Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)

This debate should not be about the ego of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell. The danger is that the overbearing arrogance of the Minister tends to submerge the issues. What are those issues? The Minister tends to question the motivation of Members on this side of the House, particularly of colleagues in the Labour Party, but he fails to accept the genuine view of Fine Gael, the Labour Party and virtually all Members of the House that we should have a police force that is reformed, has high morale, whose members have pride and confidence in their force and, above all, a force in which the public has pride and confidence. It is wrong of the Minister to question the motivation of those who put forward proposals which try to achieve that.

The Minister misrepresented the Labour Party in that he suggested it does not wish to see reform because it is putting forward a proposal for a policing commission, but nothing could be further from the truth. That is not in the Labour Party proposal. The Minister is making a serious mistake in not pausing and reflecting on the recommendations of the Morris tribunal and ensuring that the Garda Bill, when it passes, fully reflects the recommendations and advice of that tribunal. It is impossible for that to happen because the tribunal only produced its second report earlier this month but the Garda Síochána Bill is expected to be passed by the House, with all the amendments rushed through, within the next 72 hours. That is not the way to do business. I have been long enough in the House to know that rushed legislation is bad legislation.

This evening the fax machine in my office started clattering at 4 o'clock and produced pages of proposed new draft amendments from the Minister, some of which had not even been finalised by the parliamentary draftsman. These are the amendments we are supposed to discuss and put through Report Stage tomorrow morning. That is not the proper way to pass legislation. It certainly is not the way to deal with one of the great institutions of the State. We owe more to the members of the Garda Síochána, the vast majority of whom have served this country well through the years, than to treat them like this and to rush on to the Statute Book legislation containing amendments which were not given proper consideration or debate and on which there was no time to take proper advice.

The Minister should stall the Garda Bill and allow reasonable time for a proper review. Later this year the Bill can be passed after proper reflection and full debate. Instead, the Minister says: "I must show leadership", "I am determined" and "I will accept my responsibilities". It is an ego trip as far as the Minister is concerned. He spoke about the political calendar. It is not the Opposition that is concluding the proceedings of the House at the end of next week, the Government is doing so. The Minister cannot tell me that because the political calendar, designed by the Government, brings this House to a conclusion at the end of next week, we do not have time to debate properly the Garda Síochána Bill. He is wrong.

Let us discuss his proposals. He says he will appoint a chairman for the three-person Garda ombudsman committee, rather than have a single ombudsman. That is a total fudge. It makes no progress towards achieving the type of institution in which the gardaí and, more importantly, members of the public will have full confidence. There is no reason that the Minister cannot provide an ombudsman of the same type as exists in Northern Ireland. His current proposal of a three-person committee, even with a chairman, does not meet the overwhelming public demand for a single Nuala O'Loan type figure to investigate wrongdoing and deal with complaints.

It raises the suspicion that the Minister wants to have somebody on the committee who will represent the views of the Department and that, directly or indirectly, there will be an inside track into the committee to keep an eye on what it is doing. That is not what we want and it is not what the members of the Garda Síochána, with whom I have discussed this, want. They want it to be done properly, openly and independently. They do not want to be involved in investigating any of these complaints. They want everything to be above board, just as the Opposition and public do.

The strength of a single independent ombudsman was demonstrated again this week by Kevin Murphy, the former State Ombudsman, when he criticised the failure to allocate political responsibility for the nursing homes scandal. This was a strong statement by a strong independent person who is beholden to no Department, Minister or party. That is what is expected from Kevin Murphy and that is what he gave. It is what we get from Nuala O'Loan. Why can we not have the same with a Garda ombudsman? The revelations arising from the second report of the Morris tribunal demand that a single powerful and independent ombudsman be appointed. A three-person body, even with a chairman, simply remains a fudge.

It has long been Fine Gael policy to establish a commission on the Garda Síochána to examine the efficiency and accountability of the force. Events in Donegal and the recommendations of the second report of the Morris tribunal further highlight the need for this. The Minister misrepresented our colleagues in the Labour Party. I am not suggesting that reform can wait until we have the report of an independent commission. The Labour Party is suggesting, on the other hand, that we have a proper reform approach and a proper Garda Bill. At the same time, however, there is no reason that we should not have a policing commission.

The Government might claim that the Garda Síochána Bill will make a policing commission redundant, but I take the opposite view. The Garda Bill is the direct result of closed discussions within the policing loop of the Department, Garda headquarters and those associated with the Garda Síochána. The Garda Bill will provide improvements but it does not go far enough. In the meantime, the Government will not even accept the Morris report's recommendation that the Garda Bill be reviewed by the Oireachtas. The closest we came to a discussion of the report was a cursory series of statements last Friday, which clearly was not what Mr. Justice Morris had in mind. Last minute amendments which have not received proper consideration are not the answer.

As the Government insists on pushing through the Garda Bill in its present form, with only some amendments, the need for the independent commission proposed by the Labour Party is all the more urgent. Nobody but the most prejudiced observer would deny the enormous benefits resulting from the Patton commission on policing in Northern Ireland. Although the Republic has experienced different problems in policing, the problems are nevertheless significant. There must be a root and branch investigation, including an open and fair-minded examination of Mr. Justice Morris's recommendations. The judge has identified many of the most significant problems in the Garda but these issues must be dealt with in transparency and with accountability. Furthermore, the general public must have total confidence in the structure, role and powers of the complaints procedure. I doubt the measures the Minister proposes will command that level of confidence.

Neither the Government nor Mr. Justice Morris has touched on certain points, such as what we expect from members of the Garda Síochána. We expect efficiency and effectiveness, particularly when confronted with the reality of crime or anti-social behaviour. We also expect courtesy and civility, and want to ensure the Garda Síochána exercises the exceptional powers we give it with tact and diplomacy.

That raises the question of training members of the Garda Síochána. Does it include proper training in that kind of approach? It may not be ideal to segregate trainee gardaí from other young men and women so that they become part of the institutional structure of the Garda Síochána, without the possibility of the social interchange available in college. It may be time to take a more integrated approach to training gardaí. This is only one issue we should consider in the context of an independent commission on policing.

The Labour Party motion, which I support, covers these issues in broad detail. I also support some of the points in the Minister's amendment but he is seriously wrong when he urges us to recognise the comprehensiveness of the reform measures in the Garda Síochána Bill. He ignores Mr. Justice Morris's recommendation in that regard.

He is also wrong to ask us to welcome the provisions of the Bill to establish a Garda Síochána ombudsman commission. I doubt there is any support, even within the Garda Síochána, for the commission he proposes. He asks the House to acknowledge his commitment to propose amendments to strengthen the Bill. Is he serious? Report and Final Stages of the Bill start tomorrow morning and he asks us to welcome amendments which are not yet fully drafted. The Minister's ego has gone to his head if he expects us to support that kind of approach.

He has not dealt with the issue of accountability to Parliament and the Fine Gael proposal of a full-scale powerful security committee. He has not even looked at the sort of issues considered in other countries. It is salutary for us to examine what has happened elsewhere. We are not unique. There have been similar problems in other countries.

I looked at the report of the Royal Commission into the New South Wales Police Service. The report of that commission reveals the extent to which this Government has failed the Garda Síochána by ignoring many important issues that should be examined before the Minister says he has done the job and introduced legislation that will clear up the problem once and for all. The royal commission considered leadership in the police force in New South Wales, its lack of direction and openness, and the inadequate focus of the staff. The report also covers the process of reform and the professionalism, or lack of it, within the force; systems, procedures and police culture; how the police force is involved in different types of law enforcement, including areas in which it was specifically involved and some in which it should not be involved; and the organisational and managerial structure of the police service. There has been no open debate in this House or elsewhere on the organisational structure of the Garda Síochána.

The commission also considered suggestions for a revised chain of command, the question of deployment, and police and crime rates. It examined the various agencies within the force, another topic we have not discussed. These include the special branch, crime agencies, and others within the New South Wales police force. It considered employment, recruitment, entry and retirement ages, the question of non-executive officers, and issues such as the terms in contracts of employment and lateral entry. These are examples of the preliminary issues examined for that report.

It also looked at management, leadership training, ethics and integrity, responsibility for education and training, and discussed promotions and transfers and reform of those procedures. The commission considered what is done for police injured on duty, civilian support, administrative services, salaries and allowances, and secondary employment. I have merely touched on the index to identify some of the issues the royal commission considered.

I cannot accept the Minister telling us that because he has issued the second report of the Morris tribunal, and will rush through a few amendments to the Garda Síochána Bill, he has completed the job of reforming the Garda Síochána. He must accept this is not the right way to complete this job. It is important to ensure the Garda Síochána is as good as it can be. We owe that to the 12,000 members of the force, most of whom serve the country well, and all of whom will do so when the Bill is implemented.

I wish to have confidence in the Bill and be satisfied that the types of structures established will achieve the kind of effective organisation we all want. The general public must also have full and complete confidence in that Bill. The revelations from Donegal have badly dented that confidence. The Minister does not understand the depth of public concern arising from that loss of confidence.

While the Garda Síochána Bill and a policing commission are linked, the commission does not have to delay the completion of the Bill. The timetable should be that the final Stages of the Bill are postponed until after the recess when its terms would be completely examined. Deputy Kenny made a sensible proposal in that regard, namely, that there be an outside examination of the Bill to ensure it incorporates all the recommendations of the Morris report.

If the Minister does this my party will offer a constructive input in the autumn to ensure a revised Bill is put in place to achieve our aims. I suppose I should warn him that I am very much against the complaints committee about which he is talking, which he calls an ombudsman commission but which is no such thing. I feel very strongly about that. I am also very much against section 75, which precludes a member of the Garda Síochána from complaining. However, those are issues we can talk through, and I hope, in the course of time, we can convince the Minister, particularly if there is an outside view on it.

Having completed that timetable and got the Garda Bill in place before the end of this year, we will still need the commission on policing, since so many aspects have not been considered in the context of the debate on the Garda Bill. We also want to see how the changes made in the Garda Bill bed down and whether the objectives outlined have been achieved by it. In many ways, the ideal timing would be to have the commission on policing sitting when the Garda Bill has been put in place so that it can assess its effectiveness. Then, as suggested by the Labour Party, there would be the possibility, after the 18-month period mentioned, to come back, make a full report, and bring the whole operation one stage further. The Garda Síochána itself would be completely happy with that, and above all, it would have the full confidence of the general public. That is the way forward, and I commend it to the Government.

See this speech in context