Lynn Ruane (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will speak to amendment No. 8 first. This is a simple amendment which seeks to include a specific reference to equality matters and the need for equality to be upheld within the principles of policing. As drafted, the Bill provides that policing services are to be provided "in a manner that protects and vindicates human rights". This is a welcome provision but would be made stronger again if it included a specific reference to the need to uphold equality. This would ensure individuals whom we know are subject to discrimination under the nine specific grounds referred to in the Employment Equality Act and the Equality Act would be provided explicit protection within the principles which will underpin policing in Ireland.

Amendment No. 9 seeks to insert a reference to fairness within the principles of policing. As drafted, the Bill provides that policing services will be provided "in a manner that supports the proper and effective administration of justice". I have spoken on many occasions in this Chamber about the fact that certain communities are policed more heavily and acutely than others. It is an uncomfortable truth but something we must come to terms with and confront. The assumption that policing services will be provided fairly is not a satisfactory safeguard because we already know that not to be the case. This amendment would provide that policing services are to be provided in a manner that supports the fair and proper effective administration of justice. It is a small but important and impactful change. I hope the Minister will consider accepting it.Related to this point - it is something I will seek to come back to on Report Stage - is the need for our policing services to be trauma informed in their development and delivery. The Bill provides a unique opportunity to embed the need for trauma-informed service within policing. Research tells us that the vast majority of persons with whom the police interact are people who have experienced trauma in some form or were subject to adverse childhood experiences. These experiences shape how we behave, why we engage in criminality and how we interact with authority. A trauma-informed approach to policing will lead to greater understanding of the needs of those interacting with the gardaí, more effective interventions and greater confidence in the delivery of policing services.

Amendment No. 10 pertains to the need for a whole-of-community response to public safety. Like amendments Nos. 8 and 9, this amendment seeks to expand the meaning of policing principles within the Bill. It is based on an acknowledgment that effective policing depends on a whole-of-community response to public safety. When we think about policing and the administration of justice, we often conceptualise it as an "us and them" situation, involving criminals and well-behaved people, where An Garda Síochána is exclusively entrusted with maintaining safety and security. However, truly effective policing relies on a co-ordinated community and societal approach to creating and maintaining safety. If we look at how we responded to the riots in Dublin a fortnight ago, we will see that a concerted effort was made by many people in both Chambers to "other" the people who were involved, to put distance between us and them. However, they are "us"; they are in our communities and form part of the idea of safe policing and community forums. It is my assertion not only that this was unhelpful in the immediate aftermath of the violence in Dublin, but also that it is an unhelpful way to conceptualise violence and disorder more generally in terms of our shared ambition to create safer communities for us all.

Working in the community sector for as long as I did, it was always extremely difficult to hear people who shared the intention of reducing crime or increasing safety saying "this is not my community" or "this is what our community is" as if the people who engage in a particular behaviour that we may see as a threat to safety within the community, or who engage in a social activity that causes harm to themselves or to other people, are somehow in some other liminal space that is separate from the community and not part of it. I always felt that understanding how we engage in community organisations is not about separating those two spaces, because that can make people feel so ostracised that they rebel within and against their own communities. Under any legislation, or within any policing or safety forums, there must be a willingness to engage with groups and with people who are engaged in activities in which we do not like their being engaged. They do not stop engaging in such activity just because we do not like it or we wave the finger. That is not what happens. Shame cycles lead to people staying in their current positions because it is a case of "you are them and we are us and we are to stay in this type of dynamic with each other".

I remember that when I first tried to set up a programme in 2008, I ironically - probably to amuse myself - called it the DPP, the drug-dealers pilot programme. I thought DPP was a clever name for it at the time, and I still think it is. I will explain what happened there. Even those who want to work with people in the community to bring everyone along have a fear that by engaging with people who are engaged in behaviour you do not agree with, somehow you are trying to excuse or condone that behaviour even though that is not actually the effort being made. The effort being made is based on the idea that we can never truly change something unless there is a willingness to understand it. Is it not similar, on a micro level, to looking at conversations about the North and the South and how to get everybody in the room? That national concept of peace has to be taken right down to the micro level of community. That is what I mean by a whole-of-community response. Putting put the word "whole" in there is my effort to ensure everybody is included, even if we are not comfortable or happy with the behaviour being engaged in. We will never achieve cohesion if we do not have a whole-of-community mindset where we do not other people.

Amendment No. 11 relates to the provision in the Bill, as drafted, requiring the policing principles to establish that effective policing depends on securing the support and confidence of the public. This is a provision that I agree with absolutely but it is missing an important reference to the need for trust between the public and An Garda Síochána. Similar to amendment No. 9, the reality is that many communities do not presently trust members of An Garda Síochána. When I reflect on my own experiences as a young person, I recall that there were many occasions where people refused to call the gardaí even though they should have because they simply did not trust how the gardaí would respond to the situation. I know that is still the case. Some of that can be handed down historically through the generations even if a person does not directly have a negative experience with the gardaí. It can become a cultural norm generationally within the community that the relationship is not a positive one and that one should not engage in that relationship. We need to make efforts to have some sort of restorative justice programme between people within particular communities and the gardaí to the benefit of everybody. At the moment there is a incredibly weak foundation on which to build an effective policing service. I do not believe that true community safety can be created without that.