Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)

I am inclined to agree with the amendments. We had this debate on Committee Stage. I recollect that the Minister did not have a huge problem with the principle of what is contained in the amendment. His objection was more from a time point of view, that the Garda Ombudsman Commission is not sufficiently experienced or has not had sufficient time to experience a review or extension of its powers. I would like to hear more of a principled argument rather than an argument on the matter of time.

If we were dealing with the matter of time then the inclusion of a review mechanism in the legislation that would allow for us in the House to revisit the legislation at some early date might make the Minister's argument more compelling. However, the only reference to a review of the operation of the legislation is by consultation between the President of the High Court and the Minister under section 12, which presumably would be in private and would not have any bearing on any activities that might take place in the House other than by motion on the part of the Minister. It seems the Minister has reserved unto himself any powers of review and perhaps this makes the extension at this stage of powers under the legislation to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission all the more important.

On Committee Stage I drew the Minister's attention to the fact that the adjoining jurisdiction of Northern Ireland had such powers vested in its ombudsman. Perhaps in retrospect I did not pick the best example because the Minister stated - I accept what he said - that the policing situation is such in Northern Ireland that it is somewhat different to here and has been for reasons on which there is no need for us to dwell for any extended period of time.

Best practice in England and Wales could be considered on this side of the water in a way that perhaps the situation in Northern Ireland might not. Under section 4(1) of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (Investigatory Powers) Order 2004, officers of the Independent Police Complaints Commission are prescribed as being capable of authorising surveillance for the purposes of the legislation. We can draw upon best international practice. It is important to note that the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission is already engaged in some respect in this proposed legislation given the complaints procedure and the role that we are vesting in the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission under section 11. It will, therefore, be involved in some respects as a receiving party for a complaint.

However, while it may be that the commission has an involvement, when it wishes to engage in the surveillance that may be necessary having regard to the fact it is charged with the responsibility of dealing with serious matters involving the death and serious injury of citizens and the embarking by it of an appropriate investigation into these matters, it could well be that we will hamper the commission's work by not according appropriate power to it as we are according not only to the Garda but to members of the Defence Forces and the Revenue Commissioners. Greater power is being given to the Revenue Commissioners than to a body designated as a complaints office under the legislation.

See this speech in context