Breeda Moynihan-Cronin (Kerry South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 6: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the agreement made in 1997 between the Garda Síochána and Esat Digifone on the erection of masts on Garda stations and the role played by him in making the agreement; the value of the contract since 1997; the number of mobile telephones that have been provided to the Garda Síochána since 1997; the number of gardaí who have mobile phones supplied by O2 at present; if these mobile phones are the only secure communication system available to the gardaí; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29754/05]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The agreement was made in June 1997 between Esat Digifone, now O2, and the Commissioners of Public Works, the Minister for Finance, the Garda authorities and the Minister for Justice. I was not party to that agreement, as the question implies.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It was the Government, not the Minister.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wanted the Deputy to know in case he is wondering about the wisdom of the agreement.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would not expect the Minister to have been there at the time.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy might like to know who was there at the time. It was a Government consisting of the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and Democratic Left which pushed through this agreement on its last day in office. It was not this Government that signed that agreement.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should name those Ministers responsible.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy may appreciate that Deputy O'Donoghue was appointed as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on 26 June 1997 but the agreement was authorised to be signed by Cabinet on 25 June 1997.

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Minister have a problem with the agreement?

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This deal and all its provisions were done by the rainbow Government. What is interesting is not merely did that Government sign it on the last day in office, but it provided that Esat could extend it for five years, which it did. The agreement will only expire in 2007.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister answer the question?

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not possible to provide a definitive figure of its value as some of the services provided under the terms of the agreement, such as calls within the 086 network and replacement masts, are provided free of charge to the Garda Síochána. Amounts relating to mobile usage for which charges apply are deducted from the gross fees paid to the Office of Public Works in accordance with the terms of the agreement, a netting agreement. I am advised by the Office of Public Works that from June 1997 to 31 March 2005, an amount of €5.75 million has been offset against gross licence fees of €13.8 million resulting in net receipts of €8.05 million.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

I am informed by the Garda authorities that 998 mobile phones have been made available under the agreement and on official issue within the Garda Síochána. I am advised by the Garda authorities that they employ a variety of secure communications technologies to meet different operational demands and that while mobile phones provide some level of security they are not in the same category as the other secure communications technologies employed by them.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The report by the Comptroller and Auditor General of what happened in this matter since 1997, when this Government came into office, makes stark reading, particularly the number of Garda stations on which masts were erected. Peanuts were paid to the Government subsequently when an independent assessor was established. The Government had to wait six years before it received arrears of €3.6 million, without interest.

Why did the Minister and his predecessor rely on the mobile telephones and the communications network established by a private company as a substitute for a secure Garda communications system? It is the only secure system in the Garda because of the approximate 1,000 mobile telephones given to the Garda from the rank of inspector up. Why has the Minister not put in place a secure communications system for the Garda?

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I suggest the Deputy stops digging. The terms of this agreement were agreed by the Fine Gael-Labour-Democratic Left Government. It was in such a rush to agree it, a provision was included that the rents payable under the agreement would be provisional and the ultimate rent would be established by a system of arbitration. The arbitration went on and on. However, the providence of the erstwhile Government, which had signed the agreement, did not even provide for interest on the arbitrated sum. The taxpayer had to wait a long time for the actual rent, as opposed to the provisional rent, to come in. This agreement was put in place on the last day of office of the Fine Gael-Labour-Democratic Left Government.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Why is there no substitute secure communications system?

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The terms provided for an extension up to ten years. I agree the terms are open to a degree of criticism. However, any infelicity in concluding the terms falls into the hands of those who negotiated it. The arbitration process was delayed, at a cost to the taxpayer, because no provision was made for the company to pay any interest on the arbitrated award. This was an extraordinary omission by people who were so keen to have it agreed on their last day on office.