Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

While I am glad to have an opportunity to speak in this debate, I have a problem in that Members should have dealt separately with each Morris report, as well as the other reports. The House should have taken the necessary time to deal with the reports, rather than doing so in a squashed-up fashion over a few hours. The reports are sufficiently important for a full debate or a full examination. I hope this will not be the end of the matter.

In the past, the Minister has shown his willingness to take on board some of Mr. Justice Morris's observations. I hope, in the near future, Members will see more of the recommendations made by Mr. Justice Morris and others in respect of the Garda Síochána, being taken on board. When we read the reports laid before us, and the media reports of further grave abuses, and we objectively consider how much has changed in terms of accountability, discipline and training, one matter is certain, that both the Garda Síochána and the Minister have not been responding quickly enough to the concerns raised, not only by Mr. Justice Morris but over many decades, about abuse of power by members of the Garda Síochána. If the legacy of the exposed corruption and the abuse were to be investigated thoroughly, independently and honestly, it could ultimately restore confidence in the Garda and provide a solid foundation for future progress. I commend Mr. Justice Morris and Mr. Justice Barr for their work to date and I hope other investigations will be as thorough as theirs.

Many gardaí are dedicated to their job and joined the police force to ensure the safety of society. They have been rightly appalled by the revelations, but they could not have been blind to what has been going on in their Garda stations and divisions. Many more within the Garda Síochána joined just to do a job which is fair enough, but some of them have been involved in cutting corners. Others are corrupt. A combination of those who are corrupt and those who are cutting corners to get results is what has brought the Garda Síochána to the point where its reputation is in tatters and it has lost the confidence of the public. In some people's eyes the Garda Síochána is akin to a corrupt police force in a banana republic or the Ceaucescu regime. One of the clearest proposals from the Morris report was to ensure that those who are appalled or who are aware of wrongdoing within the Garda Síochána have the opportunity to expose it without fear of being sidelined, bullied or harassed. That is one of the key recommendations so that in future no Garda can turn around and say he or she could not say anything or that he or she could not uphold the law and deal with this. Mr. Justice Morris's recommendation was that a body be set up within Garda headquarters to which on a confidential basis difficulties and possible irregularities could be reported. He was being pleasant in his wording. The ICCL had it down as the drawing up of a whistleblower's charter and something along that line needs to be done quickly to ensure the restoration of confidence in the Garda Síochána is begun.

Mr. Justice Morris was clear when reporting his findings that corruption and abuse is not just a problem of a few bad apples in Donegal — the fact that we are dealing with a number of reports shows that is so. Rather, he said, it arises from systematic failures throughout the force and throughout the State. Logically, those shown to be have been corrupt and abusive in Donegal learnt the tricks of their self-interested and abusive trade in previous postings among other corrupt officers, and after operating in Donegal they went on to practise elsewhere. There is a need for a trawl of the cases of these officers who have been found wanting, abusive and corrupt. This needs to be looked at again because not everybody who was wrongfully convicted or abused is as strong as the McBreartys and accepted their lot. Some people have managed to have the strength to continually fight to expose what was done to them. Not everybody is as strong as them and often there has been continued harassment and intimidation of those who have had the gall to raise questions about the Garda Síochána and its members.

Given that all top ranking positions are dependent on the Minister's favour, it is no wonder the Garda Síochána has refused to recognise and rectify the scale of abuse. The Minister has not dealt with that aspect of a trawl and the fact that many of those who have been exposed by the Morris report have been promoted within the Garda Síochána. We all have been dismayed at the absence of successful criminal prosecutions thus far on foot of the Morris reports, not to mention the lack of clear disciplinary messages being sent in the form of dismissal.

How does the Garda Síochána restore confidence after the Morris report? We need to look, for instance, at yesterday's revelations that a senior garda at Letterkenny Garda station who was responsible for the investigation into Mr. Richie Barron's death in 1996 was appointed to the Garda Reserve interview board. That beggars belief. The garda in question is former superintendent John Fitzgerald. Mr. Justice Morris found that "the investigation was corrupt in its leadership" and that a number of named officers, Fitzgerald included, "share in various degrees the burden of fault for this matter", and yet he was appointed to pass on his tricks to a voluntary group, the Garda Reserve. A question that needs to be answered is whether we are to continue in future the damage former superintendent Fitzgerald has caused.

There are many more recent incidents adding to this legacy of corruption, cover-up and abuse, including suspicious deaths in custody, the planting and disappearance of evidence and cases of failure to act on information. All of this requires independent investigation to ensure all the gardaí involved are held to account and from which real disciplinary and criminal proceedings must follow. I will give a few examples, some of which have been covered in magazines and newspapers in recent months and some of which go back further and have not had the same type of coverage they deserved.

Brian Rossiter's case has been rehearsed here on a number of occasions. A 14 year old child, he was arrested and taken into custody in Clonmel. The following morning he was found unconscious. He died three days later having never regained consciousness. Two significant witnesses claim to have witnessed serious Garda violence against Brian.

Deputy McDowell was the Minister at the time, yet there were no inquiries into the death of the child. Under much duress the Minister finally assented to establish an inquiry into the death of Brian for whom the Garda had responsibility almost two years after an inquiry was first rightly demanded of him. However, the promised consultation on the terms of reference for the inquiry did not occur. Its terms of reference precluded the examination of the failure of the Minister or the Garda authority to properly investigate the death initially. The inquiry was established under the Dublin Police Act 1924 rather than the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004. The inquiry has no powers to compel witnesses, including the gardaí on duty the night young Brian was killed, to give evidence. Where is the accountability in this?

Terence Wheelock, aged 21, died as a result of injuries sustained in Garda custody in June 2005. The gardaí allege he hung himself in his cell. This is strongly contested by the family. Suspiciously, the cell in which he died was immediately renovated and the gardaí refused to allow the family's solicitor access to Terence's clothes. The family is still awaiting justice in this case. Where is the accountability in this?

See this speech in context