Brendan Ryan (Labour)

Nine years ago I opposed this legislation when it came before the House. I will not give the Minister of State or the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform an opportunity to take a cheap shot at the Labour Party in the period leading up to an election by calling a vote. I will put on record my scepticism about this type of legislation.

Terrorism is dreadful but looking back over the past century, in every decade nasty governments killed more people than any group of terrorists. Governments are maintaining that record. That is not a justification but is a fact that informs this debate. Dealing with the threat of politically driven violence against civilians, which is my definition of terrorism, requires appropriate legal powers and a well trained and equipped police force.

Some of the reports from the new Garda inspectorate, which are very pro-gardaí, identify a list of things which we would associate with the complaints of the Garda Representative Association but which have turned out to be factually based, such as inadequate and out-of-date equipment, incomplete training and the upgrading of technical and other equipment at a pace incredibly unrelated to reality. We now know this is a fact. It is important that some sort of commitment is made to ensure the Garda does not spend an inordinate amount of time and energy seeking equipment we take for granted. I recall when it emerged that the Garda fraud squad did not have a fax machine because it had been in existence for only five years. What the Garda needs and is entitled to is cutting edge equipment and skills, and when new forensic systems or skills become available, we should ensure they are available to the Garda Síochána immediately and not after a process of evaluation, questioning and checking. Once it works in one country, we should use it.

We must ensure powers are used as intended. The disturbing report from the Data Protection Commissioner, about which we cannot get a detailed response from the Tánaiste, despite the best efforts of Deputy Howlin, states that phone messages of innocent citizens are being intercepted by the Garda, which in his view is out of proportion to any perceived threat. We now learn that Army intelligence is doing the same. Apart from the fact that parallel agencies are doing the same job when one agency could deal with external threats and the other with internal ones and be more effectively deployed, this gives rise to many issues.

I am always suspicious that when terrorists perpetrate an appalling act, we get another raft of legislation. That is the cheapest way to respond. It does not cost much to amend the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act but it would cost a great deal more to give the Garda the secure, powerful radio and computer systems, secure and powerful forensic back-up, high-quality, up-to-date modern training and a continuing process of professional renewal. The idea that the Garda could deal with the threats of 2007 with the training of 25 years ago is nonsense. That would not work in my profession.

I do not welcome this resolution. I tolerate it but I believe it is a smokescreen for the more difficult, demanding and expensive parts of the struggle against national and international terrorism, those parts being resources and training for those who have the job of defending us.