Clare Daly (Dublin North, United Left) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State is again quoting the Attorney General. As Deputy Wallace stated, we have read the Fennelly report. I would not be too keen on quoting the Attorney General at any length. In any case, we would like to see any opinion the Attorney General had because the references to this area in the Constitution are quite limited. It does not get away from the issue that, if the Minister is saying that the only reason she must retain the power is because of the Constitution, surely it should have dawned on the Government that it should have gone to the people and looked to change the Constitution.

We must look at the context of this. The Taoiseach is heading up a special justice sub-committee which has met nine times since it was set up because of the attention on policing matters. In the public domain, it is well known that policing is overtly politicised. The people have a huge yearning that things might be different but instead the Minister is hiding behind the Constitution to say the Government will keep control, and that is the problem we have with it. The Minister retains almost every power she had or a veto, approval or consent over the exercise of any shared power with the authority. Even in instances where we are nodding the head and saying the authority has a bit of a say, the Minister still has a veto. The authority has no power at all.

It is a complete row back from the heads of the Bill and it is disappointing when one compares it with the authorities in other states. Such authorities in other states consult the government, something we have no problem with, but those states do not allow the government to have a veto, which is the kernel of a politicised police force and the reason we wanted to bring in these changes. The appointments process is being openly retained by the Government. Regarding the Commissioner and the deputy, it is very disappointing. Regarding the powers of the authority to appoint the assistant commissioners, chief superintendents and superintendents, which are only subject to regulations which exist, it is deceptive. We would say the Minister is changing nothing in this, except making it more complex, more confusing and less accountable.

See this speech in context