Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Ireland has a highly unusual degree of centralised control over its police service. As it stands, the Bill does not do much to change that or to change the politicisation of policing in Ireland. The Bill contains 137 references to the Minister, which is odd in legislation designed to facilitate an independent policing authority. A truly independent authority would determine and revise the priorities of the Garda Síochána without constantly having to get the approval of the Minister of the day. In Sweden, all Government authorities have a high level of independence since 1974. Neither the Government nor individual Ministers have the right to influence the implementation of legislation or how an agency decides in a particular case. The proposed authority is only independent in the performance of its functions subject to the Act. However, according to the Act, all of the authority's powers and functions are either shared with or subject to the approval or consent of the Minister or Government. The Minister can issue directives or orders to the authority and the authority "shall comply" with these and "shall" set out to the Minister how it has complied with them. The Minister retains sole and exclusive powers and functions in many respects and often a full veto over the authority's powers. Therefore, political power over policing has not been relinquished. This is not comparable to the real independence and strength of other statutory bodies such as the IHREC or the Ombudsman, who answers solely to Oireachtas committees. The Garda Commissioner remains exclusively accountable to the Minister rather than to the authority in contrast to the clear transfer of accountability promised in the heads of legislation published by the Minister in November 2014. We had the same Constitution in November 2014 as we have now.

Why were these provisions included in the heads of Bill given that the Constitution has not changed? Appointment of the Garda Commissioner remains solely the function of Government on the nomination of the authority of the person selected by the Public Appointments Service. The Minister alone will have the power to issue directives to the Garda Commissioner, compelling him or her to take particular action. The authority does not have the power to issue a directive, including a policy directive, to the Garda Commissioner or An Garda Síochána in general. The proposed legislation is deceptive in that it provides that the authority will have the power to appoint assistant commissioners, chief superintendents and superintendents. This power is also subject to the 2006 and 2014 regulations, which provide for the promotions advisory council and a detailed selection process by panels containing nominees from the Minister and the Garda Commissioner. It is clear that the authority's power in this regard will be merely a rubber-stamping of the nominee already selected.

The proposed arrangements regarding national security are neither impartial nor transparent as the Minister is proposed as the sole and final arbiter in any dispute on policing and national security. The definition of "national security" is impossibly broad and may contravene the requirements under the European Convention on Human Rights in this regard. This section is likely also unconstitutional as it permits the Minister to decide what is lawful and unlawful regarding the definition of "lawful protest". Under Bunreacht na hÉireann only the courts are permitted to decide what is lawful or unlawful. It is difficult, in the context of all the issues that have arisen in this area and the promises made in relation to reform and how things would be done differently, to credit that such an abysmal Bill is being put through this House. This is abysmal and disappointing legislation.

See this speech in context