David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I strongly welcome the motion tabled by Senator Conway. I do not believe it requires any amendment whatever. The other amendments on several but related issues are inappropriate. I do not disagree with anything that is said in them but they are not relevant.

I should declare an interest. Some years ago I was sent an invitation - as I think were all Members of the House - to join a local joint policing committee. I joined the north inner city policing committee and we meet in City Hall. I have found these meetings extremely valuable. We get representation from local community groups who report their concerns and specific issues of policing that worry them. The police are there in force at a senior level and they give reports about crime in the area, statistics, variation and these are probed by the public representatives at those meetings. It gives an opportunity for local communities to be represented in an arena where it matters and where one can have a clear result.

In addition, traditionally the Dublin city manager has organised on a twice yearly basis lunches in City Hall, where material is presented about the way in which the city is going. The people involved are those on the joint policing committee, although there may be one or two extra people. We have had slide shows and other presentations. I think these are extremely positive developments. I was very glad to be involved. I have not had an invitation since I was unwell but it may be just that it is being re-organised. Every opportunity I have had to go there was a positive experience where our concerns were taken seriously, dealt with and a practical resolution occurred.

The first amendment in the names of the Fianna Fáil Members is redundant. They are dealing with separate issues. We know that Garda numbers have fallen and that is definitely regrettable. I accept that but it has nothing whatever to do with joint policing committees - it is to do with policing levels. It refers to the closure of 139 Garda stations and 17 courthouses since 2011. I gather the closing of courthouses has started to level off and has stopped, but I think it would be a very good idea if the police authorities were encouraged to be honest about it and to stop telling lies. They closed the police station around the corner from me off Parnell Street. I cannot remember the name of the street, it is where Dicey Reilly used to parade but it was a big station built in the 1930s. They said it was closed for redecoration, but they have kept open one little room in a Georgian house next door and recently - having told us they were restoring the building - it has re-emerged as a hostel for the homeless. This is ridiculous. If they will not tell the truth to public representatives, where are we? We would like to know the facts.

The amendment also refers to the numbers in prison that are over the capacity of the building. I think it would be much better to start closing prisons and to only put in prison people who are a danger to themselves or to society.

The building of prisons is a complete waste of time. The amendment notes that murder in Ireland increased by 33% and calls on the Government to do this, that or the other, all of which is redundant. It is the subject of another motion and is not relevant. An amendment should address directly the subject of the main motion and this amendment does not so do. Therefore, I appeal to my Fianna Fáil colleagues not to put it to a vote. If they do, I will linger around and will vote with the Government on this one because I consider it to be an excellent motion on which Senator Conway and his colleagues ought to be commended. If Fianna Fáil or Sinn Féin Members wish to table other motions, that is good because there is room for all of them. Members can then discuss such matters but can do so in the proper context. As a House, Members should unite behind the joint policing committees.

I will turn briefly to the Sinn Féin amendment. It recommends that all joint policing committees regularly convene public meetings. As far as I am aware, the meetings of joint policing committees are open to the public and so they could constitute public committees. Members of the public rarely attend and reporters rarely attend but do occasionally. Consequently, I consider these to be public meetings. Moreover, senior gardaí and appropriate local authority staff are in attendance. As for representatives of statutory agencies, they are called from time to time. As for this business about how there should be a minimum of four meetings per annum, it sounds like one of the elements of the late Myles na gCopaleen in which one might ask, "Is this a committee meeting or what? We will have four committee meetings a year". How does one know that four meetings are needed? Moreover, why is it necessary to set the dates a year in advance? This is all hogwash that simply has been put down for the sake of covering paper with print.

The Sinn Féin amendment further recommends that the Garda representative should present a report at each meeting in written format, including statistical data. They already do this but the only point I would make is most of this information is taken back from us at the end of the meetings. I suppose this is for reasons of confidentiality or whatever -I do not know - but we already get these reports.

This is an excellent motion that supports a very positive initiative. It should have strong support from all sides of the House.