Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is difficult to return to a debate when so much has happened in the interim. Last week I commended the Minister on his handling of the Bill. There has been a growing acceptance of many of the points which he put forward in it. There has been much comment this morning on the proposed constitutional amendment in relation to asylum seekers. However, that is a another day's debate.

The Bill contains many fresh and imaginative proposals, in particular, the provision relating to policing at local level and involvement in that regard by civilians and others. It also provides that the commissioner will be the Accounting Officer for the force, which is to be welcomed. The question most asked of Departments is, who spends the money? A person given responsibility for a budget must prioritise how he or she utilises that money. When given specific responsibilities, people are better able to deal with matters and often engage in good housekeeping.

I commend the Bill and thank the Minister for attending the debate today. We look forward to Commitee and Remaining Stages and to its passage through the Dáil.

John Paul Phelan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister to the House again. It is noteworthy that he attended here on the three occasions the Second Stage debate was held. Not many Ministers remain for so much of a debate. In fact, many make their contribution and leave as soon as possible. I congratulate the Minister in that regard.

This Bill is one of the most important to come before the House during my time here. As in the case of other legislation, much of it is good and other parts could be improved upon. I welcome its inclusion of an ombudsman commission, a progressive step which has been welcomed by everyone and one which will be of assistance to the Garda in the future. Serious questions have been raised down through the years regarding the operation of the Garda Síochána and accountability within it. I am delighted the Minister has provided for an ombudsman commission. It will bring about many improvements for the force.

Also included is a provision regarding joint policing committees. As a former member of a local authority in Kilkenny, I am aware of the number of representations received by councillors from local groups in terms of policing issues on the ground. The establishment of joint policing committees is to be welcomed. However, my attention, and that of many other Members, has been drawn to a discrepancy in the current draft which provides that local authority members of town councils, formerly town commissions, and borough councils will not have the same rights as members of county and city councils as regards joint policing committees. This needs to be examined.

An example was given yesterday of County Cork, which has 12 urban authorities. It must be acknowledged that a large proportion of criminality takes place in urban areas. In view of this, the Bill would be improved if it provided that town and borough councillors could become members of the joint policing committees. It is interesting that the term "local authority" as defined in the Bill differs from that in the Local Government Act 2001, also discussed in this House. That should be corrected. I hope the Minister will see fit, during Committee and Report Stages, to give urban authorities direct access to joint policing committees.

A number of speakers referred to the Garda volunteer force, which is, in many respects, a good proposal. I listened with amazement to the contribution of one Senator who spoke of parents policing discos when he was young. I do not believe that is what is envisaged under the Bill and I could not support such an idea. Parents cannot be allowed to patrol the streets in a vigilante type fashion in order to protect their children and, God knows, whatever else. The Garda volunteer force may have some merit but I would have serious questions to ask if it were to be used in the manner suggested by a Senator on the Government side.

I have been contacted by a number of voluntary bodies as regards section 26 which deals with future payment by bodies and groups for a Garda presence during the holding of particular events. Many bodies may have the resources to fund a Garda presence at their events but that would not be the case for small festivals and voluntary events. I urge the Minister to consider exempting voluntary bodies from this provision. The proposal is not a bad done, but it needs greater consideration in terms of its detail. I urge the Minister to re-examine this issue before proceeding.

I am also aware — this point may not be relevant to the Bill — as a representative of a rural area of concerns regarding the closure of rural Garda stations. It is an issue which crops up at every meeting I attend. Local communities are rightly aggrieved about the non-occupation of Garda stations in their areas. It is imperative that as many rural Garda stations as possible are manned in the future. The presence of the Garda on the beat in any area, be it rural or urban, is a deterrent to criminality. I ask that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform look favourably on the proposal to fund rural Garda stations as a preventative measure. It is important to have in place a garda involved in the local community, a garda whose children attend the local school, a garda who is involved in local activities in his or her area. Such gardaí are an asset to a rural community. I would like to see more rather than less of them in place in the future.

I am also anxious that the Minister reply to a statement issued yesterday by the Taoiseach when he said that remarks made by him and the Minister about the activities of the IRA had indirectly led to action taken that might see an end to the criminality to which they referred. While this is not directly linked to the Bill, will the Minister indicate if he is satisfied with the words spoken by the Taoiseach, that the Minister's remarks might bring an end to the criminality to which he referred? The Taoiseach has become famous for the type of language he uses but does the Minister consider that the use of the word "might" in this situation is sufficiently strong or appropriate?

I broadly support the thrust of the Bill but I am concerned about a number of areas, in particular section 26, and the provision whereby local authorities will not be directly represented on the joint policing committees. Those are two areas that can be improved upon.

In my own city of Kilkenny, which retains its status as a city despite the battle we had in that regard after the Local Government Act 2001, and its surrounding areas, which has a population of approximately 25,000 people, there will not now be a direct link with the joint policing committee as proposed under the Bill. Much of the thuggery or whatever in which people engage when leaving pubs or nightclubs at weekends takes place on the streets in the city of Kilkenny and it would behighly inappropriate if the members of the borough council in Kilkenny did not have the opportunity to make a direct input into the joint policing committees, and not through the roundabout mechanism of county development boards and so on. Many town authorities have informal arrangements with the local gardaí but this is an opportunity to finalise those arrangements and I urge the Minister, before going any further, to take this opportunity to do so.

Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand the Minister will be taking the next Bill in the House and it is proposed to extend this debate by 15 minutes, if that is in order, which means the Minister will be called on to reply at 12.05 p.m. rather than 11.50 a.m. That should give sufficient time to allow other speakers contribute.

Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mary White (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister and his officials to the House. This is one of the most important Bills, if not the most important, to come before the Houses of the Oireachtas this year.

It is recognised internationally that the Garda Síochána was established in 1924 with an efficiency and comprehensiveness which was remarkable. The fact that our police force remains unarmed is considered a major contributory factor in reducing the number of armed crimes in the State. However, such an exemplary police force can only be maintained with the implied and express approval of the public it serves. It is built on public trust. When that trust becomes diluted, the effectiveness of this exemplary institution is compromised.

The vast majority of members of the Garda Síochána do their job to the best of their ability. It is a tough and thankless job few would be prepared to do. The basic pay for gardaí on the beat is €30,000 a year, this for a job with many potential dangers. When Charlie Chawke, the local publican in Dundrum where I live, was attacked, unarmed gardaí pursued and caught the robbers. The tragic deaths of two gardaí on the Stillorgan Road last year and the shooting dead of Detective Garda Jerry McCabe and the serious wounding of Detective Garda Ben O'Sullivan in Adare were an indication of the dangers of the job. There are very few jobs in which one's life is in danger, and we have to respect what the gardaí do for us every day.

When I see a garda on the beat I become relaxed, regardless of whether I am driving in traffic or whatever. I have an emotional reaction to gardaí on the beat. It is important that they are visible on our streets but it is also important for Members of the House to realise that 1,000 assaults on gardaí were reported last year.

The setting up of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission is the most significant aspect of the Bill. There has been a steady momentum of controversy and negative publicity building up about the Garda Síochána over the past number of years. There is the Barr tribunal on the shooting in Abbeylara of John Carthy, the Morris tribunal, about which we spoke when the Minister was in the House on a previous occasion, investigating alleged corruption by gardaí in the Donegal area, the May Day parade which suggested heavy-handedness and lack of control in the Garda, the "Prime Time" special on the lack of responsiveness and accountability of the Garda Síochána Complaints Board, and the so-called "blue flu", which was appalling and out of line. It was a serious decision on the part of the gardaí to take that action and pretend they were sick.

I made a personal complaint to the Garda Complaints Board about an incident I witnessed about three years ago. I was fearful of making the complaint because I did not know what the consequences would be but my conscience would not allow me overlook the incident. I will not give the detail of it but I reported it because what I saw was a serious injustice from a human rights point of view. I still worry about it. I was interviewed about the incident by members of the Garda at a high level and they told me at the time that the careers of the garda who carried out the incident and the other two gardaí who observed what was going on were in jeopardy. The case went through the system but it goes back to the fact that an organisation investigating itself has been proven not to be correct. What happened in this case was a serious miscarriage of justice, and nothing was done about it. It is not proper to go into too much detail but at the time I was observing it the thought came to me that this is what the Stazi must have been engaged in.

I am a huge admirer of gardaí. I love to see them on the street and I am totally supportive of them but it is like everything else in life, including the issue we were talking about involving ex-political prisoners in the North, loyalists and republicans, most of whom want a peaceful process. We cannot tar everybody with the same brush. Approximately 95% of gardaí do an outstanding job but there have been examples of the opposite and we have to clear them up. I do not repeat the incident I witnessed lightly in this House but I will never forget it and I will never forget how it was dealt with.

The membership of the new commission will comprise three members nominated by the Government and ultimately appointed by the President. They will be recommended by both these Houses. One member must be a woman. The Government will fully scrutinise each candidate to ensure their eligibility and qualifications. Automatically excluded are the following: members of the Garda Síochána; Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas; Members of the European Parliament; and members of a local authority.

The most interesting and pressing aspect of this legislation is that it provides for a more independent review body, an ombudsman, to investigate and discipline Garda behaviour. Nuala O'Loan, the Northern Ireland Police Ombudsman, encapsulates all the qualities necessary for that office to the highest degree. Without her there would be less confidence in the integrity of the ombudsman position. It is appreciated that she has faced many difficulties at great personal risk.

I would like the Minister to review the proposal that the Government can appoint people to chief superintendent and superintendent positions. That would be gross intervention. If the Garda Síochána is compared to a company, then its chief executive, the Garda Commissioner, should be able to appoint the management and middle management. That is an extreme intervention by Government to appoint the chief superintendents and superintendents. The Minister is obliged to look at that. If this becomes part of the legislation it will take a long time to rectify. The previous Garda Complaints Board was set up in 1984 so it will take another 20 years if we want to reverse that. I appeal to the Minister not to pursue this course.

Section 16, which deals with the introduction of a code of ethics, will hopefully reduce the number of complaints currently arising due to misconduct by gardaí. In the incident I observed there was no evidence that a code of standards existed. It probably would not have happened if a formal code of ethics applied to each Garda station. I support the potential use of volunteer members, as proposed in the Bill. When I lost my telephone, the insurance company required me to go the Garda and I went to my local station in Dundrum. A uniformed garda had to waste time writing all the details about my losing a telephone. That is a farce.

On the positive side, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties welcomes the Bill. It says the proposed legislation contains some important and necessary improvements to the scheme first established in 2003. It is good to see some of the concerns raised by the Irish Human Rights Commission and the ICCL have been met and that genuine changes have been made. The IHRC says the Bill marks an historic step towards placing human rights at the centre of Irish politics.

The chairman of the National Crime Council asked me to raise the issue of section 31 regarding local authorities. He felt that just to leave it to the local authorities and the Garda would exclude local area partnerships, five of which are based in Dublin, where local communities and organisations are represented. Drug task forces should be included because these are the people working on the ground. The representatives of the local communities should be part of this initiative, not just the local authorities.

I thank the Minister and his officials and congratulate him on this Bill. It was only proper that I should speak about my personal experience with regard to the Garda Complaints Board. One cannot surpass first-hand experience.

James Bannon (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome elements of the Bill, and in doing so I commend the Garda Síochána on its unfailing professionalism and dedicated service over the years. Many gardaí have made the ultimate sacrifice in the course of carrying out their duties, having lost their lives in the service of their country. Those people should always be remembered for their dedication to the protection of their fellow citizens and I commend them. Often they are just out of sight and out of mind, but their wonderful service in the protection of the State should never be forgotten.

As regards the setting up of local policing committees, these should be established exclusively from public representatives and gardaí. There would be a conflict of interest if they were to operate in conjunction with the county development boards, as proposed in the Bill, as these bodies have a specialised economic, social and cultural brief of their own. I would like the Minister to consider that.

The guidelines for the setting up of these committees should include strong representation from town as well as county councils, as appropriate. This Bill has no role for the elected members of these councils. Based on my experience in local government over the last 18 years, not a month goes by without the issue of crime and law and order coming up at local authority meetings. Local public representatives are at the coalface of what happens within communities. There is a major role for us to play. If there is vandalism on the streets, break-ins etc., these matters are raised at local authority meetings and often take up half the allotted time. Local communities liaise with their representatives who have a pivotal role to play in these matters.

Powers should be given to these local committees to co-opt members or experts. We are all aware from our own communities of people who are involved with the disadvantaged, on drug task forces or in other organisations that try to improve society. Local people know best who is genuinely interested in improving the lot of those who live in a particular town or area. This is something that should be seriously examined. I also believe strongly that those committees should be chaired by a member of the local authority. They are elected by the people, they have a role to play and this should be considered by the Minister. That is what democracy at local level is about. I also recommend that those committees should be established for the full five-year term of the local authority to give them continuity.

The chief superintendent and superintendent should be members of the local committee and should attend its meetings. I disagree with Senator White's argument that the superintendent should delegate a sergeant or a garda for this role. It is important and it gives real teeth and muscle to the committee if the chief superintendent is in attendance at those meetings to take on board the views of other members with regard to improved policing in a particular area.

The Minister should afford the Local Authority Members' Association, representing 1,500 to 1,800 councillors throughout Ireland, of which I am general secretary, an opportunity to meet him after the Bill's enactment and before the guidelines are prepared. This body has strong views on how the guidelines should be implemented. We are at the coalface throughout our political careers. The issues arise at local authority meetings. We have no real powers. We pass on representations to the Garda Síochána and normally get a nice letter of acknowledgement back from the area or district superintendent, and little else happens.

The Bill proposes many progressive measures and will fulfil its purpose if local democracy is involved. The Minister should consider that. However, no matter what measures are put in place and what decisions are taken, no police force can operate to its full potential and ability without sufficient manpower and resources. The most important measure the Government can take in the elimination of crime is the provision of 2,000 extra gardaí promised in the run-up to the local elections. People who are victims of crime feel very peeved that the promises made in the run-up to the last general election have not been fulfilled. Throughout the country, only approximately 55 additional gardaí have been taken on in the year and a half since the Government was re-elected. I hope the Minister can commit himself to the promises made in the run-up to the last election. He was not the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform at the time, but it was in the programme for Government, and he knows exactly what was promised. He is the man behind the steering wheel to deliver on that.

Rural areas, as we all know, have been hard hit by the current crime wave and need increased policing to restore confidence in the system of justice and crime prevention. We all know of daily incidents in rural areas and how vulnerable elderly people are in some parts of the country when Dublin gangs attack in the middle of the night. There is fear in the hearts of many elderly people living in rural areas, and policing should be stepped up there rather than stepped down. Before the Minister's time, there was a policy of closing rural Garda stations, and that was a great mistake, since the gardaí were involved with the local community and made a significant contribution to the development of parishes and communities.

The Minister's family was involved in the foundation of this State with the Fine Gael Party, which has always had a very strong commitment and profile in the area of crime prevention. I am happy to support elements of the Bill which, one hopes, will put an end to the assaults, violent incidents, fatalities and break-ins in rural Ireland that are almost an everyday occurrence. It is sad that not a day goes by without our hearing of fatalities as a result of crime in some part of the country. People get very annoyed and concerned about this.

As I said, Fine Gael stands for law and order and protecting our citizens, and we have a proud record in our former Ministers for Justice. I am delighted that two of those came from my general area, General Seán MacEoin and Paddy Cooney. They were excellent Ministers for Justice. I have no doubt that the Minister does a good job with his portfolio. As I said, it is important that policing in urban and rural areas be stepped up rather than down. I hope the Minister will take on board some of my views. I would appreciate it if he could meet the representative associations of the local authorities on this matter.

Kate Walsh (Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to debate this very important Bill. I congratulate the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, on introducing this most significant legislation. The Bill is important for many reasons. It is the first real attempt to reform management of the Garda Síochána since the force was founded over 80 years ago. Second, it acknowledges that there has been a decline in trust in the force recently. It seeks to restore that trust, principally through the establishment of the ombudsman. A healthy democracy based on principles of civil obedience and law and order requires a properly functioning police force commanding the trust, respect and support of the people.

The purpose of the Garda ombudsman commission is to ensure openness, transparency and accountability in the process by which complaints against the gardaí are investigated. That is both a welcome and timely move. There has been a great deal of publicity lately, much of it negative, about the way in which complaints against gardaí are currently dealt with. There is a perception that many complaints are not investigated properly and breaches of discipline are not adequately addressed. That has contributed to a breakdown in trust between the gardaí and the public, and that must be restored.

The establishment of the ombudsman will fully repair that trust and restore public confidence in the force. The Bill proposes the establishment of a fully independent Garda ombudsman commission, which will be a three-person body. To maintain full independence for the gardaí, none of the body's members will be serving or former gardaí. That is fundamental, as criticism of the complaints procedure in the past has centred on the inadequacies of guards investigating guards. The new commission will deal with complaints against gardaí.

In general, the commission may decide whether its own investigators will investigate specific complaints or ask the gardaí to investigate, but any complaints involving death or serious physical injury must be investigated by the commission and its own investigators. It is envisaged that the commission will have a total staff of approximately 80 people, of whom ten to 20 will be investigators, and an annual budget of €7 million. The commission will also examine Garda practice and procedures. Within two years of its establishment, the commission will report to the Oireachtas on its effectiveness and the adequacy of its functions. I welcome the establishment of the commission, which will do a great deal for the morale of the force and trust among the public.

I also welcome the change to the declaration for persons joining the Garda Síochána to include the need to have regard for human rights in carrying out policing duties. That is a significant change which recognises the complex and difficult tasks that gardaí must perform daily. It recognises that being a member of the Garda Síochána is not purely a matter of enforcing the law. It is also about dealing with people, often in the most difficult and emotionally charged circumstances. Being a good garda is as much about being a good human being as about being an officer of the law. Ultimately, they are our guardians of the peace.

I respect and admire all members of the Garda Síochána. Too often we hear about negative matters such as breaches of discipline, and too little about their bravery, dedication and commitment. Only two weeks ago, two young men based in Harcourt Street rescued a drowning man in the Liffey at approximately 4.30 a.m. in freezing temperatures. The two gardaí risked their lives to dive in and rescue a fellow human being. The bravery of those two gardaí is indicative of the high standards, patriotism and selflessness that characterise all that is best in the force. It reminds us yet again that as a community we are served by policemen and women of whom we are justifiably proud. We are indebted to those young men and women of the Garda Síochána for their service to the State and communities every day.

Theirs is a difficult task and a challenging vocation. It is often their role to perform the hardest tasks, for which their detractors and critics might be slow to volunteer — to face unarmed those who are armed and dangerous; to comfort and assist men, women and children in their darkest hours and worst extremities of misfortune; to risk their lives to protect those of others; and to uphold the law and the Constitution in the face of a cowardly and cynical challenge. The force has its critics, and it must take its fair share of criticism from time to time because of its failures. However, when we have to form judgments of the force and its members, we would do well to remember the simple, spontaneous acts of bravery and the good character shown.

I welcome this Bill because it embodies a principle I hold dear, community involvement and the necessity for all of us to play a role in the proper functioning of society. The Bill provides for the establishment of joint policing committees. Local elected representatives will be allowed to make recommendations about local police matters and local gardaí will be allowed to make recommendations to local authorities regarding steps they can take to reduce crime. The Bill gives a formal basis to the partnership between the community and gardaí, a partnership already enjoyed by many communities.

Tackling crime at local level is a two-way street. Councillors and local community representatives cannot fairly blame local gardaí if they have failed to play their part. They cannot criticise local gardaí for an increased incidence of joyriding incidents if they have failed to play their part through introducing traffic calming measures, dealing with licensing etc. Neither can they criticise a rise in mugging incidents if proper street lighting has not been installed.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, understands the valuable role local authorities can play in local policing. I thank him for recognising that role on a formal basis in this Bill and for this far-reaching important legislation. When passed, the Bill will ensure the Garda Síochána is a truly modern force for this century, efficiently run and organised and with the full confidence of the community it serves. I compliment the Minister's energy, drive and commitment to his role and commend his Bill to the House.

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Senator Browne.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Much of what I wanted to say has already been said. I welcome the general structure of this comprehensive, reforming and much needed legislation which will modernise the administration of the Garda Síochána, set up the independent complaints commission, and most important, set up the joint policing committee structure which, I hope, will incorporate public views and ensure those served by gardaí are heard.

Many poor communities feel they are not heard by gardaí and that their concerns are not taken on board. It is important for many of these, especially female victims of domestic violence, to have a good relationship with gardaí, particularly with regard to the implementation of barring orders. It is important too that they have confidence in the gardaí. Much good work has been done in this regard in terms of training and so on. Many individual members of the force have done exceptional work in carrying out their duty of protecting women who need protection in their homes.

As others have said, confidence in gardaí has waned over the past number of years. In that context, this legislation is extremely important and I hope it plays its necessary role in restoring public confidence in gardaí. I already mentioned two particular communities. However, in my experience there has been a general community-wide diminution in the level of confidence in the force.

The independent complaints' commission's role is important because the current complaints procedure is inadequate and not sufficiently transparent or independent. I look forward to the Committee Stage debate where there will be much work to be done. In general, I support the legislation.

Fergal Browne (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Senator O'Meara for sharing her time and welcome the Minister and his officials to the House. I wish to acknowledge the huge role played by gardaí. Recently a constituent of mine jumped into the river to rescue someone but the story never even made the newspapers. If, however, something goes wrong, it is on the front page. Gardaí risk their lives day in and out for the common good.

The Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland has requested that town councillors should be on the policing committees. Will the Minister consider this? Crime is far more rampant in urban rather than rural areas and from that point of view this provision would make sense.

Section 31 describes the make-up of a joint policing committee and includes Members of the Dáil. Why are Members of the Seanad excluded and can this be rectified? I hope that as elected representatives we would be willing to serve on such committees, make a positive contribution and bring our experiences to bear on them.

I welcome the appointment of an ombudsman commission to investigate the Garda. This will help to restore public confidence in the system. Where people have a complaint to make against a garda they can do so in the interest of all. This commission will also work in favour of gardaí. For example, gardaí have to take part in situations where their health and safety is compromised, for example, mob situations, without proper equipment. They can now use the commission to address their concerns. There are two sides to the commission and it is a welcome step.

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This has been an interesting and stimulating debate. I thank the Senators for all their contributions. Although there have been some criticisms of the Bill and of me, the House has given a warm welcome to the principle of the Bill. We have spent over seven hours discussing its provisions and I look forward to a continuing constructive input from Senators during its next Stages.

Unfortunately, in the time allotted for the Second Stage debate, I could not possibly deal with all the points raised. My efficient officials have prepared notes on many of the points raised but if I were to attempt to get through them in the time allowed to me today, I would only get about a quarter of the way. I will make a few brief points in reply.

A number of Members have pointed out that the local authority-Garda interaction provided for in the Bill seems to exclude town councils. The Bill is drafted that way and this is something on which I will reflect and prepare amendments. I agree that local authorities centred on towns are, by definition, urban authorities and that criminality in urban areas is of a different order and requires a different response from that in other areas. This is not to say that crime does not exist in rural areas. However, the involvement of the local authority in urban areas merits a revision of that particular proposal in the Bill.

The exact composition of the joint policing committees envisaged in this Bill has also excited some debate. The Bill envisages a choice. The county development board model is one of the choices available but it is not mandated as the only one. I gather from the contributions made here that the majority of Members favour a more direct local authority elected representative role, rather than a mixed approach. I wish to reflect on this and to consider how we can make these committees real workable institutions. I do not want them to be committees at which local authority representatives are a minority or feel excluded.

My purpose in this Bill, and in the Intoxicating Liquour Act, is to fight against the tendency to remove local authority members' powers and to think of new ways through which they can have a significant policy input into what happens in their areas. In that context, I reiterate that these provisions are not envisaged as one-way avenues through which complaints about Garda inadequacies come from elected representatives. As Senator Walsh and many others pointed out, they should deal with estate management, planning, traffic and lighting issues and by-laws regarding drinking and public spaces.

All of those issues are ones where the Garda has a legitimate right to be heard on some occasions and, at other times, a legitimate sense of grievance that what should be done is not being done by those who have the power to do it. In terms of the new powers that are conferred on local authorities in respect of intoxicating liquor, gardaí will have an opportunity to interact with local authority representatives and to point out the policing difficulties associated with particular late closing times in certain communities or certain parts of certain communities.

I will now move on to the question of a policing board. Senator Tuffy, Senator Hayes and others argued that one of the features of the Northern Ireland situation is the existence of an independent policing board. One has to regard the PSNI as a regional constabulary like the other constabularies in the United Kingdom. We have a national police force which discharges other functions including national security services and which has a different relationship with central government. If I thought it would be an advantage to have an independent policing board, I would go down that road. I am not trying to grab powers to myself or to clutch things to my bosom politically out of a sense of selfishness or self-aggrandisement. Accountability is most important and the current ministerial-Commissioner route for accountability to the Houses of the Oireachtas is of great importance. If, for instance, something like the RTE authority were put between me and the Commissioner, would public accountability be enhanced or reduced if a group of 12 great and good men and women were put there who had independent functions and who gave policy directions to the Garda Síochána? Would I be in a position to account in the Houses for failures of policing policy and State policy in regard to law and order if I could simply abdicate from that issue and say that, unfortunately, I have no control over these decisions? Likewise would I be accountable in terms of the activities of the Garda Síochána to this House, which is an important check and balance, if there were an independent layer of administration between the Garda Síochána and me?

I do not believe we need an independent policing board, although this was appropriate in Northern Ireland. It was appropriate there because it was necessary to join the two pillars of that community together in a common enterprise to support the new police force there, which I do not believe is necessarily the case here.

In regard to the general charge made on a number of occasions that, somehow, the capacity to give directives to the Garda Síochána amounts to a new charter for political interference or as one person, not in this House said, that I was becoming a self-styled chief of police, the reverse is true. What I want is a system whereby, in certain circumstances, the elected Government which exercises the executive power under the Constitution can give the Commissioner of the day, who otherwise is independent in the discharge of his functions, a clear direction to follow a particular policy. It could involve sealing the Border in the case of foot and mouth disease or providing an emergency service should that be warranted. It could also relate to a general policy area. However, unless the security of the State made it impossible, the legislation envisages that any such direction has to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas so that people can see exactly how the Government is exercising that power.

Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can the Minister not do that at present through discussion?

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I can. That is the point. This afternoon I could lift the phone and give a direction and nobody would ever know about it. If Senators want to know what is happening, what I have in mind would give the Commissioner great independence but in the last analysis provide the Minister, with the concurrence of the Government, the power to give a formal directive, provided the Government is willing to publicly inform both Houses of the Oireachtas. This will prevent a Minister lifting a phone in a bad humour one afternoon or influencing the outcome of any individual investigation or prosecution.

I listened intently to the points made in the debate on the appointment of chief superintendents and superintendents. It was suggested that the role of Government in such appointments was a bad thing. The situation at present is that I bring a memorandum to Cabinet almost every fortnight appointing people to the position of superintendent and chief superintendent. That is done by a totally above board, merit-based appointments system with outside lay observers on the board. I intend to examine carefully what was said by Senator O'Toole, that it should be provided in the Bill that such appointments are made in accordance with a regulatory framework. I am positively disposed towards amending the Bill to make that clear.

Such appointments are not done with a view to extending Government patronage, it is to give the holders of that office independence vis-À-vis the Commissioner. It is to make it clear to them that they hold those offices because, like officers in the Defence Forces, the Government of the day has appointed them. It is in support of their independence and status as senior officers of the Garda Síochána that they are put in place with the additional sanction of Government and they are not simply creatures of the appointments or promotion policy of the Commissioner of the day.

I have said enough about the joint policing committees. In regard to volunteer members I stress again that this is a limited skeletal outline of a statutory power for a Government to establish a voluntary police reserve if circumstances in the future so warrant. There is no formed or formulated intention to do so now. We are the only common law country with our system which does not have any voluntary police reserve. I am wholly opposed to the concept of economising through the use of yellow pack police and undercutting professional standards in policing using a volunteer reserve. That is not and would not be my aim. It is important that the Garda Síochána should have roots in the community. In time it will be regarded as a good thing that young men and women in their own community will volunteer to be supportive volunteer reservists for the police and that this will extend the sense of identity between the community and the Garda Síochána. This will not threaten the vocational interests or the representative interests of the associations in respect of their members' interests.

The question of secret societies was referred to. They are defined in the Offences against the State Act and the Treasonable Offences Act 1925. Effectively they are defined by reference to organisations whose members take an oath or affirmation to keep the proceedings of those societies and their decisions secret in all circumstances.

I welcome the general support for the ombudsman commission. Some have asked if every investigation should be undertaken, as a matter of statute law, by persons who are not gardaí, meaning the effective removal from the independent commission of the right to use gardaí on certain occasions to carry out investigations as it deems fit. It would not be wise to do that. The legislation in Northern Ireland does not allow for it. As a matter of practice, the Northern Ireland Police Ombudsman, Nuala O'Loan, undertakes her own investigations, but she has a substantial pool of investigators across the United Kingdom on which to draw. If I was to put in place a force which was capable of carrying out every investigation, from bad manners to unlawful killing, I would have to create a force of investigators of between 100 and 200 people whose sole function would be to police the police. That is not something I could sustain in current circumstances.

The new arrangements for the ombudsman commission are not intended as a criticism of the membership of the outgoing Garda Síochána Complaints Board, which has pointed out the inadequacy of the arrangements under which it operates. I pay tribute to it for all the work it has done. It may be, as Senator White said, that some have been disappointed with the outcome of its activities, but this does not detract from the fact that it operated in good faith, however undernourished by resources and undermined by statutory inadequacies.

Senator Hayes asked why a three-person body rather than a one-person body was required to fulfil the membership functions of the ombudsman commission. Given the size of the Garda Síochána and the State, the task being conferred on the commission will be better discharged if there are three persons on the board. It will prevent the possibility of a simple personality clash between the Garda Commissioner and the commission.

I presume there are many points with which some Senators feel I have not dealt. I could elaborate for an hour or an hour and a half if the order of House permitted my dealing with individual points. I thank my officials for all the work they did in researching responses to the Senators' points. I assure the House that many of the very important points that have been made on the general principle of the Bill will be considered at greater length on Committee Stage.

I thank the House for the supportive approach it has adopted. It has been a great pleasure for me to be present throughout this Second Stage debate and to hear the wide variety of views and the very strong underlying support of the Senators for the Garda Síochána.

As President of the Justice and Home Affairs Council of the European Union, I could not let this opportunity go by without sending to my Spanish confrere on that body the heartfelt sympathy of the Irish people on the terrible atrocities carried out today in Madrid. Our hearts are with those concerned. The scourge of terrorism must be eradicated across the European Union.