Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I would like to deal briefly with last weeks "Prime Time" programme and the Minister's allegation that I was stopped and cautioned by gardaí last year for the use of a mobile phone while driving. While I could not recall the incident at that time, I have since confirmed that a Garda car pulled up beside me while I was stopped at traffic lights at the Five Lamps in Dublin. I was not stopped or cautioned, and none of the gardaí got out of their vehicle. As others have noted, the politically motivated and personal attack on me represents a serious abuse of the Minister's power and privilege. I can confirm that I have written to the Standards in Public Office Commission and Data Protection Commissioner requesting them to investigate the matter.

Throughout our campaign for an independent public inquiry on the termination of fixed charge notices, we have only spoken of the issue of discretion in regard to fixed charge notices on the PULSE system. The Minister has consistently tried to misrepresent our position on discretion. I will make things clear for him once again. We have never stated that there should be no discretion in cases where, for example, someone is speeding to hospital with a sick child, rather, I have repeatedly said that this use of discretion must be subject to proper monitoring and oversight in order to ensure it is not open to abuse. At the current time, as the Minister knows, there is no legislation to provide for this discretionary power. This was confirmed by the Attorney General in 2006, who stated that if gardaí exercise this discretion it must be recorded. This recommendation was clearly not followed as the internal review found that the lack of paper a trail was one of the two main problems identified. In addition, the foremost authority on traffic legislation, Robert Pierse, has gone further and said under the current legislation the exercise of this discretion by gardaí is unlawful. Despite the Minister's claims, I am not opposed to discretion, as long as it is lawful and subject to a system of transparency, monitoring, oversight, appeal and a formal application process which can be evidenced by a paper trail. Furthermore, it should be a well publicised system which is accessible to all members of society, not just those who can count a senior garda among their circles of friends.

The Minister continues to misrepresent our position in order to minimise and rubbish the serious issues at hand, which have impacted on road safety, revenue for the State and, ultimately, the application of the rule of law in this State and whether it can be considered to be uniform, consistent and fairly applied. Since I and three other Deputies raised these issues, the Minister has tried to ridicule us, skew the debate and misrepresent our position, and has shown a fundamental lack of respect for us as elected representatives and for the meaningful operation and functioning of the Legislature.

Why did the Minister stoop to these unparliamentary levels? What is he trying to hide? If these issues are so minimal, why was he afraid to exercise his powers to order a special inquiry or to refer the matters to the Garda Ombudsman Commission and have them investigated in a transparent manner? That is the only way public confidence in the system would have been restored. Was he afraid that the ombudsman might act in an independent manner?

He repeatedly dismissed our calls for a public inquiry and has refused to explain why he did not use one of three options available to him to have this matter externally investigated. He told us that the internal review would answer all our questions. The truth of the matter is that the internal review was discredited as early as 7 December when the Commissioner rubbished it and said there was no basis for the allegations. It was discredited by the failure to interview or protect the two whistleblowers involved. Imagine the situation. Two whistleblowers came forward and provided a dossier which was a sample of what was going on, and nobody interviewed them. One could not make it up. The investigation was discredited by its terms of reference which were narrow, disproving, dismissive and minimising.

Finally, the Minister was not able to release the names of people who have had their fixed charge notices terminated. I did not ask him to do so. He was not able to release the name of a superintendent who has terminated almost 1,000 fixed charge notices for every offence possible. Some 700 terminations were squashed with excuses such as "Garda seeks cancellation" and "Garda wants termination". Serious questions must be asked, but the Minister chose to release the name of someone who did not get a fixed charge notice terminated, and who did not even receive a fixed charge notice.

The Minister says he released my name in the public interest. Is he serious and does he think people believe him? I do not think they do. It is not we who are undermining the Garda Síochána; it is the Minister.

See this speech in context