Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I have sent to the Tánaiste a proposed amendment to the published terms of reference. I hope it will be accepted as I believe it covers concerns that Deputy O'Callaghan and I have raised in public discourse since the draft terms were circulated. Specifically, I do not believe it is sufficient to establish whether allegations of criminal misconduct against Sergeant McCabe were circulated to the media. We must also seek to establish whether such allegations were known to be false, if they were circulated. This may appear to be a technical point but it is one that I hope the Tánaiste will take on board.

I have served in this House for some time and it has been my privilege to do so. I served on both Government and Opposition benches. I also served as Leas-Cheann Comhairle and worked to uphold the rules and norms of this House. I know, perhaps better than many, the responsibility that comes with membership of this House. I do not wear that privilege lightly and nor have I ever sought to abuse it. The contribution I made in this House yesterday was not about party politics. I did not say anything that sought to undermine another Deputy, nor did I apportion responsibility for the matters at hand to any political party or individual.

2 o’clock

I could point to examples where serving Members of this House have used parliamentary privilege to do exactly that. What I did yesterday was not in that vein. The only place in which we as Members of this House have absolute privilege in what we say is this Chamber, so we should speak in this place with respect for the responsibility that this brings.

Yesterday morning, I received information that I believed to be of significant public importance. The word "hearsay" has since been bandied about aplenty, but this was not idle chat or pub gossip. I received information which I believe to be credible and which is absolutely germane to a matter about which the Government, in its own careful deliberation, has determined to establish a commission of investigation, thereby acknowledging the significance and importance of these matters. I spoke frankly in this Chamber yesterday, and I repeated the information that had been disclosed to me. I will make myself available to Mr. Justice Charleton to do so again if he feels that I can be of any assistance in his work. I can also inform the House that my source for the information I put on the record yesterday has given consent for their name to be provided also to Mr. Justice Charleton, and has made clear to me their willingness to provide Mr. Justice Charleton with all of the information at their disposal.

More insidious than the allegation that I was involved in circulating gossip was the notion, tabled by Deputy O’Callaghan and others, that what I said was damaging to Sergeant Maurice McCabe. I have spoken to Maurice McCabe today. He confirmed to me that he is of course aware, in specific detail, of all the allegations made against him. He has been aware of them, and he and his family have tried to live with them, for a number of years. I am glad to be able to inform the House that he has expressed gratitude for my intervention yesterday, and in no way regards it as having been damaging in any way to him. The nature of the allegations, as one journalist made clear on radio this morning, have not been a secret. Deputy John McGuinness has previously referred to them as "vile" allegations, but today he thinks I am wrong to have spoken openly about them. The allegations have been circulated around the media, around political circles and around Sergeant McCabe’s colleagues for some time.

The role of the media, as we are so often told, is to speak truth to power. It has been alleged that the media allowed themselves to be used by those with power to denigrate those without. This will be a matter for the commission to determine. If the commission of investigation makes such a finding, I hope it will give the media cause to reflect upon their own actions as much as they have on mine.

I said yesterday that I cannot think of another walk of life where, if allegations of this nature had been made against a person in a position of power, he or she would not be placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of a full investigation. Today we debate the establishment of a commission of investigation. We are told that it may take nine months to report and the media narrative has taken hold that a Garda Commissioner could not step aside for that length of time. This point was also made today by the Tánaiste herself. I believe that view is wrong. Prior to her appointment on a permanent basis, Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan served as acting Commissioner for eight months. The idea, therefore, that someone else could act into her role for nine months is not all that far-fetched.

The Garda Commissioner heads a policing service charged with protecting the security of the State, preventing crime and vindicating the human rights of each individual. Yet, at the same time and while still discharging these important, constitutional and onerous responsibilities, Commissioner O’Sullivan now faces a statutory investigation. In the course of this inquiry, the Commissioner’s mobile phones and her phone records for a two-year period are to be examined, as are all Garda electronic and paper files, to see if she or the former Commissioner are implicated in any way in this affair. Nóirín O’Sullivan as Garda Commissioner is the custodian of the very records that Mr. Justice Charleton will examine to see if they disclose wrongdoing by, among others, the Commissioner herself. I believe, honestly and objectively, that this places her in an untenable position.

I reiterate that I have long experience in pursuing truth, particularly in the justice sector. My experience in helping whistleblowers in this sector dates back as far as the establishment of the Morris tribunal, and I repeat that I do not lightly raise issues of the significance that I raised yesterday. We must not forget that at the centre of this commission of inquiry are two protected disclosures and questions around what the former and current commissioners of An Garda Síochána knew and did. The truth of all of these matters, as others have said, will be determined by an independent commission of investigation. In the interim, all Members of the Oireachtas, both Government and Opposition, have responsibility to ensure the integrity of An Garda Síochána is protected in all our interests.

It remains my view that the reputation of the An Garda Síochána would best be protected if the current Garda Commissioner stood aside until the finalisation of the work of the commission of inquiry. As others have said, the allegations that Commissioner O’Sullivan faces are grave. She steadfastly refutes them, as she is perfectly entitled to do. She may be proven innocent of any wrongdoing, but the opposite is also possible. While Superintendent Taylor stands under investigation, he is suspended from duty, a point well made by Deputy O'Callaghan in his contribution. I believe it is reasonable to apply the same standard to the Garda Commissioner.

See this speech in context