Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am very glad to have an opportunity to speak on this very important issue. I would like to think that we have come to a juncture where we have addressed the issues that have been a cause of concern over recent years.

The origin of these issues dates back almost ten years. They were in the ether, so to speak, for a long time and were reported at the time. Garda Maurice McCabe, as he was then, reported those issues many years ago but they failed to be dealt with by the previous Minister for Justice and Equality. It was suggested at the time that he did not discharge his duties accurately on foot of the Guerin report. Admittedly, the report was deemed to be in a position to assess the situation in so far as it could in a short time.

The O'Higgins report probed deeper into the history of the circumstances and, I would like to believe, dealt much more comprehensively and satisfactorily with the situation that arose. I am concerned that we would second-guess the end of this report because if we second-guess everything we do in this business, we will be here for a long time talking about the same issues.

Reference has been made repeatedly to the extent to which the Garda Commissioner may have instructed counsel. In deference to the counsel on the opposite side of the House, my experience of counsel, and I am not a lawyer but I have been cross-examined by counsel for the other side many times in court, is that if one employs counsel in any case, one's solicitor instructs counsel and they do their job. Their job is to test the veracity of the case being put to them, and they do not ask anybody's permission as to how they should do it.

There has been much discussion on whether specific instructions were given by the Commissioner to her counsel. I would have expected that there was an agreement to the effect that counsel would not address the issue or be in any way aggressive or invasive in their questioning, unless that was done beforehand. In terms of progress of the case, therefore, the solution would be that counsel would do their job. It is not very nice sometimes when they do their job, but that is the purpose of a counsel, and the opposing counsel has a similar responsibility.

When a situation like that arises, there are two opposing sides, which do their best. Each of them is in court for a particular purpose. That is the responsibility with which they are charged. That is the job they are paid for and if they did not do it effectively and authoritatively, the client would ask them what they were doing in court. Members know that because we have all had constituents say that to us. I would like to believe that counsel did their job, as they were entitled to do, and that they did so objectively in terms of testing the veracity of whatever case is put to them.

My experience as a Member of this House is that Government used to be discouraged from interfering with An Garda Síochána. There was always a suggestion that there should be a distance between Government and An Garda Síochána, and I agree with that. I am aware there were difficulties in An Garda Síochána in Donegal, Cavan and other areas, and all of those issues must be thoroughly investigated to the satisfaction of victims in particular, about whom we do not spend much time talking. In the debate that takes place, the victims are in the background while we argue about the niceties or otherwise of the way their cases are dealt with. To protect the integrity of the force it is vitally important that all situations referred to or concerns raised by whistleblowers are thoroughly and openly investigated in so far as that can be done. In the event of a commission of inquiry, we cannot have it both ways. We cannot have direct public access to it and have it operate on a confidential basis at the same time. One defeats the purpose of the other, but much work has been done in that regard.

Some Members of this House expressed opposition to the current Commissioner of An Garda Síochána before she was appointed. That is unfair. Everybody who is appointed to do a job in the public arena, whatever it is, should be given a fair chance to do it because if we do not allow them do it, subject them to continuous criticism and question their every move, we will not get people willing to go forward in order to be pilloried. I hope it is recognised that the Garda Commissioner, whoever that person may be, is entitled to do their job in the way it was intended, in compliance with regulations and in keeping with the legislation that has been introduced in the meantime.

There are nine items in terms of improved legislation and so on. The Policing Authority was established as a result of the debate that took place at that time. The appointments of the Garda Commissioner and two Deputy Garda Commissioners were made on foot of an open and independent selection process; that was the first time that happened. The role of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission was strengthened, including its power to investigate complaints against the Garda Commissioner, which was also innovative. We had new and comprehensive whistleblower protection measures through Garda whistleblowers. The members of An Garda Síochána may now communicate their concerns to the Garda Commissioner who can also be investigated, which is something new. The Freedom of Information Act has been extended to include An Garda Síochána, which is also an innovation. The independent review of the penalty points system by the Garda Inspectorate and the appointment of a judge, a former President of the Circuit Court, to the new position of the oversight authority for the fixed charge processing system is new procedure and legislation. Steps have been taken to implement the recommendations of the Garda Inspectorate's crime investigation report, which was published in November 2014. A series of other measures have been put in place to address the concerns raised as a result of difficulties that arose in the force over some considerable time.

It is vitally important that members of the general public have absolute confidence in An Garda Síochána, its institutions, the manner in which it does its business and the way in which it deals with the public. There is an important role for the members of the public also who must have respect for the institutions of the State, including An Garda Síochána. We live in a time when everybody's authority is questioned. Shootings are taking place in the streets on a daily basis. Nothing is sacred any more. It is of huge significance that An Garda Síochána receives the respect required for its function, and that means the people of all ranks, provided they observe all the regulations pertinent to their respective positions.

As we move forward, and I hope we have learned many lessons, we must remember that it is said the morale of the members of An Garda Síochána is at a low ebb. It is at a low ebb for a number of reasons, one of which is that they are questioned all the time. I accept it is important that we move forward into a new era and that we do things transparently and in a way we can stand over, but in doing so there should be a recognition that the members of An Garda Síochána need support also. There must be recognition from the public that the members do an important job, which we send them out to do on a daily basis. When they go to work in the morning, they do not know whether they will come back that evening, or ever, and many of them have not come back. We must have respect for the force, support it, recognise that its members have to do their job, and demand of the force adherence to the rules and regulations that should apply at all times.

See this speech in context