asked the President whether he is prepared to state the reasons for the removal of General O'Duffy from the office of Commissioner of the Gárda Síochána and whether any charge was made against General O'Duffy.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Gárda Síochána Commissioner's Removal.
No charge was made against General O'Duffy. He was removed from office because, in the opinion of the Executive Council, a change of Commissioner was desirable in the public interest.
Will the President state what change was necessary in the public interest?
I have explained already that a change of Commissioner was desirable.
Will the President state the reasons for the change?
No. We do not propose to state the reasons—to say anything further.
Will the President afford an opportunity to the Dáil to discuss this matter by way of a Motion proposed?
The members of the Dáil who desire to discuss this matter will have ample opportunity to do so on several Votes—on the Vote on Account and other Votes.
Will an opportunity be afforded to members of the Dáil to discuss the matter by way of a Motion in the Dáil?
No.
Would there not be time to-morrow for a discussion on this matter by reason of the nature of the business before the Dáil?
No. There is no time.
Does the President not realise that this is a departure from public policy? I submit it is and, consequently, an opportunity should be afforded to the Dáil for discussing the matter.
On the contrary, there has been no departure from public policy. It is strictly in accordance with the Act. Section 2 of The Gárda Síochána Act, 1924, empowers the Executive Council to remove the Commissioner. It says:—
The general direction and control of the Gárda Síochána shall, subject to regulations made by the Minister under this Act, be vested in the Commissioner of the Gárda Síochána, who shall from time to time be appointed, and may at any time be removed, by the Executive Council.
Will the President state what particular attributes the present holder of the office has got which were not possessed by his predecessor?
Is the President not aware that statutory power can be used capriciously?
It was not used capriciously. If it is the opinion of the Executive Council that the public interest will be served by a change, the Executive Council is entitled to make that change and, if it does so deliberately as we did, then it is not capricious.
Then why should we not be given the reasons for the Commissioner's removal if it is not capricious?
Because it is not desirable in all cases to give reasons. If a definite charge were made against General O'Duffy, then that charge would be brought forward and the reasons given.
May we take it there is no charge?
I have said so.
Are we to take it that there is no attribute that he possesses which renders him unfit to carry out the policy of the Government and that there is no particular attribute possessed by his successor which gives him any precedence over the last holder of the office?
Are we to understand it is the policy of the Government to Americanise the Gárda Síochána?
I shall hand in a Motion for the discussion of this matter by the Dáil.