Alex White (Labour)

My amendment No. 2 is put forward largely for the same reasons as those rehearsed by Senator Regan. I ask the Minister to clarify the notion of "expertise" in this section. The extent to which this is explained will influence Members on this side of the House in ascertaining whether it might be acceptable for such evidence to be given by any member or former member of the Garda Síochána. Like Senator Regan, I cannot understand, from my reading of the section, how a court is to come to the conclusion that a particular garda or former garda has the appropriate expertise. "Expertise" is defined in the section as "experience, specialised knowledge or qualifications". Any garda or former garda deemed to have such expertise is then referred to in the section as the "appropriate expert".

An obvious argument in favour of the amendment is that a chief superintendent, with all his or her experience, background knowledge and judgment, is a person who, at least at a superficial level, would be regarded as possessing a high level of expertise and in whom one would perhaps be more likely - without meaning to cause offence to individual members of the force - to repose a high level of reliance than may be the case in respect of "any" member or former member. Perhaps the Minister will be able to explain the rationale for this provision. One possible explanation may be the argument that levels of expertise can be developed by individual members of the force which would not require them to be an inspector, superintendent or chief superintendent. There are individual gardaí, whether community gardaí or otherwise, who, by virtue of their day-to-day activities, become experts on this or that aspect of Garda work.

If that is what the Minister has in mind, it is not what has been stated in defence of the provision. I am not completely sure, from any of the material I have seen or read, why we are to depart from what may not be an absolute policy but is certainly a practice with which we are familiar in legislation, whereby one relies on relatively senior gardaí to deal with matters such as this. To clarify, I am not at all confused in the way that the Minister has suggested people outside the House may be confused. That is, I understand fully that the role of gardaí under this section has to do with evidence in regard to the existence of an organisation rather than membership of it. However, I cannot see the basis for the argument that an individual garda could have developed any particular level of expertise other than that he or she knows of the existence of a particular organisation. I am trying to navigate my way around this provision but cannot understand the rationale behind it. I hope the Minister will be able to put me right in this regard.

Nor can I understand the inclusion of the provision whereby any former member of the Garda Síochána may be deemed to be an expert in these matters. There is not even a stipulation that such a person's membership must have ceased within a particular time limit. Under the section, it is comprehended that a person who left the force many years ago may be deemed to have the requisite expertise. It is somewhat perplexing that any such person could be regarded by a court as possessing such expertise regarding the existence of a criminal organisation. It would be of assistance if the Minister would elaborate on the rationale for this.