Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

Gabhaim buíochas as an deis labhairt ar an cheist seo agus as an breis ama a tugadh dom. Bhuail mé leis an iar Bhreitheamh Kevin Haugh cúpla uair maidir leis an Garda Ombudsman Commission. Bhí cuma air go raibh sé dírithe ar an phost sin agus is trua go bhfuil sé imithe ar shlí na fírinne.

Mar sin féin, caithfidh mé dul i gcoinne an rúin seo. Ní locht ar bith é seo ar charachtar nó ar an obair atá déanta ar Dermot Gallagher thar na blianta. Bhuail mé leis cúpla uair san am sin, go háirithe nuair a bhí plá á dhéanamh againn ar Chomhaontú Aoine an Chéasta agus ina dhiaidh sin. Duine lách é a chur chuig an obair a bhí os a chomhair agus a d'oibrigh go maith linn. Ach mar sin féin, is cóir cur i gcoinne an cinnidh seo de bharr an bhealach ar roghnaíodh é. Nílim i gcoinne an duine, ach i gcoinne an phróisis roghnaithe. Ní raibh sé ceart ná cóir, go háirithe nuair a cuirtear san áireamh cé chomh tábhachtach agus atá an post seo. Táimidne sa Stát seo ag iarraidh a chur i gcion ar an phobal go bhfuil neamhspleáchas i gceist leis an gcoimisiún agus go seasann sé ann féin agus gur é an duine is fearr don phost a bheadh roghnaithe.

The primary purpose of the Garda Ombudsman Commission and the position of its chair are vital. I remember arguing with a previous Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, former Deputy Michael McDowell, the need for a single ombudsman rather than a commission. Obviously the position of chair involves a particular job of work. Its purpose may be to investigate individual complaints against individual members of the Garda Síochána but there is a further objective, given the failure over the years of the Garda Complaints Board which had lost the confidence of the public. Members of this House should look at the contributions in the debate when the Garda Ombudsman Commission was being established.

Its ultimate objective is to restore public confidence in the Garda Síochána. That is part of its role, not its sole duty. For the Ombudsman Commission to achieve that, the public must have confidence in that very body. It must be, and be seen to be, totally independent. For that reason, I question whether a very recently retired, high-level Civil Servant could ever command the optimum confidence of the public in a role as an independent scrutiniser of other servants of the State. As I stated earlier, this is not to offer opposition to the person in question but to ask if there should be a cooling off period between appointments, whether of a judge, a retired judge or a person in a position such as Mr. Gallagher held. If there were such a cooling off period perhaps we would be in a better position today.

Concerning the process of selection followed recently, I concur with the statement by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, whose director reacted to the announcement by stating, "It is very disappointing that the Government has chosen to fill this post with a retired public servant without the open and transparent recruitment process which should accompany any appointment to a body charged with the independent scrutiny of the conduct of agents of the State."

In the Six Counties appointments such as this must involve the transparent, open and merit-based recruitment process and be subject to prior scrutiny by a panel that is independent of the relevant Department. Last week I asked the Minister by way of a parliamentary question whether he agreed that similar principles should underpin key appointment processes in this State. The Minister in his reply flatly rejected my proposal and showed himself to be out of touch from prevailing public opinions and in denial as to the systems that give rise to them.

Whether fairly in some instances, or unfairly in others, the public associates many Government appointments with cronyism and jobs for the boys. Countless e-mails, letters and telephone calls to my office are testament to that. The source of this suspicion is systemic and must be addressed.

This appointment cannot be divorced from the wider context of economic recession. If the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission is to restore confidence in the Garda, the public must have confidence in it. The majority of people looking at this appointment, against their own background of loss of jobs and income cuts, will see it as the appointment of a high earner who on recently retiring from his position as a civil servant, received a fairly large sum and an annual pension of €120,000. He had also been given the job of chair of the governing body of UCD and is now being appointed as chairperson of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission with a nice salary. Even though he has indicated acceptance of a reduced level of remuneration of €90,000, this, on top of the other income, is a nice earner. In my own area, the early focus project in the Mater Dei primary school in Basin Lane, is surviving on less than that and is currently under threat. The slight reduction in remuneration does nothing, in my view, to restore confidence.

The scarcity of resources and performance to date of the ombudsman commission has not created public confidence in the body. It is to be hoped that as it moves forward this year, it will deliver what the public expects. People are still waiting to see the commission flexing its muscles properly. Suspicion about the appointment of the commission's members is something it cannot afford.

The Garda Inspectorate and the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission need to examine the case referred to in the House, namely, the Boylan case, which concerns a blatant and high profile informer who was allowed carry on his trade. The Garda Síochána Inspectorate, Kathleen O'Toole's office, should be asked to examine the practice of the non-prosecution of drug dealers or other criminals and using them as informers and allowing them to continue operating with impunity. This is the public perception. Far too often, cases have collapsed on a technicality and the public view is that these are created technicalities to allow informers to carry on their trade, given that these people are caught in the act, caught red-handed and yet the next day they are back on the streets carrying on the same trade in full public view.

There is an aspect of public confidence which needs to be addressed and restored. Those caught red-handed should be brought before the courts and convicted and not escape on technicalities. We need to address the ineffectiveness of the prosecuting gardaí to ensure they have the resources and the wherewithal to properly prepare cases. We need to address the high-profile cases such as the Boylan case and other scandals. It is a big job of work for the Garda ombudsman commission. I have confidence in the appointment of Mr. Gallagher because he has the ability to do the job, but I will oppose the motion on the basis of the selection procedure involved.

See this speech in context