Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

This amendment is one for which we all argued on Committee Stage. It proposes that there should be a one-person Garda ombudsman in line with the excellent model that operates in Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, however, the Minister decided we were all out of line and that his proposal was the correct model. Since then, the Minister has moved forward to some degree. The provision in the Bill as it currently stands for an ombudsman commission represents a move from his original idea of a Garda inspectorate.

His new amendments represent a more considerable move forward and are remarkably progressive compared with where the Minister originally stood on this issue. These amendments propose that the three-person commission will include a nominated chairperson whose role will be akin to that of a general secretary. He or she will perform an administrative role in allocating the work of the office and determining how it will be done.

All these aspects are part and parcel of the Minister's new amendments. It is clear that the chairman is an entirely different type of animal to what was envisaged in the existing provision for a three-person ombudsman commission with no distinction between any of the members. We must welcome that the Minister has made some progress in the direction to which we have been pointing for a long time.

In the context of these changes, will the Minister clarify whether the definition or interpretation is accurate? The Bill defines the ombudsman commission as the Garda Síochána ombudsman commission established under section 57. That section refers to the establishment of the ombudsman commission and section 58 refers to the appointment of the persons who make up the commission. In many ways, the new role of chairman is more important than that of the commission given the extensive rights and duties which the Minister's new amendments propose. Is it sufficient to retain that particular reference and interpretation of the ombudsman commission without also including a definition or interpretation of the chairman? It is important to include that definition and I ask the Minister to respond on this point.

It will fall on deaf ears to ask the Minister to emulate the simple model that was devised by Senator Maurice Hayes in 1995. He developed the idea of a police ombudsman for Northern Ireland as a means of oversight of and investigation into complaints about the RUC. This idea was taken on board enthusiastically by both the Independent Commission on Policing, chaired by Chris Patten, in 1999 and, subsequently, by the new Policy Service of Northern Ireland.

I met the Chief Constable of the PSNI, Hugh Orde, when he visited this State and heard him speak robustly and enthusiastically in defence of the model in operation in Northern Ireland. He explained that while there were many initial concerns and suspicions among members of the Northern Ireland police force, they would now accept no other system of overview.

PSNI members believe a strong and independent individual at the head of the independent investigative machinery is the only way forward. There have been disagreements from time to time but there is also a general acceptance that it is essential to have a person who is independent, able to stand up in a singular capacity to defend the office and the work that is being done, will explain that work to the public, will make the decisions as to how complaints are to be investigated and also will proactively determine when investigations should take place where no complaint has been made. This latter aspect is an important one.

The Labour Party has tabled an amendment which would allow us to leave open the possibility of a one-person commission or a multi-person commission. This means the legislation would not have to be amended if the present model which the Minister favours does not work out to the best advantage. If this amendment is taken on board, a future Minister could determine that an ombudsman commission could consist of one person rather then three. The Minister seems to be moving in that direction because he has created a chairman who is not just primus inter pares but is effectively the ombudsman because of the powers he or she will enjoy.

The Minister should go one step further by providing for the scope that will allow the office to develop from a commission to a one-person ombudsman. He does not have to do it within the legislation but he can include the option. This means that, depending on how matters work out and whether the body the Minister proposes to establish operates as effectively as he envisages, he or his successors can tweak and vary it and can revert to the original model devised by Senator Maurice Hayes and which is operated in Northern Ireland.

Is the Minister prepared to accept the modest amendment proposed by the Labour Party? This amendment comes later in the sequence and it will fall if we do not reach it unless its concept is taken on board by the Minister in an amendment of his own. Such an amendment should expand the concept of the ombudsman commission to allow it to be either a single person or a triumvirate as envisaged.

See this speech in context