Dáil debates

Thursday, 14 April 2005

Garda Síochána Bill 2004 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed).

 

3:00 pm

Photo of Damien EnglishDamien English (Meath, Fine Gael)

It is always more fun when the Minister is here; we are able to have much more of a debate on such issues.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak on the Bill. I wish to focus on some relevant issues at national and local level which I hope will add to the Bill.

The Bill is badly needed. Its main objectives are to reform the law relating to the administration and management of the Garda Síochána and to set up the ombudsman commission and the Garda inspectorate. All three objectives are needed to bring clarity and inspire more public confidence in the force. I receive very few complaints about gardaí, as I am sure do most Deputies. The force is a big organisation with up to 14,000 members and there are bound to be a few bad eggs. They are found in every organisation, be it politics, the church, or the GAA. We must accept that. In general, gardaí do an outstanding job and the force has much to be proud of. We owe its members a great deal and everybody is aware of that.

It is important for us to put laws in place which will help restore the utmost faith in the Garda Síochána to give people confidence in its members and to give gardaí, including new people entering the force, confidence to stand tall and proud. They do a tremendous job and we should back them up. This legislation will go a long way to bring clarity and to restore confidence in the force. It will make it easy for a person with a complaint to have it dealt with rather than depending on Deputies to ask questions, being afraid to make a complaint or having a doubt about doing so. The procedure for dealing with a complaint will be clear. While I receive few complaints about gardaí it is important that there is a proper structure in place in which everyone has confidence.

The existing structure for dealing with Garda complaints is not old, it was set up in the 1980s and it has worked quite well. This structure is being put in place to affirm people's faith in the system. The ombudsman commission will be a positive measure in that respect.

Since the foundation of the State the Garda Síochána has played a pivotal role in safeguarding the public in the ever developing society in which we live. In recent years the geographic and demographic make-up of Ireland has changed considerably. This Bill must provide the framework for appropriate changes within the Garda Síochána. By adequately reforming the law relating to the administration and management of the Garda Síochána, this House can allow the force to meet the changing needs of society. To do so we must look to society and bring the experiences gained here to the gardaí and elsewhere. The Minister and the rest of us are guilty of quoting figures, comparing figures for various years. We must realise that life in 2005 is very different from life in 1996, 1997, 1981 and 1982. We have come a long way. There is no point saying there are more gardaí now than there were in those years. The circumstances are different. We need more gardaí now. The Minister's party and the other Government party pointed out that we needed an additional 2,000 gardaí three years ago. I presume we need even more than that now. Everyone is aware that society has changed. We need to adapt the force in terms of numbers and how its members do their job if we are to properly serve and protect citizens and ensure they have confidence in the system. There is no point in comparing current figures with figures for previous years and I will not do that.

This Bill paves the way for community policing and for local authorities to become involved in that. I and others dealt with gardaí when organising the St. Patrick's Day parade and festival in Navan, with which the Minister might not be familiar. Like many other towns on that day last year, problems arose in Navan due to the abuse of alcohol by young people. That was partly the fault of the organisers because we probably had the wrong band playing in the wrong place which drew the wrong crowd and other things happened which contributed to the problems that arose. Many of the problems arose from a lack of communication between the festival committee, the Garda and other groups organising events.

We decided this year to make sure that we got it right and the gardaí had the same approach. We met three months in advance with the local superintendent, Sergeant Gerry Smith, Sergeant Seán Farrell, Sergeant Pat Gannon and a few others. I commend the excellent job they did. We met and discussed what would happen on the day and the week of the festival. There were three or four meetings following that and everyone was very clear about what had to be done, where problems might arise and how we could solve them without using brute force or muscle power but by simply having a presence and doing things right. We followed the advice of the gardaí and they listened to advice we gave them.

On the day four or five times more gardaí than last year were present, which made a major difference. The whole event went off without trouble. I believe three arrests were made, which is expected during a normal weekend. This was down to co-operation and everybody recognising they had a job to do. In the heat of that activity the Garda foiled a robbery which otherwise might not have been caught. A few gentlemen decided to come from Dublin to rob the local bookie and were caught in the act as a result of the greater Garda presence. This shows it can help in running an event smoothly, protecting a town and avoiding trouble on the streets while at the same time solving other crimes. This does not necessarily need to involve gardaí. The proposed volunteer force could also get involved in running such events as well as protecting the area from crimes such as robbery.

Freeing up Garda resources to work on the front line is of vital importance and we need to recruit more civilian staff, for example, a psychologist or press officer, to take over from Garda officers who are qualified specifically to tackle crime. I do not see why the force needs a garda as its press officer. The political parties have press officers who were not politicians before becoming press officers. There are plans to redeploy 300 or 400 gardaí, who are tied up doing specific duties, to work on the streets. The sooner this happens the better. While the Bill may pave the way for such change it is not spelt out. It gives more power to the Commissioner to consider introducing more civilians. Having trained members of the force carry out tasks that members of the public could do makes little sense.

In general the State boasts of an excellent workforce who have received a first-rate education. It is now time to mobilise the people in assisting the Garda Síochána in its duties. I recently spoke to an Irish person who graduated with a master's degree in criminal psychology in the UK. She now works in the police support staff there having not been trained as a police officer. More than half if not two thirds of the police workforce in the UK is made up of support staff. While I understand they are still called policemen and policewomen they are not trained as police officers. This goes a long way towards freeing up the police to do the task for which they have been trained. It can be seen that considerably more scope exists for freeing up trained Garda personnel to tackle crime on the front line. The woman I mentioned, who is the same age as I am, could not get a job in the Garda Síochána despite her qualifications. She would have to train in Templemore, serve some years on the beat and work her way up. We are losing such people who could fit in at different levels of the Garda Síochána.

Even if we recruit such people, I understand they would need to complete an induction course. However, to expect someone of 33 with two children to leave a job and take a very low wage for up to two years is not sustainable. It is not a viable option for many people who would like to find a role in the Garda Síochána. We should find a way to make it possible for people to enter at different levels of the Garda or to move career into the force. While it is acceptable for students on leaving school to go to college for three or four years without being paid, this does not work later in life. Perhaps scope exists for some of the educational institutes to run a diploma or certificate course in preparation for joining the Garda. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform does not need to organise all the training and the Minister may have some ideas on the matter. I presume the Bill will open the door to such change.

While the new 35-year age limit for joining the Garda Síochána is a significant improvement it is still too low and could easily be set at 40 or 45. I know that to get value for having trained gardaí we want to get 20 or 30 years service from them. They could continue to work until 65 or even 70 and repay the State for their training. On the subject of training, how much retraining and continual training and assessment of gardaí is carried out? While some people might question the ability of some gardaí fresh out of training, 20 years later they might not be as active and might not have received scenario training etc. Other professions need to update their training and employees need regular retraining.

We need to recruit more civilians to carry out particular tasks in the force. Many clerical workers in the former health boards tell me they have no work to do and could be put to better use elsewhere. Without sacking anybody we could move people to different positions and get better use from them. While it might not be possible to get them to move immediately they could do so after completing a short course. This would free up gardaí to go and do the job they want to do and for which they have been trained, which is working among the people solving and preventing crime.

Section 29 provides that the Garda Commissioner shall have direct responsibility for the distribution and stationing of members of the Garda Síochána. This is probably the way it was, which might have been acceptable in the past. However, we need to debate the provision of funding for the development of new and existing Garda stations. I wrote to the Minister about the Garda station in Laytown, which is manned on a part-time basis. The population along the east coast has exploded and what once were small rural villages are now sprawling urban centres. Residents demand a full-time and more dedicated presence from the Garda in this area. Will the Commissioner be given the resources to properly police these areas? While Garda stations are being closed in some areas, will new ones be provided in areas of population growth? The infrastructure needs to be established to allow for the stationing of gardaí in such centres of growth before crime gets out of control there. Often we act too slowly and by the time we realise we need to appoint more gardaí to an area the damage has already been done. This could have been prevented by having gardaí in place from the start. While I understand we do not have an endless number of gardaí to move around, we need to consider taking some action in this regard.

When the Commissioner is deliberating as to where to station the gardaí the Minister might point out to him the following information on my county. In 1996, Navan had one garda for every 270 people, which was the same as it had been in 1981. We now have one garda for every 450 to 500 people. While I know people will say it is not necessary to have gardaí everywhere, people want to see a Garda presence and we need to realise we are short on personnel. The Louth-Meath division now has seven fewer sergeants. With the population increasing some criminal elements have moved from Dublin into the region. We should be reacting to this by having more criminal units. The counties of Meath and Louth have insufficient PULSE computers for the gardaí to do their job and they spend much time travelling to stations with a computer, which seems strange in this modern day and age.

Chapter 4 of the Bill addresses co-operation with local authorities and arrangements for obtaining the views of the public. Earlier I referred to our experience in Navan with the St. Patrick's festival. I fully support the concept of local authorities working with the Garda in committees and forums. The Bill suggests that the sergeant does not necessarily need to act on the outcome of such meetings. While we cannot expect these forums to tell a sergeant what to do, he or she should be strongly encouraged to act on the recommendations of those committees. The local authorities and voluntary groups involved in those committees will want to see results. There is no point in turning up every few months for a chat, shaking hands and going off again — that will not work. If we want community involvement it must deliver results and people must see action.

The Minister asked for comment on who should be involved in policing committees. Membership should not be confined to those involved in local authorities but should include members of community organisations. While making these arrangements will present a major problem, it is vital that membership is drawn from a broad spectrum. Given that members of local authorities, for example, can become conditioned and may miss the point, the policing committees and fora must have a broad membership mix.

Section 32 requires local authorities to take action when requested to do so by the Garda for the purposes of facilitating the force in patrolling a certain area, prevent and solve crime and so forth. Issues such as the provision of lighting and pedestrian walkways will need to be addressed to allow the Garda to act, react and move around. Certain Government policies, however, will prevent local authorities from taking the necessary action. Pedestrian walkways between adjacent estates, for example, are often the location of trouble and anti-social behaviour. These and certain corners or end rows in estates tend to become the local hang-out area. Planning rules requiring pedestrian access points, therefore, cause disputes between local authority members and planners.

As a local councillor, I argued, for example, that certain access points would cause major trouble because to push people from other parts of a town through an estate is to ask for trouble, given that people from different estates do not often mix well. Planners are able to throw back the argument that no changes can be made because an alleyway or access point is stipulated under planning rules. There is scope for change in this regard to enable community gardaí to identify minor problems and request local authorities and community policing committees to take action.

Community policing is a brilliant initiative which does not enjoy the prestige it deserves. In addition, community gardaí do not always receive the respect or opportunities they deserve. My local area has several community gardaí who do excellent work in solving and preventing crimes. For example, they are involved with young people through a range of organisations. At a recent committee meeting, members were informed that a senior garda once described community policing is an "unaffordable luxury". This form of policing is not unaffordable when one takes a long-term perspective because it will solve and prevent problems. Furthermore, it is a necessity, not a luxury. We need gardaí who are involved in all aspects of community life.

The debate about community policing tends to focus on towns. Community gardaí are also required in rural areas and villages to mix with people and prevent crime among all groups, not only young people. For example, a community garda should step in and warn those whom he or she suspects may be drink driving or driving a car with technical faults that he or she will be caught. The pat on the shoulder and warning to cop oneself on used to be common crime deterrents and should be one of the features of community policing.

The proposal to introduce a volunteer reserve force reflects a similar move in the United Kingdom. It is an excellent idea which should proceed. The Minister's target is to recruit a force numbering 1,400. He will have to consider whether background checks will be required because retired members of other organisations may wish to volunteer. While the establishment of a new force will be a considerable task, I hope a pool of expertise will become available and the volunteers will be free to do a range of duties. I am not convinced they should have the same level of responsibility as members of the Garda Síochána. It could create problems if volunteers with less training and pay were allowed to perform the same role as fully trained, full-time gardaí. The new force offers a way forward in that it will add to current resources and provide more people on the ground to do policing work.

Many Garda duties could be carried out by other bodies. I support the decision to privatise the operation of speed cameras, for instance, but I do not understand the reason that, under law, the number of people permitted to direct or control traffic is so restrictive. Will the Minister consider allowing staff of local authorities to be trained to direct traffic? Many of our towns suffering from infrastructural deficits could make good use of local authority personnel, rather than gardaí, during heavy traffic periods, for example, at rush hour or in the event of breakdowns or oil spills. Traffic wardens could be trained for this purpose. A little imagination is required. Will the Minister confirm that the Bill leaves a door open for alternatives to be explored and, where necessary, implemented?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.