Maurice Hayes (Independent)

I, too, would like to have had more time for a combined Oireachtas discussion on this important Bill. The Minister is constrained by the time available to him. Like Senator Mansergh, as a simple former civil servant, I cannot see why the time could not have been extended because there is value in a close committee-style scrutiny of complicated matters. Having said that, the Minister engaged with us fully on the previous Stage in this House. A number of the amendments that appear here are in response to issues raised at the time.

It would make the best the enemy of the good for the Minister to hold fire now on this matter. There is a tail wind in the Morris report and it would be like throwing away the spinnaker if he stopped now. I have a firm belief in the ability of great organisations to resist change and get a second wind. Having said that, I would like to refer to general points raised with which I agree. First, this could be a centralising matter. On the other hand, it should allow for devolved structures. I would not be in favour of having different police services. It is important that the whole structure is flattened and that there are devolved structures for people to raise issues, where comparisons can be made and recognition taken of the different policing needs of different communities and areas. I am seized of the point made by Senator Higgins about making the education of young gardaí like the education of others with whom they would be working. If that means being members of the USI, good luck to them. It might be managed by delaying the time of attestation or whatever.

On the amendments, I welcome the introduction of the provision relating to human rights and the fact that the code of ethics is made mandatory. A sufficient mechanism for consultation is set out in the Bill to ensure that the Garda Commissioner has enough help to prepare a draft of this for the Minister. It is the Minister himself who will produce the code.

One set of amendments does not seem to be included in the first group, where I expected to find them. These are amendments Nos. 109 to 114, inclusive. They are technical amendments and I cannot find them anywhere else. The amendments affect the same item, where the word "member" is deleted and "person" is substituted. I have no other comment on that grouping of amendments. I thank the Minister for taking on board many of the points made in the course of the debate.