John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill and the Second Stage debate that is taking place on it. It is important legislation.

In the penalties concerned, I point to the fact that one size does not fit all and perhaps, in the context of amendments, the Minister would look at that. We must tailor it to the size of the companies involved and to the extent of the complaint or corruption put forward by the whistleblower, and apply the appropriate action. I come at this from the point of view that the biggest employer in the State is the State. The largest number of complaints, the largest number of whistleblowers and the largest number of those who have generally expressed concern come within the State's organisation.

Through the years, and different Governments, we have failed to protect the people. Protecting the people is the basic job of any government and we have failed miserably in that regard. In fact, our management of complaints and whistleblowers has been sloppy. It has shown complete disregard for their rights. It has shown complete disregard for the complaint that they are making even though it is in the interest of the State.

The person who in good faith comes forward with a complaint is often the one who will at the end of the process be the victim. The person's health will be broken. Their job will probably be gone. They will not be able to serve anymore. That is the history of this, if one looks back on it. They are the ones who have tried to do the State some service. It is an appalling situation.

In any Bill like this, we have to look at the issues that the State has faced over the past few years, particularly in recent times. There are different types of whistleblower. There is the whistleblower about the job. There is someone who comes forward out of the experience in dealing with the State and is willing to put his or her experiences in the public domain so the State can learn from the mistakes, and there is a need for the State to respond in a supportive way that protects that person's position in life, job or credibility, in terms of how he or she put forward the complaint in the first place.

A letter I received serves to inform me about what happened.

I will cite one or two cases. One lady, who is a hard-working woman, describes the State as "a little corrupt country". This was her experience, which we need to take into account. She expected the law enforcers, including the Garda, the DPP and judges, to protect, serve and tell the truth. In her correspondence she went on to outline what happened to her and her son who was killed in a hit and run incident. She outlined details of the person who was driving the car and killed her son: he was out on bail, his passport was in the Garda station, he was on a suspended sentence on both sides of the Border, he was well known to the PSNI and had served time in custody there. In addition, he was on a peace bond, had 40 convictions and 17 convictions outside this jurisdiction. He was also well known to Interpol. He was driving a completely defective vehicle on the night in question, with no tax, insurance or NCT. The man was on the probation books for six years for heroin before he killed on the roadside. He had previous convictions for road traffic offences, burglary, aggravated burglary, handling stolen property and drugs. Six weeks after killing this woman's son, he received two sentences of two weeks to run concurrently. He was asked to sign on at the Garda station in Carrickmacross, but as he was serving a sentence in another jurisdiction he did not sign on at the Garda station. However, nobody bothered to pick that up. In fact, some of the background information was never presented at his court case.

This lady's cherished son was a well qualified young man who had just finished university and was setting out in life. He was a man who cared for the community, worked with his neighbours and looked after them, but he was lost to the country and to his family. This lady decided to pursue the matter. On the one hand, the State had given the man who killed her son a senior counsel, junior counsel, an interpreter and a solicitor. On the other hand, the State gave her, her family and her lost son a junior counsel. At every hand's turn she complained to the State that is there to protect her, but she was not listened to. She would not give up on her son, however, and eventually wrote to the Attorney General, the DPP, the DPP's complaints department and the Garda Ombudsman. She made 19 different complaints, just two of which were upheld. No justice was served in this case so this lady turned to the authorities and asked for a public inquiry. She asked for all the actions taken by the State, and the inaction, to be examined so that this would never happen again.

In their grief and trauma, following the death of their son, the lady and her husband turned to their daughter for support and assistance in lobbying the State that is supposed to protect them for an inquiry into what I consider to be a serious injustice. Lucia O'Farrell, having lost her son Shane at 23 years of age, was refused. She then turned to the only other people who could help her. She asked those in the political system to look at the papers in a file that is 12 inches thick. The file is full of inaccuracies and issues that have not served her or her family well. She blew the whistle on all of this, including at the offices of the DPP, the Ombudsman and the Attorney General. She asked for action, and I must tell the Minister, Deputy Howlin, that that woman is sincere in her approach to this matter. She has a case that this State must answer. She has an absolute case for a public inquiry. She turned to her politicians, and wrote to the Taoiseach explaining that she had not received an acknowledgement. This woman, in absolute grief and traumatised by the loss of her son, appealed to the political system, yet she received no answer. I saw the answer that she got from the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, and I have to say that it does not make me feel proud of this country. She got a cold acknowledgement. I challenge the Ministers, Deputy Howlin and Deputy Shatter, or the Taoiseach to meet this woman and her family. They should read the paperwork in detail and see how justice was not served in this case. They should demand a public inquiry. I have made these appeals before in this Chamber but nothing happens.

See this speech in context