Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 1, 28, 45 to 48, inclusive, 50, 53 to 57, inclusive, 59 and 60 are related and will be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping all follow on from previous amendments made to the Bill arising in this House arising from proposals made by Deputies on the issue of the prominence of the Irish language in the names of the newly established bodies. Those Report Stage amendments provided for Irish language names for the various policing bodies in line with the Official Languages (Amendment) Act 2021. At the time, I did not include the reformed Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, with the amendments to the other bodies as I indicated that I wanted to give further consideration to its name more generally. As it will be a very public-facing body in the police oversight system, its name will be important. The office will have the attributes of an ombudsman but this does not fully capture the full scope of the policing oversight role involved, which will also involve live criminal investigations. I, therefore, tabled amendments to change the name of the new office from the Office of the Police Ombudsman to its Irish language equivalent - Oifig an Ombudsman Póilíneachta - but also to add to the name "Fiosrú" meaning "inquiry" to the official title. Its name now reads Fiosrú - Oifig an Ombudsman Póilíneachta. This name will reflect the revised approach to the naming of public bodies in the Irish language while also reflecting the broader policing inquiry or investigation aspects of the reformed body's remit.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ba chóir dom beagáinín a rá mar gheall ar sin. I welcome the proposal and the amendment agus táim buíoch go raibh an Rialtas ag éisteacht leis an díospóireacht a bhí sa Teach ach tá beagáin imní orm mar gheall ar an rud a tharla leis an gCoimisiún Toghcháin. Since that name was brought in, it seems to refer to itself as “the commission” as Béarla. I would hope that “fiosrú” will be used. Feicim sa leasú go luaitear “Fiosrú - Oifig an Ombudsman Póilíneachta (in this Act referred to as the “Office of the Police Ombudsman”)”. Tá súil agam go n-úsáideann an tAire, an Roinn agus an oifig sin “fiosrú” i gcónaí agus gan a bheith ag úsáid an frása atá in brackets. Aontaím leis an leasú sin áfach, agus mar a dúirt mé, táim buíoch as.

Is focal simplí agus oiriúnach é le húsáid don oifig sin agus cuirim fáilte leis.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The official branding will have to have the Irish and English on equal terms. While I cannot dictate at every stage how somebody refers to themselves, I will most likely be referring to Fiosrú. It is about ongoing engagement to make sure one is not used more than the other. As the Deputy said, it is a simple name people will be able to use, understand and relate to. It should be no issue for people to use the Irish word.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is important that the relevant Minister or Department media team would use Fiosrú all the time, rather than using the longer term or even the Office of the Police Ombudsman. Fiosrú is much easier and rolls off the tongue a little better.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That would be the intention.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is an amendment put forward by Senators Ruane, Black and Flynn, which I supported in the Seanad. It relates to section 16 of the Bill, specifically to the list of matters that persons recommended by the Public Appointments Service for appointment as members of the new Garda board are to have experience and expertise in. The amendment adds data protection to sub-paragraph (b), in addition to organisational governance, management or public administration. With the board being a new entity I agree that such expertise could assist in all aspects of the more general management areas also set out in section 16, so I supported this amendment.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 3, 4, 24, 25, 41 and 42 are related and will be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping are necessary to bring certain provisions in this Bill in line with the requirements of the 2019 EU directive on debt and insolvency issues. I was advised that as previously drafted the provisions in the Bill, which bar a person who is bankrupt from the Garda board, the policing and community safety authority and office of the independent examiner were not in line with the directive. These amendments ensure that a person who has been discharged from bankruptcy will be eligible for consideration for a role in any of these three offices, bringing the relevant provision into compliance with the directive.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 5, 6, 38 and 39 are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping concern sections 32 and 225, which provide for different types of judicial led inquiries under the Bill. During debates on the Bill in the Dáil, it was noted by Deputies Aodhán Ó Ríordáin and Brendan Howlin that the sections providing for judicial inquiry lacked any penalties for non-compliance of the respective judge leading the inquiry. I subsequently received further legal advice, which essentially concurred with the Deputies and confirmed that the initial approach of relying on the common law powers of a judge to enforce such penalties would not be appropriate. I am grateful to both Deputies for their constructive input. These amendments make express provision for penalties for non-compliance with an inquiry.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is another amendment proposed by Senators Ruane, Black and Flynn. It amended section 36(1), which requires the Garda Commissioner to keep the Minister and the Secretary General of the Department of Justice fully informed of certain matters. The amendment added an additional paragraph requiring the Garda Commissioner to inform the Minister of significant developments that might reasonably be expected to adversely affect the performance of An Garda Síochána. A general requirement under section 36(1)(d) is already placed on the Garda Commissioner to keep the Minister fully informed of any other matters that in the Commissioner's opinion should be brought to the Minister's attention. However, as we have seen in recent times it is crucial that there is no impediment to An Garda Síochána performing its functions effectively. The crucial element of this is the need for clear and unfettered communication between the Garda Commissioner and the Minister for Justice, and any such impediments. In that regard, I was happy to support this amendment.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 8 and 9 are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping concern section 54, which deals with the appointment of members of Garda staff. Although this matter was previously discussed at length in the Dáil, by way of background I will briefly note that the Commission on the Future of Policing recommended that Garda staff would be directly recruited into An Garda Síochána and that An Garda Síochána should be seen and treated as a single organisation with a single workforce who share a common mission. Section 54(1) allows the Commissioner to recruit Garda staff directly into the organisation. In addition, section 54(5) allows for the designation of existing civilian staff as members of Garda staff but only on foot of an appropriate industrial relations process. The commencement of this legislation will have no automatic effect on existing civilian staff. It is a matter that was also the subject of further debate in the Seanad as well as here. I engaged directly with many Garda civilian staff and their representatives. I am keenly aware of, and sensitive to, the concerns that have been raised by existing staff and their union representatives. To provide staff with further reassurance, I have brought forward Seanad amendments to section 54 guaranteeing, under subsection (5), that would have the effect of designating existing Garda staff as staff, may not be made until at least 24 months after the commencement of that section. This would provide a suitable time period for staff engagement, which is under way and will allow for negotiations as a priority on the terms and conditions that will apply to new civilian staff recruited after the commencement of the the Bill, and who will also automatically be designated as Garda staff. As a final note, by way of update, I have taken further action to ensure there has been, and continues to be engagement between myself, Department officials, Garda management and the relevant trade unions in this area. Officials from my Department, following consultation with An Garda Síochána and the relevant unions, have agreed upon an independent mediation process under an independent facilitator for the official negotiations in this matter. Negotiations will commence once that appointment has been formally made, and I will continue to engage with colleagues and others on this matter directly where required as the negotiations progress.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 10 to 14, inclusive, and 17 are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in grouping five are technical in nature. They relate to section 55, which provides for the making of a superannuation scheme or schemes by the Garda Commissioner for members of Garda staff where members of Garda staff do not become members of the single public service scheme. They also concern section 112, which performs a similar function with regard to the new national office for community safety. The amendments followed on from discussions with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform and provide for minor changes to language concerning the consents required for the introduction of such schemes.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 15 and 16 are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping relate to section 75, which sets out the functions of the audit committee of the new proposed Garda board. Their purpose was to correct a drafting oversight. They align certain provisions regarding what matters the audit committee will provide advice on. As initially drafted, the committee was obliged to advise the Garda Commissioner on governance and financial matters, but only to advise the board on financial matters. The amendments simply ensure that the audit committee will also advise the board on governance matters. This is considered appropriate as a committee of the board should advise the board on all of its findings, whether financial, governance based or otherwise. This is again a technical amendment.

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

Seanad amendments Nos. 18 and 19 are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping concern section 114,l which provides for the making of regulations to establish new local community safety partnerships, LCSPs. These new partnerships will, on a phased basis, replace the existing joint policing committees, JPCs, with a new broader type of body, built around a key principle of the Bill that community safety is not just a matter for An Garda Síochána. While the local authority, the county and city councillors, in any area will undoubtedly continue to play a key role in the new partnerships, the purpose of this new framework is to ensure that all stakeholders involved take on a similar key role in helping to ensure our communities are safe.

I have not set out exact membership and leadership of these partnerships in the primary legislation. This is not the approach taken to the current committees and it is also less flexible. Instead, I have left the detail to be worked out through a combination of guidance and regulations while also committing to further engagement with councillors and their representative bodies. As an additional gesture of reassurance, I have introduced these amendments to the Bill, which confirm that nothing in the upcoming regulations shall prevent a city or county councillor from becoming a chairperson or vice chairperson of a new partnership. This ensures that the model is capable of accommodating the best possible membership and leadership for each partnership based on its own requirements and individual circumstances.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This amendment concerns section 118, which places certain duties on public service bodies in respect of improving community safety. The amendment simply ensures that public bodies must now include in their strategic plans an assessment of the issues affecting community safety that is relevant to its functions. The body will also be required to include the actions or proposed actions in place to address those issues. The duty will also include a reporting element via the body's annual report.

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

Seanad amendments Nos. 21 and 22 are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping provide for the deletion of section 165 in its entirety along with any other references to that section contained in the Bill. In short, section 165 provided for the transfer by ministerial order of staff of the current Garda Síochána Inspectorate to the new policing security and community safety authority. At the time of drafting, it was considered a necessary provision to allow for the transfer of Garda Síochána Inspectorate staff who had been appointed under section 119 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 to the new body. However, on further examination, it was determined that the current staff were not actually appointed under section 119 of the 2005 Act and are, in fact, staff of the Department of Justice who have been transferred internally to the inspectorate. The section has, therefore, been deleted and any necessary transfer of such staff will be again dealt with internally by the Department and by the new policing and community safety authority.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendment was proposed by Senators Ruane, Black and Flynn and it is in the same vein as amendment No. 2. It sought to include data protection as a listed area of desired expertise for membership of the new policing and community safety authority. As I had supported the Senators' amendment with regard to ensuring that data protection was included in the criteria required of the Garda board members, I also saw it fitting to support this amendment.

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

Seanad amendments Nos. 26 and 27 are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in grouping 9 are ministerial and are technical in nature. They are necessary to update collective citations for other Acts mentioned in sections 155 and 165 of the Bill. References to the Maternity Protection Acts, 1994 and 2004, will now become references to the Maternity Protection Acts, 1994 to 2022. This is on foot of the provisions of the Local Government (Maternity Protection and Other Measures for Members of Local Authorities) Act 2022. References to the Parental Leave Acts, 1998 to 2019, will now also become references to the Parental Leave Acts, 1998 to 2022, on foot of the provisions of the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2023.

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

Seanad amendments Nos. 29 to 33, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This set of amendments relates to the recommendation of a person for appointment to the role of police ombudsman. They concern section 172 and the appointment of the police ombudsman under section 174, which relates to the terms and conditions of office, and the insertion of a new section 173.

Following the conclusion of the Dáil debate on this Bill, I gave further consideration to a number of matters relating to the significant reforms of the GSOC given effect via this Bill. Operationally, the police ombudsman will have a broader remit and enhanced processes and procedures. I have spoken to my decision to change the name of the body and to introduce the name "Fiosrú" to better capture the scope of the body's remit. However, structurally, the body also moves to a single ombudsman model. These changes in the context of the broader reforms being made across the policing oversight landscape will see this new role of police ombudsman take on even greater significance.

On careful consideration, it is my view that such is the importance of this role and the envisaged status the police ombudsman figure will hold in the public eye that this office cannot be left vacant for any extended time. There may be circumstances where new leadership is urgently required, for example, at a time of significant challenge or public scrutiny. In light of the sensitive and often complex area in which the police ombudsman will operate, it is crucial that there are safeguards in place should these exceptional circumstances arise. I have, therefore, decided to introduce an alternative nomination process to supplement the primary process undertaken by the Public Appointment Service to be used where there is a vacancy in the office and an immediate need to ensure stability and consistency within the body. In such circumstances, there would also be a public interest for the Minister act swiftly to fill the police ombudsman position and it is my view that the legislation should allow for that type of situation.

Accordingly, this set of amendments provides for the Minister in exceptional circumstances and where it is in the public interest to recommend to Government a judge of the superior courts or the Circuit Court for nomination to the role of police ombudsman, that such an appointment is still to be subject to the same oversight as any nomination arising from the default process undertaken by the Public Appointments Service, i.e. being approved via the passage of resolutions by both Houses of the Oireachtas before the appointment by the President, and that such an appointment can only be for a period of up to three years with the exact term within this maximum to be determined by the Minister. Given the exceptional circumstances this alternative process is designed to account for, it is not expected this option would be used often, if at all, but it is possible to envisage a situation where there would be an urgent need to fill a post in order to ensure the public retains full confidence in the oversight of An Garda Síochána.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendment relates to section 201, which provides for the establishment of arrangements for the handling of complaints which the police ombudsman has deemed suitable for resolution by An Garda Síochána. The amendment relates specifically to subsection (3)(g), which provides that the arrangements established under the section shall include, "the provision, where appropriate, of advice, guidance or training to members of garda personnel who are the subject of complaints". The amendment deletes the word "advice" which is considered to be already captured by the latter reference to guidance, which means essentially the same thing in this context. It is a technical amendment.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That guidance will be given by other members of An Garda Síochána. Is that correct?

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Under the term "guidance", not "advice", yes.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Section 208 provides for the appointment of a designated officer to undertake investigations of admissible complaints and other specified matters where the police ombudsman is required to undertake such investigations or has determined such investigation is warranted. This minor amendment is required to correct a cross-reference which referred to section 204(2), when it should have been more specific in referring to section 204(1)(d). It is a technical amendment.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This amendment is required to correct an error identified in section 215(1)(a)(iii). Section 215 deals more broadly with the provision of reports to the Garda Commissioner by the police ombudsman on foot of a police ombudsman investigation. As previously drafted, the subparagraph in question applied only to members of An Garda Síochána and not to members of Garda staff. This is incorrect and not in line with the expansion of the police ombudsman's remit under the Bill to include all Garda personnel. This will only come into effect following the making of a ministerial order. Therefore, the amendment serves to capture both Garda members and Garda staff.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendment concerns section 224, which provides that the police ombudsman can review certain decisions made relating to the inadmissibility of a complaint or the discontinuation of an investigation. The amendment was required following a request from GSOC to reconsider subsections (6) and (7) of section 224, which set out how a person should be notified of a decision that a complaint made to the police ombudsman has been deemed inadmissible or that a police ombudsman investigation has been discontinued. GSOC was concerned that the previous wording, which provided that a notification delivered by electronic mail should be deemed to be received when a read receipt had been generated, was too prescriptive. I was in agreement. Accordingly, subsections (6) and (7) have been deleted and it will now be the responsibility of the body to develop its own operating procedures to ensure a fair, reasonable and transparent approach is taken to such notifications in each case.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This amendment relates to section 228, which deals generally with transitional complaints and investigations of GSOC when moving from the 2005 Act to the new regime under this Bill. My Department was informed there was a GSOC examination ongoing under section 106 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005. That section allows GSOC to examine the practices, policies or procedures of An Garda Síochána in order to prevent complaints arising. The amendment inserts a new subsection (9), which will allow for that examination to continue to its conclusion under section 106 of the 2005 Act, notwithstanding the repeal of that Act by this Bill. The power to conduct investigations under section 106 will not be carried forward under the Bill as it does not align with the expanded remit of the reformed body or its place in the new policing oversight framework. It is considered such examinations are more suited to the new policing and community safety authority with its new inspection functions.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This ministerial amendment is technical and required to deal with an error that occurred in the transposition of the Bill as amended on Committee Stage in this House. Section 252 lists sections of the Bill under which orders or regulations may be made in the post-Committee Stage draft of the Bill. Paragraph (j) in subsection (3) referred to section 3 of the Bill. This is incorrect as there is no power to make orders or regulations in that section. The correct cross-reference is to section 264(3) and the amendment corrects the error.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This amendment is technical and necessary to correct an error that occurred in the drafting process. Section 266(k)(ii) amends section 47(1A) of the Coroners Act 1962, a provision which allows for the current ombudsman commission to perform functions in relation to requesting the exhumation of bodies in certain circumstances. Section 266(k)(ii) updates references to the ombudsman commission with reference to the police ombudsman but, as currently drafted, it has two references to the body of the police ombudsman when they should be to the body by the police ombudsman. This amendment has corrected these errors.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Similar to amendment No. 28, I hope in the future there is leadership shown by the Department and Minister to say it would be referred to as "Fiosrú" at all times, as opposed to the longer "office of the police ombudsman".

Seanad amendment agreed to.

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

Baineann leasuithe 49 agus 58 le chéile agus féadfar iad a phlé le chéile.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The amendments in this grouping are technical in nature and were required to update references to the Garda Síochána Act 2005 and the Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) Act 2023 with reference to this Bill, when enacted. They also serve to continue certain CCTV schemes set out under section 38 of the 2005 Act until such time as the new scheme to be rolled out under the 2023 Act is ready to commence. Deputies will be aware that the recording devices Act was enacted in December last.

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

Baineann leasuithe 51 agus 52 le chéile agus féadfar iad a phlé le chéile.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

These amendments relate to the amendments to the Communications (Retention of Data) Act 2011. Section 6E of the 2011 Act permits An Garda Síochána to access cell site location data providing the geographic location of a mobile phone generally within the last 48-hour period in what are emerging cases. Access to this data may be granted where urgently needed to protect a person from a serious risk to life or personal safety or to determine the whereabouts of a missing person.

A Garda request for permission to get this data from telecommunications companies must be authorised by a superior officer who is not below the rank of superintendent. He or she must apply proportionality and necessity tests before making a decision. Given that these are urgent cases, the superior officer is not required to seek court approval for this in advance. Instead, the superior officer must personally apply to the District Court for affirmation of any decision to authorise access to this data within 72 hours.

The requirement to seek court affirmation of such requests after the event was introduced in 2022 on foot of Court of Justice of the EU rulings. Over the first six months of operation of these changes, from June to December last year, there were 76 Garda applications affirmed by the District Court under section 6E and the rate of applications is expected to increase over time. However, this needs to be seen in the context of the current population of the State of over 5 million people. It is also worth noting that according to the www.missingpersons.iewebsite, approximately 9,000 people each year go missing. Overall, the number of requests made under this section is low.

The amendments made are practical in nature. These types of applications have to be dealt with at any time on a 24-hour, seven-day basis by a Garda member not below superintendent rank. While a roster of superintendents has been put in place, this is disruptive to the normal work of these officers. There are very few statutory provisions which require a superintendent to almost immediately attend court at the frequency required by these cases. For this reason, I have lowered the minimum rank of superior officer who may authorise applications to that of inspector, a rank which is subject to more flexible rostering and on-call duties. On foot of advice from the Attorney General, I have also made further changes, which make this section more legally robust and to further ensure that privacy rights are also taken into account.

I am satisfied that these amendments ensure that section 6E will continue to operate as intended and that An Garda Síochána is well placed to offer immediate assistance and support in dealing with emergency situations.

Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The main difference is that the Minister is changing the definition of superior officer so someone of the rank of inspector would be able to make these applications.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Garda has said it is causing difficulty, given the level at which the officer has to attend court. By reducing it to inspector, it will be much easier for the Garda to use it. It is proving difficult for its members and by reducing it to the rank of inspector, there will be more flexibility and an ability for them to attend court in the way they need. It does not take away any of the protections and it will still have to go through court. That is still in place. It is just the rank of the officer that is changing.

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

Agreement to the Seanad amendments is reported to the House and a message will be sent to Seanad Éireann acquainting it accordingly.