Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)

Tá áthas orm labhairt sa díospóireacht seo ag tacú le tairiscint na gComhaltaí Príobháideacha ó Pháirtí an Lucht Oibre ag impí ar an Rialtas coimisiún neamhspleách a bhunú chun féachaint ar obair na ngardaí in Éirinn. Molaim an rún freisin go dtugfaí tuairimí ón phobal, comhlachtaí poiblí agus cumainn nach cumainn Stáit iad san áireamh agus, bunaithe air sin, moltaí a chur ar fáil maidir le struchtúr na ngardaí agus an tslí a ndéanann siad a gcuid oibre.

I want to focus on a particular issue which comes within the ambit of the commission proposed by the Labour Party here over the past two nights that has particular significance for the Oireachtas, namely the right of a citizen to reach out to a public representative to report wrongdoing with a view to having the particular issue dealt with in the public interest. Surely a citizen should have the right to pass on such information to the public representative of his or her choice without putting himself or herself at risk.

There is a fundamental principle involved here with regard to the role of the public representative in society. If a citizen passes on information that exposes unlawful or corrupt behaviour, he or she should be able to do so in the full certainty that the Member to whom he or she entrusted the information could not be compelled by the courts to disclose the source of that information. Take, for example, a non-national nursing assistant who works in a private nursing home on a work permit who is conscience driven to expose mistreatment or neglect of elderly patients to the authorities. Such a person would in most cases feel very much at risk in making such disclosures. However, if such a person could go to a Member and make these disclosures in the certainty that his or her identity would be protected by law, such disclosures would be made more frequently, to the benefit of the State. This is, perhaps, an extreme example, but obviously there are many other instances where whistleblowers should be protected and encouraged to pass on information to public representatives.

I raise this issue because a colleague of ours, a Member of the House, is before the Supreme Court because he feels honour bound not to reveal the source of information given to him confidentially which is relevant to the Morris tribunal. The irony is that if Deputy Howlin put the information he got in the public arena under parliamentary privilege when he got it, he could not be pursued through the courts to reveal his source. However, because he acted responsibly and went to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform with the information, he finds himself before the Supreme Court. I do not blame the then Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, for this. The blame lies with senior gardaí who demanded to know his source.

The question remains as to what confidence a whistleblower can have when confiding in Members other than the integrity of the Member. Members and public representatives generally are, by and large, close to their electorate. Much private and personal information is confided in them for reasons of advice and for taking action to right wrongs. This is a healthy aspect of our democracy and should not be weakened in any way. Deputy Howlin's dilemma underlines a potential hazard for all of us as Members. We need an urgent and effective remedy to it so this type of situation does not arise in future.

Massive corruption has been exposed in the Garda Síochána in Donegal. The legal system appears to be seeking to shoot the messenger, who acted from the best possible reasons in this case.

See this speech in context