Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

There is no sense in which my Department refused anybody a briefing. If such a request had been communicated to us, we would have given a briefing to anybody who wanted it.

I do not wish to devote much time to the group 1 amendments because these are technical in nature, with little serious content from a policy perspective. In the main, they arise from drafting improvements suggested by the Parliamentary Counsel. The other types of amendments involved are those correcting the alphabetic position of definitions, on which half an hour was spent in the Dáil, clarifying references to the disciplinary regulations, defining the word "document", changing references to "Departments of Government" to "Departments of State", ensuring consistency with normal drafting conventions by using the word "direct" as opposed to "require", and correcting typographical errors.

I will refer to some of these amendments in more detail. Amendment No. 9, for example, which inserts "vindicating the human rights of each individual" as a new paragraph (c) in section 7(1) of the Bill dealing with the functions of the Garda Síochána, was agreed by me with a change in the wording in light of an amendment by Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, the Fine Gael justice spokesman in the Dáil, who proposed the insertion of the phrase "respecting the human rights of each individual". In deference to Senator Tuffy, she put down a somewhat similar amendment in this House on Committee Stage last December, which was supported by Fine Gael Senators and Senator Maurice Hayes. While I was not persuaded initially to make the change, I reflected on it and accepted it.

With regard to amendment No. 11, Deputy Costello was sufficiently persistent in making a case for the amendment which I agreed to make to section 7(3). This resulted from his amendment to his own amendment and, in the circumstances, I was happy to make the change.

On the subject of amendment No. 32, I was pressed in the other House to strengthen the provision in section 16(1) of the Bill which provides for the drawing up of a new code of ethics, by inserting "shall" instead of "may". I did this on Report stage.

Amendment No. 33 deals with the insertion in the Bill of provisions that will enable the Garda Representative Association to look after the interests of Garda trainees. I made this concession with the approval of the association and Garda management.

Amendment No. 37, which deals with arrangements for the Garda Commissioner to obtain the views of the public about policing matters and the state of crime, is not a new provision. When the Bill was considered in this House, it appeared as section 34. However, the suggestion was made to me in the other House that it should appear in that part of the Bill dealing with the role of the Garda Commissioner. Accordingly, it now appears as section 27.

Amendment No. 133 is necessary as a transitional provision with regard to the continuance in being of Garda disciplinary regulations under the 1989 regulations, although those regulations may be revoked in line with the provisions governing the drawing up of new regulations in this area. I envisage that there will be new regulations but I want to provide that some disciplinary regime will be in existence until new regulations are introduced.

Amendment No. 135 is related to the matter of the Garda Commissioner being made the Accounting Officer for the force in regard to the appropriation accounts under section 43 of the Bill. The responsibilities arising in that regard under section 18 of the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act 1993 are expressed by that Act as applying to Departments or offices. It is doubtful if the Garda Síochána comes within the definition of those two terms, so it was necessary to make the amendment to the 1993 Act as provided for in the amendment.