Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

Following on from what my colleague, Deputy Gannon, said yesterday, I will move to the subject of the new independent security examiner proposed in the Bill. It is very welcome to see the independent oversight mechanisms being brought into this sphere. We are all familiar with the experience of looking for important information and having the words, “national security”, sometimes waved about like a get-out-of-jail-free card in response.

Of course there is a need for confidentiality when it comes to national security - I completely appreciate that - but no function of the State should be free from oversight. However, the restrictions placed on the independent examiner in this Bill as regards his or her independence and powers mean that it will fall short of the mark. The independent examiner must have access to all relevant information needed to fulfil his or her mandate to assess national security legislation in order to ensure that measures taken in the name of national security are proportionate and compliant with human rights law. Under this Bill, information can be withheld from the independent examiner to safeguard international intelligence sources. A large number of our national security issues - transnational crime, cyberattacks, gang crime and security issues in Northern Ireland, to name just a few - rely on intelligence from outside the State. That is a massive amount of information that could be withheld from the independent examiner using this clause in the Bill. If the Government is serious about the need for an oversight body, it needs to allow it to access the information the independent examiner deems necessary, as is done in the North, the UK and Australia. Obviously, we cannot have a starting point whereby we do not trust the person who will be the independent examiner. Maybe I have not got that quite right, and I would be happy to hear what the Minister has to say about that, but that is my reading of that aspect and my concern about it.

Another important aspect is the need for public transparency in the work of the independent examiner. The Bill states that information from the examiner will not be made public if the information would prejudice international relations. Very little information about national security will not have some impact on international relations, particularly with the UK or EU member states. I do not deny there is a need to be careful as to how information will impact our relationships with other nations, but maybe this clause is too broad. Sometimes making information public is the right thing to do, regardless of whether it annoys a neighbour state.

As for the proposed new policing and community safety authority, formed from the Policing Authority and the Garda Inspectorate, there needs to be more work in the Bill on their powers of inspection. Unannounced inspections are required under the optional protocol to the convention against torture. This Bill, however, seems to leave the detail of that power to a memorandum of understanding between the Garda and the policing and community safety authority, PCSA. I recall having a debate here when the Corporate Enforcement Authority was to take over from the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. A commitment was to be given to gardaí, and a wrangle about that went on between one Department and another for months on end. We were given a guarantee that there would be a memo that would make sure that it happened. That has raised a big question mark for me because this is an essential part of the body's functions and it is too important to be left to a memo. There has to be a degree of certainty in that regard. We have all seen the negotiations on these kinds of memorandums drag out - I have just identified one such example - and for this body to operate without the power of unannounced inspections would be unacceptable.

Another issue missing from the Bill is disaggregated data. There is reference to the obligation on the Garda to collect statistical information; however, this is a missed opportunity to require specifically the collection of disaggregated data. These kinds of data - age, gender, ethnicity, disability, etc. - are essential to keeping track of trends and patterns as regards crime, victims of crime and the use of police powers. The Garda is subject to the public sector duty and is required to assess constantly whether it is complying with equality and human rights standards and to identify areas that can be improved. Understanding what needs to be improved is not possible without those kinds of data being collected and appropriately stored.

The formation of all these bodies will require an incredible amount of effort and resources, which I hope the Government will be forthcoming in providing. I also acknowledge the impact the Bill will have on existing civil servants in An Garda Síochána, who will become public servants. Fórsa has stated that 93% of staff surveyed have grave concerns about the impact this will have on their terms and conditions. This is ultimately an industrial relations issue which should be dealt with through the proper channels. It is important to acknowledge the concerns of staff and to work towards a solution which alleviates their concerns.

Obviously, it is important that the Garda Commissioner has control over resources and deploys those resources, and I do not dispute that, but - and every single time I get the opportunity to say this I do so - I do have concerns about how those resources are deployed. I have talked to about four different Garda Commissioners in sequence about this point. I have met them. We have met them, a Cheann Comhairle, as a group of Deputies from our two constituencies in Kildare. The one thing the deployment of those resources does not take into account is population. It is not the only metric used to deploy Garda resources - obviously, there are the levels of crime in an area, deprivation and a whole lot of other metrics that would be used - but it cannot be ignored either.

For example, Kildare's population doubled between 1971 and 1996. Its population has doubled again since that time. This cannot be done without resources. People say they keep seeing housing estates but they do not see anything else. It is part of the reason people are discontented about those resources being stretched. I have looked at each of the policing plans that are produced - they are produced annually - and, to be honest, the ones I have seen have been copy-and-paste jobs. It is as if the publication of a new census does not matter. The Minister, Deputy Harris, is in an area with a growing population. The Minister who is on maternity leave is in the area of the country that has the lowest ratio of gardaí to the population, and she was until recently the Minister for Justice. Kildare has the second lowest such ratio. There is a sizeable difference, but I suspect that if one were to look at the Dublin area, Fingal would fall into that category too. The growth nationally has happened in that arc, from the Fingal area outwards and through Kildare and Meath. I think I looked at this not that long ago and the population increase was something like 41% in Meath, 39% in Kildare and about 40% in Fingal. Fingal has had 100,000 additional people over the past 20 years, over three censuses. That cannot be catered for without resources. We are giving the Garda Commissioner the authority to deploy resources, but the Garda Commissioner must also recognise that those resources need to match the population. I remember meeting one assistant commissioner and he told us that no divisional commander would voluntarily give up his or her resources and that the view was "what you have you hold". I think we both remember that, a Cheann Comhairle.

The problem is that there is an opportunity cost in that, and that opportunity cost manifests itself in the kind of policing we have. We have a reactive type of policing because we do not have the resources to be proactive. We are also putting gardaí at very significant risk because they are responding to calls, sometimes very dangerous calls, without backup and we do not have the road checks and so on.

The real deficiency is in community policing because we do not have the resources to go into the schools or to do the kinds of things that build communities. That is essential if we are to give the responsibility to the Commissioner. With responsibility comes an obligation. As I said, I do not miss an opportunity to make this point because resources are not just gardaí, as the Minister will know, but other resources too. As the population grows, we are playing catch-up the whole time. Whether it is in the largest class sizes in the country or HSE services, the same pattern is seen, and we have to change that. As I said, it is not the only metric but it has to be considered.

I look forward to the next policing plan now and the new census that is about to be revealed to see if it has made any difference. I have looked at the last couple of censuses - I have a fascination with numbers - but I did not see any difference before or after any of them. One should see that if one has a system that takes this into account. I hope the Minister will relay that point to the Garda Commissioner when they next meet. I will continue to drive both of them mad on this until the matter is dealt with.

See this speech in context