always possible. Notwithstanding the difficulties I have outlined, there seemed to be a particularly conservative attitude to the provision of information on the part of the Garda. It would have been helpful if gardaí had been more forthcoming in this regard. In this context, we should bear in mind that section 45 of the Local Government Act 2001 provides that the public and media should normally be permitted to attend local authority meetings unless such access is not in the public interest. Does this provision have any bearing in respect of the joint committees and could difficulties arise in this regard?

The establishment of the joint committees will introduce an entire layer of additional bureaucracy at local government level, albeit some of it very productive, including the new county development boards, strategic policy committees and community and voluntary fora. It may take some time to see a result from these new strata of administration because, by their nature, they represent a focus on the long-term view. They also require a significant additional level of administration in terms of costs and staff resources. Such commitment of resources cannot be bypassed in respect of the functioning of the joint committees. There must be some transfer of funds to local authorities to enable the committees to work in practice.

There may be an expectation that the committees will represent merely a feeding of information to the Garda. However, such consultation may involve a dialogue in both directions.

For example, I chaired a county development board and noted that issues were raised by the Garda. Some of its proposals were resource-dependent. It is difficult to respond if there is not a transfer of funds to deal with the issues raised, including traffic-related issues. For example, a very good suggestion to reduce the time gardaí spend addressing traffic back-up, making reference to filter lanes into housing estates or off major roads, had resource implications. It had such implications for the Garda because the necessary infrastructure was not in place; thus it was investing time doing something that could have been done in a different way. Unexpected issues with resource implications may crop up in the context of the relationship between the local authorities and the Garda. These need to be dealt with.

I know from experience that members of the public raise issues associated with vandalism and anti-social behaviour. They do so right across the spectrum, irrespective of the community in which they live. Often they are reluctant to draw attention to problems in an area close to where they live because they are seriously concerned they will be intimidated if they are identified as having drawn attention to the problems. This is partly why such problems are under-reported. I have seen people being singled out for reporting anti-social behaviour. This makes difficult circumstances very much worse.

The relationship between the local authorities and the Garda could be of assistance regarding the closure of laneways and lighting up dark spaces, for example. Often assistance merely involves moving the problem on and, therefore, the cause is not dealt with. I know policing is part of the solution but it does not represent the total solution.

While canvassing for the local elections last year, I had time to listen to the electorate. Many raised concerns about anti-social behaviour and vandalism and linked the problem to the inadequacy of facilities. Over and over, they talked about the kind of place in which they wanted to live and in which they wanted their children to grow up. I felt their message was very hopeful but it will only remain hopeful if it is delivered upon. Policing is only one aspect of this matter. We must consider the others.

In the developing county of Kildare — the only county of which I have direct experience — there has been a population increase in the order of 50,000 in the past ten years. This substantial increase amounts to one third of the population. An increase in Garda resources has not matched population growth. There should be a relationship between population growth and the provision of facilities and services, including gardaí. When I refer to resources, I do not refer solely to personnel but also to physical infrastructure.

During almost every election campaign the electorate in Leixlip, the town in which I live, draws attention to the need for a Garda station in the town. It was promised during the term of the Government before last but has still not materialised. People become fairly cynical when promises are made at election time and not delivered on. There should be accelerated delivery of such basic facilities as a desk for people to work from and a place to which people can call to make their complaints and raise concerns. If such a premises only allowed for form filling, it would still represent a Garda presence and be important. For example, there is a Garda office in Leixlip that opens for two hours a day. I am focusing on Leixlip but the resource issue is prevalent throughout the constituency. I have no doubt that the message of the electorate is similar in all other developing areas.

Section 14 of the Bill establishes a basis in law for the resources of the Garda Síochána to be supplemented by providing for the appointment, by the Garda Commissioner, of persons as volunteer members of the force. I will be amazed if many volunteer. I have some concerns about this approach to policing. If one offers a service voluntarily, one can also withdraw it voluntarily; thus we may not have the continuity we need.

We all know gardaí do a difficult job and often put their lives at risk. Under section 14, we will be asking people to do the same in a voluntary capacity. I have serious concerns about the protection they will be offered. What protection will be offered to their families in the event of their receiving a serious injury, or worse?

Consider the level of training required and the specific reference to the need to have regard to human rights which will lead to this training being further developed. What level of training will the volunteers in the force receive? Will they be trained to the same standard as other members of the force? It is difficult to believe they will be trained to the same standard, given the time it takes to train an officer to such a standard.

I am concerned there will be disproportionate numbers of volunteers in certain areas and staffing issues in others. What impact will this have in the assignment of new gardaí? There could be considerable resistance to the initiative if it is regarded as too much part of the solution such that the professional full-time force will not comprise the dominant part of the organisation. What will be the practical impact of voluntary policing? I do not believe a significant number will volunteer.

The proposal for a Garda ombudsman represents an improvement. While it is important to have improvements, the proposal does not go far enough. We have a tendency in this country to go 50% of the way in respect of many measures. I would have preferred if this matter had been dealt with fully rather than in an incremental way. I am concerned that the proposal does not represent the whole solution.

The Morris tribunal must be a deep source of concern to members of the Garda. It is probably of most concern to the most honourable members of the force which comprise the dominant group. In recent years I have had an opportunity to interact with members of the Garda on behalf of constituents. I have the highest praise for some of the work they do which often goes unnoticed. Often gardaí have interacted positively with others at flashpoints. They have found imaginative ways to deal with them.

I understand time is required to train extra gardaí but the delay in deploying the extra 2,000 gardaí is such that the casualty of the service has been in the area of community policing. This is a positive development in which interventions can be imaginative. In that regard, the quicker those 2,000 gardaí are available, the better. A Garda presence gives people a great deal of comfort.

Policing is not the only solution to anti-social behaviour. A societal issue must also be addressed, as must a resourcing issue in terms of how we construct our communities. It is not just a question of building more and more houses, one must provide the necessary facilities and services. If one examines the studies carried out in prisons, one will note a direct relationship between anti-social behaviour and prisoners not being members of sports clubs or other community organisations. These issues must be dealt with. This will require investment in communities. While the Bill does not cover this specifically, it will produce the results we seek only if investment is made in remedying the cause of problems as well as in policing.

See this speech in context