Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

This has been an interesting and stimulating debate. I thank the Senators for all their contributions. Although there have been some criticisms of the Bill and of me, the House has given a warm welcome to the principle of the Bill. We have spent over seven hours discussing its provisions and I look forward to a continuing constructive input from Senators during its next Stages.

Unfortunately, in the time allotted for the Second Stage debate, I could not possibly deal with all the points raised. My efficient officials have prepared notes on many of the points raised but if I were to attempt to get through them in the time allowed to me today, I would only get about a quarter of the way. I will make a few brief points in reply.

A number of Members have pointed out that the local authority-Garda interaction provided for in the Bill seems to exclude town councils. The Bill is drafted that way and this is something on which I will reflect and prepare amendments. I agree that local authorities centred on towns are, by definition, urban authorities and that criminality in urban areas is of a different order and requires a different response from that in other areas. This is not to say that crime does not exist in rural areas. However, the involvement of the local authority in urban areas merits a revision of that particular proposal in the Bill.

The exact composition of the joint policing committees envisaged in this Bill has also excited some debate. The Bill envisages a choice. The county development board model is one of the choices available but it is not mandated as the only one. I gather from the contributions made here that the majority of Members favour a more direct local authority elected representative role, rather than a mixed approach. I wish to reflect on this and to consider how we can make these committees real workable institutions. I do not want them to be committees at which local authority representatives are a minority or feel excluded.

My purpose in this Bill, and in the Intoxicating Liquour Act, is to fight against the tendency to remove local authority members' powers and to think of new ways through which they can have a significant policy input into what happens in their areas. In that context, I reiterate that these provisions are not envisaged as one-way avenues through which complaints about Garda inadequacies come from elected representatives. As Senator Walsh and many others pointed out, they should deal with estate management, planning, traffic and lighting issues and by-laws regarding drinking and public spaces.

All of those issues are ones where the Garda has a legitimate right to be heard on some occasions and, at other times, a legitimate sense of grievance that what should be done is not being done by those who have the power to do it. In terms of the new powers that are conferred on local authorities in respect of intoxicating liquor, gardaí will have an opportunity to interact with local authority representatives and to point out the policing difficulties associated with particular late closing times in certain communities or certain parts of certain communities.

I will now move on to the question of a policing board. Senator Tuffy, Senator Hayes and others argued that one of the features of the Northern Ireland situation is the existence of an independent policing board. One has to regard the PSNI as a regional constabulary like the other constabularies in the United Kingdom. We have a national police force which discharges other functions including national security services and which has a different relationship with central government. If I thought it would be an advantage to have an independent policing board, I would go down that road. I am not trying to grab powers to myself or to clutch things to my bosom politically out of a sense of selfishness or self-aggrandisement. Accountability is most important and the current ministerial-Commissioner route for accountability to the Houses of the Oireachtas is of great importance. If, for instance, something like the RTE authority were put between me and the Commissioner, would public accountability be enhanced or reduced if a group of 12 great and good men and women were put there who had independent functions and who gave policy directions to the Garda Síochána? Would I be in a position to account in the Houses for failures of policing policy and State policy in regard to law and order if I could simply abdicate from that issue and say that, unfortunately, I have no control over these decisions? Likewise would I be accountable in terms of the activities of the Garda Síochána to this House, which is an important check and balance, if there were an independent layer of administration between the Garda Síochána and me?

I do not believe we need an independent policing board, although this was appropriate in Northern Ireland. It was appropriate there because it was necessary to join the two pillars of that community together in a common enterprise to support the new police force there, which I do not believe is necessarily the case here.

In regard to the general charge made on a number of occasions that, somehow, the capacity to give directives to the Garda Síochána amounts to a new charter for political interference or as one person, not in this House said, that I was becoming a self-styled chief of police, the reverse is true. What I want is a system whereby, in certain circumstances, the elected Government which exercises the executive power under the Constitution can give the Commissioner of the day, who otherwise is independent in the discharge of his functions, a clear direction to follow a particular policy. It could involve sealing the Border in the case of foot and mouth disease or providing an emergency service should that be warranted. It could also relate to a general policy area. However, unless the security of the State made it impossible, the legislation envisages that any such direction has to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas so that people can see exactly how the Government is exercising that power.