Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is there a Minister with responsibility for justice in the House?

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are any number of them.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am disappointed the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is not present because this is a serious situation, as he acknowledged yesterday. Last weekend The Sunday Tribune published a memorandum to claims supervisors in the Quinn Direct group outlining a series of steps being taken to drastically reduce the cost of claims to this group and therefore to dramatically increase profits. According to the memo, a panel, consisting mainly of retired gardaí and some serving gardaí, was put together to investigate claims and to use "Their negotiation ... and persuasive skills" in settling claims on the doorsteps of claimants against this insurance company. It further outlined that solicitors acting for claimants would be given incentives to persuade their clients to settle claims against Quinn Direct at greatly reduced amounts.

These are explosive allegations. In today's Irish Independent and Irish Examiner newspapers, Quinn Direct has taken out an advertisement claiming the memo is a forgery and denying the claims. I believe the memo is not a forgery and that the claims in The Sunday Tribune will stand up to scrutiny. There is no doubt but that the——

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not think the Deputy is entitled to make that claim in the House. They are allegations. The Chair is concerned about the use of language in this House, both as regards people outside the House who are not here to answer for themselves and also against Members in the House. There is a long-standing tradition in the House and rulings of my predecessors going back to the foundation of the State, reflected in the Salient Rulings of the Chair, that Members should show restraint in the House in their use of language. I would ask the Deputy to honour that long-standing tradition of the House.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This issue is in the public domain.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree it is in the public domain but I do not think Members can draw conclusions that have not been drawn outside the House following due process. We must be the champions of due process in this House.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will discuss the point with the Ceann Comhairle at another time. I will be more general for the remainder of this contribution. However, I have said things before which have proved to be true.

What is undeniable is that the profits of insurance companies have rocketed in recent years to the tune of hundreds of millions of euro — up to €500 million. Clearly, the number of vehicles on the roads has increased but I have no doubt ruthless measures used by various groups were an important factor. This is not about eliminating fraudulent claims but about pressurising ordinary, genuine people with genuine claims to settle for much less. In claims of personal injury due to motor car crashes, there is a good reason not to rush into a settlement as long-term effects of injuries may not be evident early on. Clearly, profits increased as a result.

In 2005, another major insurance company awarded a lucrative contract worth approximately €40,000 to a recently retired, very senior member of the Garda Síochána to assemble a panel of claims investigators for that company. Meetings of retired and serving gardaí were held in the second half of 2005 to advance this.

The fact that those among the most senior officers of the Garda Síochána can work in a job with serious traffic responsibilities and then, within a short period of retiring, work for multinational insurance companies raises the most serious issue. It is similar to senior planning officials in local authorities resigning and then going to work for developers who have substantial dealings with the planning authority for which these officials previously worked. I believe the insurance companies should be in public ownership to ensure that the interests of the public are served.

A so-called memorandum of understanding was signed by the Garda Commissioner and AXA Insurance providing an extraordinary situation whereby gardaí in the south east were instructed to call AXA recovery agents only to tow away vehicles involved or damaged in road crashes. It is completely inappropriate for the police force to give a clear commercial advantage in an entire region to one arm of a major multinational insurance corporation.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform informed me last week that gardaí in the south east had saved €10,000 as a result of this agreement. We seek further clarification on that. Of course, AXA would have gained enormously commercially from the arrangement. The Minister also informed me that an exclusive arrangement between the Garda Síochána and AXA Insurance to have damaged vehicles in the Dublin metropolitan region towed away will be introduced in Dublin soon. The capital has one third of the population of the State and this exclusive arrangement with the Garda would be an enormously lucrative situation for this insurance company. What do the other companies, smaller garages and towing companies think of this proposal? They will be cut out to benefit the major multinational, AXA Insurance. I call on the Minister to halt this arrangement immediately and to arrange for a full discussion on the issues raised by these questions.

Seán Haughey (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, who cannot be here, I am pleased to respond to the matter raised by the Deputy.

The allegations to which the Deputy refers emerged in a newspaper article last weekend. Lest there be any doubt about it, these allegations are being taken most seriously. The Tánaiste regards the situation as a matter of the utmost gravity and contacted the Garda Commissioner. The Garda Commissioner shares the Tánaiste's view that the allegations in the article concerning an abuse of position are of the utmost gravity. They are being treated seriously and are being inquired into fully. The Commissioner has appointed a senior officer at assistant commissioner level to investigate the matter. The Garda Síochána would welcome the receipt of any information that would assist the investigation.

The allegation that serving members are being employed in a private capacity by motor insurance companies to assist in settling claims is something that must be treated with the utmost seriousness. The idea that members of the force could use the official resources at their disposal in the service of a private company for their own personal gain is anathema to the notion of public service. The thrust of the Tánaiste's policy on the Garda Síochána since he assumed office, as exemplified by the historic enactment of the Garda Síochána Act, has been to ensure that public confidence in the concept of an effective and impartial policing system is maintained. For that reason, each and every allegation must be investigated and, where evidence exists, the perpetrators must be subject to the full rigours of the law.

In this instance the law is very clear. An explicit prohibition on the disclosure of information was specifically inserted in the Garda Síochána Act 2005. The section covers both serving and former members of the force. Section 62 of that Act prohibits a person who is or was a member of the Garda Síochána, or its civilian staff, from disclosing information obtained in the course of his or her duties. The section provides stiff penalties, fines up to €50,000 and-or up to five years' imprisonment for conviction on indictment in the ordinary course, increasing to €75,000 and-or seven years' imprisonment where persons who contravene its provisions receive any gift, consideration or advantage as an inducement to disclose any information.

These penalties are severe and will cause any errant minority to think twice before considering releasing sensitive information. The provision, in its original draft form, attracted a considerable degree of public controversy during its passage through the Oireachtas on the grounds that it would be unnecessarily restrictive. However, the purpose of the legislation was to deal with a real concern that confidential and personal information about individual investigations was emerging in circumstances which were neither legitimate nor ethical. The penalties in section 62 of the Act strike the right balance. The great majority of members of the Garda Síochána would be appalled at the thought that colleagues might conduct themselves in this way and would instinctively support the fundamental policy aspect of the provision.

In addition to section 62 of the Garda Síochána Act, serving and former gardaí are also governed by the provisions of the Official Secrets Act and the Data Protection Acts. At an operational level, the Garda authorities take all the necessary precautions to ensure that information contained on their computer systems is secure. As a practical measure, members' log-on accounts for the Garda Information System, PULSE-GNIB-FCPS are disabled upon their retirement to ensure that they cannot access any of the Garda IT systems. The Garda Commissioner takes his responsibilities in this area very seriously and every allegation of misuse and abuse of information will be investigated vigorously.