Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

A few specific points arise from reading the Bill. Obviously, section 7 is very important in that it provides an overall definition of the functions of the Garda Síochána. I query the wording of section 4 which provides that in performing its functions the Garda Síochána shall have regard to the importance of upholding human rights. Why does the section not provide simply that the Garda Síochána shall have a duty to uphold human rights? The provision as drafted strikes me as a little mealy-mouthed and cautious. To be historical, the concept of human rights goes back to the late 18th century and the Declaration of the Rights of Man at the beginning of the French Revolution. At that time, rights were seen very much in the context of the executive power of the state, the conditions under which it could detain people, try them and, possibly, put them to death. While the last of these is not relevant here, I wonder, nevertheless, why the provisions of section 4 are not more straightforward.

Senator O'Toole referred to section 17 and raised the issue of trade unions and the Garda Representative Association. It is important to place the Garda and the Defence Forces in a separate category in this instance. Members of these organisations do not have the right to strike in the way others do, though that has been subverted to a degree through what is termed "blue flu". The law in this area has not prevented spokesmen for Garda and Defence Forces representative associations from being, on occasion, as forthright in their public comments as any trade unionist. It does not detract from the rights of the organisations given their specific circumstances.

Section 15 makes provisions in respect of secret societies. The term "secret societies" always conjures up for me 19th century Italian nationalism and the Carabiniere. Is there a legislative definition of "secret society"? Has the further complication of transfers with the Police Service of Northern Ireland been considered? In my understanding of the PSNI, membership of societies must be registered. The force includes masons and I do not know whether the Orange Order counts as a secret society. Probably, it does not. If members of the PSNI are transferred to the Garda, it is possible that some of them will belong to a secret society, albeit with registered membership. Does this create any difficulty in terms of the legislation? Perhaps the matter should be examined.

The roles of the Minister and the Garda Commissioner are very well defined in the Bill. It is important in a democracy to ensure the Government has the right to point out priorities. This should be done in consultation with the police force to avoid practical difficulties. It is a welcome step forward to provide in the Bill that the Commissioner is the Accounting Officer of the Garda Síochána. There was a period in the Defence Forces and the Garda when every minor decision which involved the spending of money had to be double-checked by a junior or middle ranking official of the relevant Department. I am glad that is no longer the case.

Section 39 of the Bill relates to statistics. Without suggesting the Minister has a different view, it is important that statistics are trusted and released on an automatic basis. It has been the case here and in other jurisdictions that crime statistics have been used to make political points. Crime statistics must be as trustworthy as the economic data we receive from the Central Statistics Office. That is not to suggest that is not case currently.

An important element of the legislation is the provision resulting from the Good Friday Agreement and the Patten report whereby members of the Police Service of Northern Ireland can serve in the Garda and vice versa. It is a positive and welcome development.

Section 55 has given rise to some comment such as what information members can release. This seems to be an aspect informed by experience of the incidents that gave rise to the Nally report. I declare an interest in that I was one of the people impugned by certain allegations. It is right that that situation be straightened out because there is no doubt that allegations which have no foundation have caused great distress and concern to relatives in a situation where the people involved have had to answer certain claims of their own. I do not want to go into any more detail but it is right that that situation be corrected.

The section dealing with the ombudsman is an important part of the legislation. The Minister was right, after some hesitation, to adopt the name, otherwise there would be much fruitless debate about terminology and not about the substance. It is good to have a three person ombudsman commission. It is not modelled exactly on the position in Northern Ireland but the background and the position in Northern Ireland is very different. Essentially, we have a society where there is, broadly speaking — I do not want to over-generalise — a consensus behind the Garda Síochána although this does not detract from the fact that there may be difficulties with the Garda Síochána in certain communities.

I warmly welcome the provision for committees between the Garda and local authorities. That ought to include town councils as well as county councils. To take my home county as an example, the situation in Tipperary town may be quite different from that in Carrick-on-Suir or Clonmel. There should be an opportunity for a town council to have a formal system of liaison from time to time with the Garda Síochána. That provision is enormously beneficial and, perhaps, takes a leaf from the Patten report although it is not as formal as policing partnerships. We have our own needs and culture.

My colleague, Senator Mooney, referred to history. Some people date modern policing in Ireland not to Grattan's Parliament but to 1813 in the troubled barony of Middlethird in County Tipperary.