Vol. 499 No. 5
1 Mr. Higgins (Mayo) asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason a security van carrying £1.2 million, which was attacked recently by armed raiders at Dalkey, County Dublin, did not have a Garda escort; if there is evidence that the raiders have paramilitary connections; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3075/99]
The Garda authorities are well aware of the need to have arrangements in place designed to prevent large sums of money failing into the hands of criminals.
The security arrangements to be made in any such instance are matters to be determined by the Garda authorities on the basis of their professional judgment, deploying to maximum effect the resources at their disposal. The Deputy will appreciate that, for obvious reasons, there are limits regarding the level of detail concerning such arrangements on which I can comment publicly.
There are and always will be, situations where the professional judgments made by the gardaí or indeed any other professionals may be queried on various grounds when something goes seriously wrong. This is essentially what the Deputy is doing and that is understandable.
I have confirmed with the Garda authorities that their cash escort policies are kept under constant review and, in line with standard practice, there is a further review of existing arrangements ongoing following the robbery in Dalkey. Obviously, the fact that lives were threatened by the criminals who carried out the robbery is and has to be a source of concern and underlines the importance of taking the lessons of Dalkey on board as a matter of top priority.
In looking at the Dalkey robbery generally, it is right to acknowledge on the positive side that the general arrangements the gardaí had in place were such that the raiders, although having the benefit of selecting the location and the timing of their attack, were forced, due to the speedy arrival of the gardaí, to flee the scene with considerably less cash than was in the security van.
On the question whether there is evidence that the raiders had paramilitary connections I am informed by the Garda authorities that at this stage of the Garda investigation into the robbery, no conclusions have been reached by the investigating gardaí regarding the involvement of any specific subversive or criminal group. Recent suggestions to the effect that the gardaí or the Government are seeking to suppress knowledge of Provisional IRA involvement in this robbery are without foundation.
Like all Members of the House, I condemn what was clearly a well planned and ruthless act of armed robbery during which shots were fired, including one at the driver of the hijacked car. Such incidents cannot and will not be tolerated. The priorities of the Garda authorities now will be to secure the necessary evidence to mount a successful prosecution against the perpetrators of this outrageous crime, and, as in other cases, ensure that the lessons to be learned from the crime are taken fully on board in determining their crime fighting strategies.
(Mayo): Why has the Minister chosen not to make a statement but rather to hide behind the guise that this is an operational matter for the Garda Síochána? Does the Minister not recall that in January 1995, when the same company was involved, he insisted on the then Minister for Justice, Deputy Owen, making a detailed statement and answering questions in the House? She did not cling to the type of political cowardice that has been the hallmark of this Minister. Will the Minister confirm that this was a para military operation, that Garda communications were intercepted, that AK47 guns, which are the stock and trade of the Provisional IRA, were used, that shots were fired, that £80,000 was taken and remains missing – that would buy quite a number of rocket launchers and Semtex – and that the raiders are still at large? Will he acknowledge that everybody, including the Garda and the general public, knows that this was a paramilitary raid? It had all the hallmarks of a paramilitary raid and should be acknowledged as such.
Political cowardice is not something I could be accused of with any great reason. I well recall January 1995 and on that occasion I raised several issues with the then Minister. Those matters related, for example, to the urgency with which the question of the freezing of assets should be dealt with by the Minister of the day. I spoke also about the need to implement the 1994 Act and the need for a bail referendum and referred generally to matters of policy. I want to make it clear that I have no difficulty coming into this House at any time to answer reasonable questions Deputies wish to raise. The Deputy is being disingenuous when he accuses me of doing otherwise in this case—
(Mayo): Four weeks after the event.
—when he knows well that the Dáil was not sitting at the time. I reject that piece of theatrics.
With regard to whether this offence was carried out by the Provisional IRA, the Continuity IRA or other paramilitaries, the position is that at this stage of the Garda investigation into the robbery, no conclusions have been reached by the Garda regarding the activities, in so far as involvement in this crime was concerned, of any specific subversive or criminal group. It has not been the practice for a Minister of the day to report to the House on the progress of Garda investigations, nor indeed did the previous Minister for Justice do so. It would not be proper for me to speculate as to who were the perpetrators of this crime. I emphasise that recent claims that the Garda or the Government are trying to suppress information in this matter, and trying to suppress knowledge of Provisional IRA involvement, are totally without foundation and border on the irresponsible.
(Mayo): Will the Minister not acknowledge that where AK47s are used – they were used in this case and were the weapons used in the murder of Garda Jerry McCabe – there is paramilitary involvement? There is a seepage of guns from the IRA so this was either a Provisional IRA or a dissident IRA group and the Minister should admit that. Will the Minister explain the reason a security van with £1.2 million on board was travelling unprotected in south County Dublin? The van did not have a Garda or Army escort and to allow that van travel the roads unprotected was a major security blunder. Whose decision was it not to seek armed protection? What guidelines are in place for the shipment of such large amounts of cash? Has the Minister ordered a full security review? In view of the fact that there was interception of Garda communications, is the Minister now prepared to introduce legislation to ban scanners?
Legislation to ban scanners would not be effective. I have sought and obtained Government approval to the tune of £80 million to replace the existing Garda radio network to ensure we can have encryption which will mean that it will not be possible for people planning crimes of this nature to listen in to what gardaí are saying to one another. That is an effective response and, in general terms, the gardaí welcome that move.
Schedules are supplied to a Garda liaison officer by the cash in transit companies in relation to movements of cash by them. On 4 January 1999, the Garda Síochána were aware of 72 cash in transit vehicles operating in the Dublin region. A specific request for escort was not received in respect of the vehicle in question. However, the Garda monitoring plan took into consideration the movement of the vehicle together with the other cash transit vehicles. Monitoring of these vehicles by members of the Garda Síochána is scheduled to afford the maximum coverage possible to each movement. The Garda Síochána decides where the escort should go on a given day. It is regrettable that an escort was not provided on this occasion and I do not defend that. However, I outlined to the Deputy the precise position on the date in question. The situation is monitored and there are ongoing discussions within the Garda Síochána regarding the issue of security.
