Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the Cooke report. In this House, and, indeed, in political institutions in general, we are used to people grabbing headlines and we are used to people making allegations, but what we are not used to is such people stopping once the news cycle moves on to coming back and standing by the headlines that they grabbed and the allegations that they made.

It is important in this debate that we remind ourselves of what exactly were those accusations, allegations and headlines. The first one, that GSOC was being bugged by An Garda Síochána, was clearly found not to be the case. That is not my view. It is conclusion one, on page 48, of the Cooke report. Regarding the second allegation, that Government-owned technology had been used to hack into e-mails, again, the independent Cooke report, on page 52, paragraph 12.2, found that not be the case.

The third allegation was the constant criticism and sneering by some of the Government's assertion that GSOC should have reported to the Minister for Justice and Equality about any public interest inquiry. The leader of Sinn Féin, Deputy Gerry Adams, ridiculed that assertion in this House. In a statement, on 11 February, he stated:

GSOC are not obliged to report to Minister Shatter in the same way as the Garda Commissioner is, and for good reason. The Ombudsman Commission is appointed by the President, not the Government.

Deputy Adams is not here and no representative of his party is here, but I am sure somebody is watching in from a distance. Deputy Adams was wrong. Mr. Justice Cooke found him to be wrong. The Deputy constantly barraged the Taoiseach in this House. He asked the Taoiseach to apologise for ever asserting the truth. The truth is a new phenomenon for Deputy Adams and it is something he is coming to terms with, but he might come in and apologise and correct the record of this House, and correct his public press statement of 11 February which was wrong.

We now find Members of this House stating that while there was no evidence that GSOC was bugged, we also cannot state categorically 110% that it definitely was not. Can we get real? This is getting ridiculous. One cannot live like that, one cannot legislation like that and one certainly cannot hold a rational political debate like that if one refuses to debate the facts and if one refuses to accept the independent findings.

I listened to Deputy Clare Daly and others talking about vans and cameras and I want to make a point as a citizen of this Republic. If there were vans and cameras, has it dawned on anybody that there was a foreign security firm, effectively, a spying firm, operating in this country? Would it have been remiss of the security services in this country not to have been alert to the fact that there was a foreign security firm operating here?

Having made these points and put the debate in context, it is important to note that there are lessons to learned, both from the Cooke report and from the general debacle and saga that we have had between GSOC and An Garda Síochána and other broader justice issues. I wish to make three points.

On the new police authority - the Minister is having a consultation day in Farmleigh tomorrow - Mr. Justice Cooke refers, on page 53 of his report, to the importance of using the opportunity of establishing that new authority to define and revise the relationships between GSOC, the Garda Commissioner and the Minister. This is a really important opportunity. Those lines of communication, co-operation and clarity need to be clearly established.

Page 50 of the report further outlines this issue when it states that the suspicion which GSOC displayed towards An Garda Síochána was "heavily influenced by the atmosphere of frustration and tension that had arisen in relations between GSOC personnel and the senior ranks of the Garda Síochána". Tension is healthy, and I respect the comments made by Deputy Shatter in that regard, but no tension that leads to such a level of frustration and suspicion can be tolerated. Clearly, there is a need to look at the relationships and the structures between GSOC and An Garda Síochána.

The security anomalies within GSOC, while not evidence of covert surveillance, also need to be addressed and GSOC needs to be conscious of that. While the report found no evidence of covert surveillance, it found that there were security vulnerabilities.

We also need to look at GSOC, which was established by this House. I heard Deputy Kirk speak on behalf of Fianna Fáil and bemoan the limitations of GSOC. His party, in the previous Government, set it up. They gave it the responsibilities but they did not give it the teeth. They decided that the gardaí could never make a complaint to it. They were the ones who put the structures in place and now they are the ones doing what they always do when in opposition, throwing mud at whoever is the Fine Gael Minister for Justice and Equality. They established it; we are going to fix it. We must not get into this political scenario where we delegate responsibility to organisations such as GSOC which, it is important to note, the report found and the Minister has echoed, acted in good faith. We must support them. We must have confidence in an Ombudsman's commission.

The reforms have begun. Tomorrow, in Farmleigh, is an important day in terms of what a police authority should look like in this country and I ask the Minister to take my suggestions on board.

See this speech in context