asked the Minister for Justice whether there has been any improvement in his relations with the AGSI; whether he has already met, or plans further meetings with the association; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Minister's Relations with Garda Body.
4.
I am entirely satisfied with my relations with the association. They invited me to address their conference on 28 March and I was glad to accept the invitation. In the course of my address I undertook to meet them as early as possible and I am doing this. A meeting has been arranged for a date in early June. I am always willing to meet them and the other associations to discuss any matters of concern to them.
Will the Minister agree that there has been in the public eye, a great deal of the bitterest exchange between the association and the Minister? Will the Minister tell the House what he is doing to alleviate that situation? Will he comment on the many allegations made by the association, in particular in relation to political influence in the appointments and promotions in the force and on the failure to implement the report of the Three Wise Men? Would the Minister agree that it is a very unsatisfactory situation in the public eye that such a high degree of discord appears in public between the Minister for Justice and one of the premier Garda associations in the country?
I find that question insulting. It is deliberately mischievous and framed in such a way as to cause as much difficulty as the Deputy can cause. I will try to deal with it. With regard to alleged bitternesses that exist between the association and me, nothing is further from the truth. I was invited by the association to their annual conference. I was glad to accept the invitation. I went there and listened to what the president had to say. The president did me the courtesy of letting me have a copy of his speech beforehand and I replied publicly to the president. There are differences between us on issues. I said to the president that I was prepared to meet them, and I understand that arrangements have now been finalised for that meeting.
I am sure that I meet as many members of the public as Deputy Taylor and others and I have no indication from anybody nor have I been advised by members of my party that there is any public perception of bitterness. With regard to the insinuation that there is perhaps a bitterness because of a report which the Deputy called the Three Wise Men report, if Deputy Taylor was in the House on the last day when I was answering questions he would have been able to hear a very full report on that issue, a report which was accepted on that occasion, presumably in the absence of Deputy Taylor. With regard to the insinuation——
I was here.
If the Deputy was here, and I am not too sure that he was——
I am always here when you are answering questions.
If the Deputy was here, there is greater reason for me to believe that the Deputy is being deliberately mischievous in the way he put his supplementary. As far as the so-called——
This is a highly developed technique with which to intimidate Deputies.
——allegations of political interference are concerned——
(Interruptions.)
A number of very serious charges were made by way of innuendo and insinuation. I am trying to answer them and I hope the Deputy will at least do me the courtesy of trying to listen. In relation to allegations of political influence in promotions, during my time as Minister for Justice, since the last election there were a very small number of promotions made, having regard to the existence of the public service embargo. The promotions made were that of commissioner, deputy commissioner and three assistant commissioners. These appointments which were the most important made, were publicly welcomed by that association and the other associations as well. That gives the lie to the innuendo of Deputy Taylor's. The association have their role and function in representing their members and I have my role as Minister. I understand that the association must play their role and they understand that I must play mine. There are matters for discussion between us, matters about which we will talk in a couple of weeks. There will be a number of areas of disagreement. That is natural and that has always been the way in dealings with this association and the other associations.
I welcome the fact that the Minister has arranged a meeting, albeit in June, having regard to the fact that the president of the association told the conference that the Minister refers to, that they had been seeking a meeting with him for over a year. The Minister is incorrect in attributing a mischievous intent to me. Has the Minister not seen the media reports on the conference exchanges, particularly the leading article in The Irish Times of 29 March which was headed “Scathing Attack by Collins on Garda Association”? So far as the appointments are concerned, just as I was here to listen to the Minister, was he not at the conference to hear the president of that association tell him and the conference that most gardaí believed that there was widespread political interference in relation to appointments? Will the Minister comment on what he now sees as the major differences between him and the association, and are all these matters up for discussion at the meeting to take place in June, in particular the appointment of an independent police authority, as being sought by the association and many others?
The Deputy is again misrepresenting the situation for reasons best known to himself.
There is no misrepresentation.
During the course of his presidential address at that conference the president said that there was a failure to obtain a productive meeting. That does not say that there was not a meeting. A meeting took place. The president of the conference asked that a meeting would take place, and that meeting has been arranged. That meeting was only sought at the conference. The Deputy is incorrect and he is misleading the House or misrepresenting the situation when he says that the president of the association at the conference made allegations about political interference in promotions. That is not true. I was present for the entire address of the president at that conference and he did not make such allegations.
Can I ask——
(Interruptions.)
I put it to the Minister——
I will hear Deputy McCartan, but may I dissuade Members from the notion that they may debate this matter now. I will hear a brief supplementary question, and then I am moving on.
Will the Minister agree that it is easy to make an allegation of political interference, and it has been made not against the Minister only but against successive Governments——
A question, please.
——and it will continue to be made unfortunately——
A question, please, otherwise I will go on to the next question.
——as long as we do not have an independent police authority——
I am afraid that the Deputy is disobeying the Chair deliberately.
Will the Minister agree that as long as we do not have an independent police authority, it will be easy for members of the public and Members of the House to make allegations of political interference? What steps, if any, will be taken, if the matter is being considered at Government level?
I could easily dismiss that by saying that it is a totally separate question. The matter is not being considered by Government.
Question No. 5, please.