Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)

I am grateful to the Labour Party for tabling the motion to allow the House to respond to the second Morris tribunal report. As Senator O'Toole has stated on the Order of Business in recent months, the fact that we have not debated the first report to date is regrettable but we are doing so this evening. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Mr. Justice Morris for his report and its clear findings and the way in which he conducted the tribunal. Others could learn from him. When the second report was published, I welcomed the courage of the AGSI because the association was honest and up-front and it recognised the scale of the problem unlike others, who refused to comment on the day. It was a difficult day for senior management figures within the force but they were up-front and honest.

I made comments yesterday about the suitability of the decision made by the Commissioner in respect of transferring five of the officers cited in the report. I still disagree with that decision. Senator O'Toole outlined four options, of which the worst was transferring people from one division to another. The better option would have been to suspend the officers until such time as the DPP decided whether charges stemming from the report were to be made. If not, it would be another matter. It was the wrong decision to shunt five of the officers mentioned in the report from one division to another. I stand over this comment but I understand the difficulty the Commissioner obviously faced at the time.

I recommend to the House the comments made by Senator Cummins this evening when he effectively suggested we would park the Garda Síochána Bill 2004, which is due to return to this House before the summer recess to report amendments made in the Dáil. It would be wise to co consider the Bill for another three or four months. The Bill is timely and no one is suggesting it should be shelved but the only legislative change the Government has proposed in response to the Morris tribunal report concerns the requirement for gardaí to account for their actions as members of the force. There may be another amendment in the offing and I welcome the Minister of State's comments in respect of the ombudsman commission, but it would be wrong to suggest the only response the Government would make to the Bill would be the amendment to which I referred. It is the view of our group that we should take our time on Report Stage when it returns to the House.

Senators Cummins, Jim Walsh, Tuffy and I contributed during the lengthy debate on the Bill in this House, as did many others. Senators will remember we spent a full week on Committee and Report Stages. We put much time into the Bill but events have moved on. The issue of the ombudsman must be addressed. I met Mrs. Nuala O'Loan in Northern Ireland. I was impressed by her office and by the fact that many of the cases that came across her desk were handed out to very experienced officers, some of whom are from the London Metropolitan Police service, who are able to investigate and determine the validity of the complaints made. This is the model we need. On Senator Maurice Hayes's point about visibility, there is a significant advantage in terms of the visibility of one person being the ombudsman for this area. I ask the Government to dwell on this matter between now and the report of the amendments from the Dáil. The Minister of State's comments reflect this somewhat.

Another argument concerns the inspectorate. It is not just a question of complaints. The public has questions about the deployment of gardaí and detection rates. Where I live, we have seen our division's detection rates fall by one third in the past four years. The question of why this has been allowed to happen at a time when the Government argues that resources are being invested in additional officers on the beat must be asked of senior and middle management. The public has legitimate questions about deployment, whether we are getting the best use of the force's resources and whether we are getting the best value for money in terms of the resources that are made available. For this reason it is important we have some independent assessment, a type of international best practice. How is Manchester faring on detection rates? How is Paris faring?

In his speech, the Minister of State referred to why it is important to have a national police force. If one reads the recommendations in the Morris tribunal report, the first chapter deals with the issue of the role of head office. Mr. Justice Morris is critical of this area because there is such a distance between County Donegal and Dublin. We may need to re-examine the regionalisation of the force's command structure. The great lesson of the Morris tribunal must surely be that certain elements of the force in County Donegal were out of the control of middle management. This is something we must learn for the future.

In response to what the Minister of State said, we may need to re-examine this issue as a means of giving better accountability in terms of the resources present. I am a supporter of the Garda Síochána. It is one of the great success stories of this young State, which is over 80 years old. We must support the Garda Síochána while also supporting the valuable requirement for reform of the force to make it more accountable.