Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank my colleague, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, for bringing forward the motion. It is clear from our interaction with the Garda Commissioner last week that we have yet to receive answers to the simple questions we posed. We received an excellent description from her of what the problem was. We also heard descriptive language about apologies, mistakes, wrongdoings, unacceptability and failure, but we received no reasoning as to why they had occurred. The issues concerning breath-testing and fixed charge notices arose on senior management's watch. It is important for the Dáil and the Policing Authority to get answers to these questions. Earlier today we saw the Commissioner at the AGSI conference trying to throw out hypotheticals to her members, which I do not think was appropriate in the context of the fact that an audit was ongoing. To deliver some level of confidence, she should provide answers. When the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality receives the responses tomorrow, I hope we will be given answers to these important questions.

Unlike Deputy Róisín Shortall and Sinn Féin who put forward a populist, political motion which simply calls for a head without any solution to how we can reform policing, the motion before the House addresses a number of matters. It is about strengthening the existing regulatory powers in the context of the architecture of policing. That means empowering the Policing Authority and ensuring it has the capacity to intervene at the highest level to provide for a degree of oversight that we have not seen heretofore.

What goes to the core of the issue is that we are not sure, based on the evidence we have seen up to now, if we would have received the information but for a leaked report in The Irish Times. Senior management in An Garda Síochána had knowledge of this for two and a half years, yet little or nothing was done to inform the Minister or the Policing Authority that, as it knew full well, needed to receive the information. Our legislative role is the fundamental answer. That is why our motion tries to provide a framework to restore the morale and confidence of the members we saw today. They are angry and disappointed with the constant sense of crisis in policing. The motion provides a constructive legislative proposal that would work to address the matters before us, rather than simply trying to call for heads without providing solutions. What goes to the heart of this is Sinn Féin trying to remove the motion from the House. No party should monopolise the debate on any matter. We all have a right to table motions but not to monopolise or own a particular topic because it happens to be in the news. Our motion attempts to move forward by examining the future of policing.

See this speech in context