Joint Committee on Justice debate - Tuesday, 24 Oct 2023

Policing Matters: Discussion

An Cathaoirleach

I welcome the witnesses to the committee. The purpose of our meeting is to discuss policing matters. A range of matters will be traversed. The discussion will cover three main topics: challenges relating to rostering and recruitment and recent industrial relations issues; the policing of Dublin city; and the policing of protests. Those are three quite distinct topics but I am sure there will be some overlap.

Our witnesses are all very welcome and I thank them for making themselves available to join our discussion. I welcome Mr. Ronan Slevin, general secretary of the Garda Representative Association, GRA; and Mr. Brendan O’Connor, president of the GRA. From the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors, AGSI, I welcome Ms Antoinette Cunningham, general secretary, and Mr. Ronan Clogher. From the Restaurants Association of Ireland, RAI, I welcome Mr. Adrian Cummins, chief executive, and Mr. Sean Collender. I also welcome Mr. Gallagher, a former Garda inspector. I think he served in the Dublin city centre area, among other places, during his tenure.

I will read a short note on privilege. I think most of the witnesses have been at this committee before and are familiar with the set-up, but I will read it into the record. Witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in any such way as to make him, her or it identifiable or engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. If their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks.

The format of the meeting is that each organisation will be allowed three minutes for a brief opening statement. It is quite short but we will allow them to elaborate over the course of the meeting. We generally find a short and snappy introduction to their position and organisation works well. We then have engagement with the members for the rest of the meeting.

We have a rota system. Members of the committee are allowed six minutes each for their interaction. The six minutes includes both the questions they wish to put and the responses to them. When six minutes are up, I will move onto the next member. We usually find that the first couple of questions set the tone and if you do not get your reply in the first or second round, you will probably get it in the third or fourth round. We generally get all the business done over the course of the meeting.

On housekeeping, we have a three-hour slot.

We may not need three hours. If the meeting is still going after 90 minutes we will take a short ten-minute break to allow everybody a chance to stretch their legs. We have three hours if we need that time but we will see how things go.

I now invite a representative of each organisation to make an opening statement. Each group has three minutes, starting with Mr. Slevin.

Mr. Ronan Slevin

On behalf of the Garda Representative Association, GRA, I thank the Chair for the opportunity to speak before this committee and answer any questions from him and the members. Our testimony to this Oireachtas joint committee will primarily focus on items 1 and 3 from our detailed submission on a number of policing matter, which we presented earlier to the committee.

Item 2 is the deployment of personnel in Dublin and is an operational matter for Garda management. We believe that many of the challenges being experienced stem from the systematic problems we will discuss today.

Visible and effective policing can only be delivered by a sufficient number of gardaí who are adequately trained and equipped, have access to technology and utilise systems that are less bureaucratic and administration focused. Esteemed members, we are currently witnessing a crisis in An Garda Síochána, focused on the recruitment and retention of gardaí and enormous challenges which are directly linked to a myriad of other issues faced by our members every day. In the area of recruitment, we are not seeing sufficient numbers presenting to join the force despite Government approval for Garda management to achieve an adequate level of recruits. It is our considered view that the amount of compensation for training, which has risen from €184 to a still meagre €305 per week, will do little or nothing to attract the most suitably qualified candidates to a career in An Garda Síochána.

The people who make it through training are met with a far too incremental pay scale system for them to achieve a level of payment appropriate to match an appropriate standard of living. It is in the area of recruitment where I believe the very sustainability of An Garda Síochána is threatened. As many as 800 members were promised by the Garda Commissioner in 2022, with just 300 trainees entering the Garda College. This year, we were promised 1,000 trainees and, once again, that number will fall considerably short with the figure set to reach just over 600, which is nearly 40% short of targets. A significant activation to encourage the appropriate level of high-quality recruits is needed to immediately address these significant trainee compensation issues, and to address the pay scale structural inadequacies which currently exist, in addition to the substandard pensions being offered to new entrants since 2013.

For all of the issues we have in recruitment, we have parallel problems when it comes to the retention of our members. We are currently experiencing record numbers of gardaí leaving the force, with that number set to reach at least 150 this year, with 116 members having resigned so far. In this month alone, ten members have given their notice. Last year, the figure stood at 108, which is a number that normally equates to 45 resignations. The number exiting the force is an extreme concern, where overall conditions and terms of service, general well-being, morale and lack of recognition, poor pension entitlements for new recruits, resourcing, bureaucracy, workload and an unfair disciplinary process all contribute to the disillusionment of the modern Garda where a growing number are simply walking away.

One significant area where we will achieve a better work-life balance is around rosters. We are now negotiating with the Commissioner for a system that will allow for a maximising of resources through an efficient timetable and that is satisfactory to all. It is an ongoing area of extreme difference between our members and Commissioner Harris, that he continually fails to accept that there is a morale issue in An Garda Síochána, and one which can be greatly improved by a fairer roster system being established.

Myself and Mr. Brendan O'Connor, president of the GRA, will highlight some of the details around rosters for the committee. We will also pinpoint areas where morale has reached extreme depths, particularly in terms of training, pensions, health and disciplinary procedure.

Training is an area which the public can see most visibly, particularly given the growing level of intimidation that our members face, notably around public gatherings by groups holding extreme views and espousing hate-filled philosophies. We look forward to discussing with the committee members the fine balance between our unquestionable duty of care to the general public and managing extremely volatile situations and sometimes without appropriate training.

I wish to emphasis to the Chair and members of the joint committee that the life of the modern Garda is still a hugely fulfilling vocation. The job of a garda is unique and like no other role in society. As gardaí, we all serve with pride and honour despite a deteriorating series of conditions put in our way. Our number one priority is to provide security, protection and reassurance to the Irish people, and our members will never be found wanting with this great responsibility.

Once again, I thank the Chair for inviting us here today. We look forward to answering any questions throughout this hearing and beyond.

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

I thank the Chair and members of the committee for the opportunity afforded the AGSI to address them this afternoon. The AGSI is a representative body that represents almost 2,500 sergeants and inspectors, who are mid-ranking supervisors within the Garda organisation.

Our opening statement represents some of the main points that we have already made in our more detailed submissions. We will start off again with the issues around recruitment and retention. An Garda Síochána is no different from other international policy forces because they are currently facing recruitment challenges.

Policing is a challenging and testing career that requires resilience, tenacity and a sense of vocation. Traditionally, the trade-off for those challenges has been great job security, a good pension and the ability to retire earlier as a recognition of the attrition attached to the role.

The difficulties attracting new recruits to join An Garda Síochána is one of the signal biggest challenges currently facing the Garda organisation. Lower numbers and fewer people applying to join means that the fundamental root causes of this problem are not being addressed by Government. There is too much emphasis placed on the narrative that this problem with recruitment originated due to the Covid pandemic when that is simply not true.

The number of people applying to join An Garda Síochána has dropped dramatically in the last 20 years and the most recent 2022 competition attracted under 5,000 applicants. It is clear that young people do not consider An Garda Síochána as an attractive career option and some feel that it is part of their career rather than their total career.

Pension regulations is a contributing factor to the demise of the vocational nature of the job of An Garda Síochána. Both 1995 and 2013 saw significant changes to the pension entitlements of members of the gardaí. The 2013 change, in particular, means that a pension for gardaí who join after that year is simply not sustainable for them to live on and now means that as people move through their career they begin to question whether they can live on their earnings. Larger mortgages and greater expenses mean that people are financially stretched for longer periods of their lives and a desire by some to move to more attractive positions or, indeed, jobs in the Civil Service, has become a feature that we have seen more and more in recent times.

The best recruiters in any organisation always come from within. It is a sad reflection on the current state of An Garda Síochána that lots of serving gardaí or parents do not seem to recommend the job as a choice career for their sons and daughters.

An internal working group has now been established, at the suggestion of the AGSI, to identify where there are recruitment and retention challenges. One of the things that we welcome, as an association, is the fact that the organisation has now established exit interviews. While the organisation has not published any findings yet, these exit interviews are an important evidence-based approach to establish why people no longer find the job attractive to join or, indeed, to remain.

Our most experienced members believe they have more to contribute. It is shameful that a proposal on the extension of the retirement age beyond 60 years to the age of 62 has been with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform for some time. This often means that people who are fit, willing and able to carry out contributions to the job are forced to retire because of an age limit placed upon them.

The use and misuse of social media is a major factor. At almost every public interaction in which gardaí are now involved, mobile phones are used to film operational matters. These recordings are often uploaded on to social media platforms and utilised as out-of-context clips without the knowledge of members, and frequently used to threaten members and make a mockery of them, and results in trial by social media. In terms of the stress and welfare impact of this on members is huge and there has been no meaningful Government response, which is unacceptable as far as the AGSI is concerned. If public social media platforms have the right to be seen in Irish society, then limitations on operational police matters should be considered and we would ask the committee to do that.

The bureaucracy and the Garda reform agenda are contained in A Policing Service for the Future, APSFF, which originated in 2018 with the Commission on the Future of Policing. The AGSI would question whether the recommendations contained in the Commission on the Future of Policing remain relevant today. It is our belief that some of those recommendations should be revisited. It is shameful that the office of the APSFF, which is run out of the Department of the Taoiseach, has never engaged with AGSI since its establishment and as a key stakeholder in the Garda organisation we believe that is a mistake.

On the issue of rosters, which has been controversial, AGSI always remembers that our first and primary obligation is to the communities we serve. However, we are also conscious that roster design, work-life balance, health and safety as well as earning consequences have to be discussed. A key requirement in any roster design is flexibility for Garda management to meet the needs of the community and the demands of policing while balancing predictability and certainty in work-life balance for members of a An Garda Síochána. It is welcome after the recent controversies on rosters that we now have established a forum where negotiations will begin in the near future and we in AGSI welcome that and look forward to getting in to discuss the matter of rosters.

In regard to the issue of morale, we see many challenges, some of which are controllable internally, but others which must be challenged externally. The Government has a part to play in matters that have gone from Garda headquarters, which are supported by the gardaí. These include the restoration of travel and sub for members who currently cannot afford to stay in a hotel when attending criminal trials in Dublin because all they receive is €107. That results in members not being able to get a hotel because €107 will not cover the cost of a hotel anywhere in Dublin or its confines, so they are travelling to criminal trials for weeks on end and have to travel up and down the country. That is not acceptable. That matter has been with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform for some time and has not been resolved. An extension of the retirement age is also with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, as are proposals on the Garda band, one of our greatest assets, which we see falling in numbers. We are appealing to the Government to make decisions in relation to them.

I will turn to some of the solutions because I am conscious of time. Some of the solutions that could be offered include an independent pay review body for gardaí. There are very specific needs in regard to An Garda Síochána. We are different from any other cohort of public servants. We do not hold the right to go on strike and, therefore, we always negotiate our pay on an unequal basis compared with other public servants. The impact of pension and the impact of earning capacity in relation to roster design could be progressed if there was an independent pay review body for An Garda Síochána. We had a recommendation to amend the training allowance. We welcome the recent budget decision that amended the training allowance for student gardaí.

We need to revisit the right to strike for gardaí. Recent events and events in 2016 have shown us how vulnerable society can be and how powerless Garda management can be if individuals decide to withdraw their labour because of an industrial dispute. On the right to strike, obviously there would have to be minimum controls and emergency cover during strike days but we believe with the appropriate control systems in place and with the proper controls, the right to strike for gardaí should be revisited as it could contain better options than individuals deciding to take action. Long-service pay increments could encourage those within the job to stay.

In 2021 the Government changed the promotion regulations for An Garda Síochána. This was not properly consulted on and has had a hugely demoralising affect on people within the organisation when it comes to promotion opportunities.

The right to disconnect is becoming extremely challenging for our people. As a member of An Garda Síochána and particularly with the introduction of new mobility devices, people at times feel they never have the right to disconnect. If we are serious about addressing morale and some of the policing issues, we should look back at some of the reports and recommendations contained from the inspectorate. It had recommendations that would be helpful. A review of the operating model is also needed.

An Cathaoirleach

I allowed some latitude on the time. I did the same for the GRA because of the matters to be considered.

Mr. Adrian Cummins

I thank the committee for the opportunity to take part in today's discussion. I am joined by the deputy president of the association, Mr. Seán Collender, owner of the Kinara Restaurant Group in Dublin. I want to place on the record of the committee that the hospitality industry has huge respect for our police force in Ireland and fully supports all it does to protect and ensure the safety of our citizens throughout the country.

Our goal today is to shine a light on one of the aspects of street crime and antisocial behaviour, the impact it has on local businesses, including hospitality businesses, restaurants, pubs and cafes. When we surveyed the Restaurant Association of Ireland, RAI, Dublin-based members in advance of this meeting, they give us first-hand accounts of the challenges that a lack of safety and security in the city has created. Of the respondents, 100% said Dublin is less safe today than it was pre-pandemic. Some had faced break-ins and theft and many said their staff were routinely threatened and do not feel safe at work. Customers have admitted to businesses that they feel less safe entering the city in recent times, particularly at night. The idea that customers are being discouraged from visiting Dublin city hospitality businesses like restaurants and pubs correlates with polling that we conducted by Red C in July. That research found that only 20% of all adults believe safety and security in Dublin city is good during the day, while only 7% said the same for night time. The current situation is not only making Irish consumers less likely to support local businesses in Dublin city but it also affects tourists. Immense damage was done to our tourism and hospitality industry and offering when the attack on a US tourist during the summer time was reported around the world. That particular case also resulted in a warning from the US embassy to visitors about several safety concerns they should watch out for in Dublin.

With locals and tourists alike discouraged from visiting Dublin city and its hospitality businesses, it is clear what is needed now is not a debate on whether the capital city has a street crime and antisocial behaviour problem, because it does. Instead, we need to talk about how our approach can be reformed to bring about more improvements. Our members suggest three primary areas for reform. More resources are needed. We need to increase Garda visibility on the streets. We welcome the €10 million provided by the Government for extra resources. There is no better deterrent to crime than the possibility of a garda being in the area to issue an arrest. We should be aiming for Dublin city to have one of the highest police per head of population ratios compared with any other European capital city. The figure currently stands at just 255 gardaí per 100,000 population in Dublin. We need a zero-tolerance approach towards the public sale and consumption of illegal drugs. We also need to review the efficacy of the proliferation of drug treatment centres and in the future of medically supervised injection facilities in the city. A forum between the relevant bodies and local businesses should be created in any area where these facilities are provided. Finally, well-documented taxi shortages and lack of reliable public transport options, particularly at peak times, mean staff and customers have to spend longer in the city than they need to. We should urgently look at ways to increase the number of options available to those visiting city centre restaurants and pubs, to get to the city and home safely.

These are some of the proposals that RAI members have put forward for improving the safety and viability of our city. I look forward to discussing them and other ways with the committee.

Mr. Anthony Gallagher

I am a former inspector in An Garda Síochána with a total of 38 years service. I spent 20 years at inspector grade in the north central division. I am currently the events security and risk manager with Ashtree Risk Group and I am also chairman of Dubhlinn, which is a business group representing about 100 businesses in Dublin central from Parnell Square to Drumcondra.

I have a few points to raise. The first is about recruitment. It is important that An Garda Síochána should be an appealing career. The improvement in regard to the training allowance is welcome but the emphasis in relation to the training of the gardaí should be a greater road-craft type of training and the predominant portion of the training should take place at station level where there are resources and visibility and learning on the job.

The first increment of salary should commence at that point.

We are looking at retention then in relation to what has happened there. We have spent a significant amount of money recruiting and training gardaí and I wonder whether we really are putting a robust enough effort into the after-interviews or to interview them before they have that inclination to retire early or resign. That should be independently done by a HR function in order that you can get a fully understanding of the reason they are retiring.

I will speak briefly on rostering. All I will say is it is a four-by-four roster. The business community that I represent speaks a lot about the continuation of service and the ability to contact their community gardaí. The community policing service, in itself, is a special service. It is a welcome service but they need to see them for a greater period than four days.

On morale within An Garda Síochána, the front-line units should not be depleted at the expense of lateral movement to staff specialised areas. That should be only done when the workforce is sufficiently strong to facilitate that. While those specialised areas are very important, it should pause until then. Also, more civilian or Garda staff should be involved in the administrative operational areas of the job to free up members of the Garda to have more visibility on the street. They can assist in the areas of reports etc. The Garda should consider bringing back retired gardaí, who might well come back under a specialised package. They could look at areas such as serving the public hatch, creating reports etc. That has been done in the UK and was quite successful.

On the policing of Dublin city, we have approximately 100 million visitors visiting the city each year. At one point, it reached 110 million. I believe policing should follow that footfall. The resource need for the likes of the city centre stations, namely, Pearse Street and Store Street, are paramount because if we cannot police our national promenades sufficiently, that is the barometer test of the public perception of safety that people will have in relation to how we police the city.

There are four main areas of risk in the city, as I would see it, and it starts with some of the smaller areas. The first area is in relation to the panhandling and begging outside stores. There is an undertone to that because they are taking up positions outside shops, the retail staff are afraid of them and they, in turn, then become involved in shoplifting themselves. I continue to work in that area in my job experience.

As for the methadone dispensing services, while it certainly is a worthy issue, they are too intensified and focused on the city centre. The service should be dispersed out to the suburbs. All of the service should not be confined to the city centre because some of these groupings are making their way back into the city centre and are causing alarm among business owners.

What I would say about hostels is that the intensification of the hostels is predominantly in the city centre. I know of approximately 60 hostels within a short radius of the epicentre of Dublin city and there is no educational ground for people to rehabilitate in a city centre hostel. They have to go out of the hostel every single day, they are meeting up with their fellow peers at one stage and they are falling back into crime. It is not an environment where you can teach self-sufficiency.

In relation to the social housing there, the amenities for young people who live in housing flat complexes should be improved because they are gathering among their peers and descending on the city. We have seen some of the recent events in Temple Bar and other such areas.

On high-risk offenders, I know for a fact that there are about 24 or 25 recidivist-type of offenders in the city centre. They are committing a substantial amount of the crime. For example, two offenders were recently arrested with the co-operation of the Garda, which did a great job. One was found to have six warrants, the other was an habitual offender and they are obtaining bail. I think we have to look at the bail laws and the capacity of the current prison complexes to deal with them. Our population has increased by 2 million people. A proportionate percentage of that will offend. Therefore, we have to revive the Thornton Hall project as an option to increase the capacity to deal with the type of offenders.

There are longer term issues in relation to the hostels, the methadone clinics and so on but we need to have an even distribution of these facilities. The feeding is an important aspect because of the growing queues that are assembling. I am not unsympathetic to that plight but it causes a fear amongst people. They are parading for their refreshments at city centre locations and it is causing alarm.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Gallagher and all our guests. That concludes the initial opening statements. Quite a breadth of topics were covered. Topics 1 and 2 were mentioned but topic 3 perhaps did not get quite the same degree of attention in the opening statements. That is important and perhaps we will touch on that in the toing and froing over the course of the meeting.

I will invite members to speak. To give them an indication, the order I have noted so far is: Deputies Daly, Niamh Smyth and Costello. I see other hands going up.

Deputy Pa Daly

Cuirim fáilte roimh gach éinne anseo. They are all very welcome.

I sense the frustration from all four of the groupings present. Both the AGSI and the GRA mentioned the increased pressures from far-right groups. I note what they said in relation to other issues, such as the Garda band, which we, in Tralee, would know well, and what they said in relation to travel and courthouses. It is all the more reason to improve and refurbish existing courthouses around the country as well, including Tralee courthouse. It has been left with only a lick of paint for the judge's room. That is about as much as has been done over the past 25 or 30 years.

I hear what Mr. Gallagher says. When we met gardaí and business leaders during the summer in the north-inner city of Dublin, we heard the HSE closed a lot of drug clinics, for example, in Blanchardstown. They were all funnelled in. Vulnerable people, some ex-prisoners and people with drug issues were funnelled in to the city centre but we see that around the country as well. In my own town, Tralee, there are five or six hostels. When the town councils were abolished, they were all concentrated, it seems to me, in provincial towns as opposed to being spread out around the county.

I note what Mr. Gallagher said in relation to prisons but before we expand the number of beds in prisons, you have to address the fact that, for instance, as we heard in a previous committee, there were two Merchants Quay-provided counsellors for the entirety of the Midlands Prison. That is as much as what has been done to help prisoners to prevent recidivism. Before any prison spaces are built, you have to deal with that.

Going back to what the GRA and the AGSI are saying, I sense their frustration in relation to the lack of progress on accountability by the Government and the Garda Reserve regulations. We and members of the Garda, particularly to increase presence in the city centre, were asking for those new regulations to be published. I understand they have been. Do the witnesses have any idea as to when they will be implementable in order that recruitment can begin to take place?

I also note what they are saying regarding a police service for the future. Has there been a response as to when they might be invited in to make their submissions, which need to be heard in order that these frustrations can be included in that?

I have another question in relation to the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland. The commission wanted gardaí to be taken away from non-core duties at the time, it is now five years ago, such as court presenting, transport or escort duty, coroners' courts etc. While civilianisation has taken place to some extent, could they expand on that because I understand it is really up to the gardaí themselves to do a lot of the computer work, such as inputting?

I spoke to a garda at the weekend who mentioned that while seven or eight divisions are using the investigation management system, there is resistance to it in a lot of stations in which it has not yet been introduced. I am told that is because it is quite cumbersome and will end up with more gardaí behind desks rather than doing what they want to be doing. Do the witnesses have any comment on that? It is something I hear from gardaí.

I also hear a lot from gardaí about excessive oversight and regulation, poor morale and lack of recognition. A statement that comes up often is that there is always somebody looking over their shoulders. I would appreciate a response on that.

If there is time, will the witnesses from the Garda representative organisations comment on whether enough is being done to recruit from new communities? While I welcome the increase in the allowable age of recruits to 50, I do not anticipate there will be many applicants at the upper end. Nevertheless, the change will mean the retirement age has to be extended to at least 62. Will the witnesses comment on that? Members of the Garda will have to be able stay in post long enough to pay off their mortgages and so on. I would appreciate answers to some of those questions.

An Cathaoirleach

There is a short window left for responses to the Deputy's questions. There will be time over the course of the meeting for the witnesses to come back in. To keep it fair, I will stick to six-minute slots for each member. Does Ms Cunningham wish to respond to that set of questions?

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

I will address the question on the investigation management system. It is a new system that has been introduced as part of the Garda reform agenda. Every incident gardaí encounter, from the theft of a bottle of Lucozade from a shop up to the most serious type of crime, will be recorded on the new system. We believe the origins of the system are in a UK model that was designed for the management of major crime investigations, with only the more serious types of crimes recorded on the system. The way we have adopted it in this country involves recording every single incident. That includes things like basic minor road traffic accidents involving no injury and no disclosed offence. Such incidents still requires a garda to sit at a computer and input a minimum number of jobs every time, even where the incident might just have involved a swapping of insurance details.

In an attempt to progress the issues that have emerged in the eight divisions where the system is out on pilot at the moment, we have made some detailed submissions arising from workshops we have held with members. Following on from that, we met with the deputy commissioner and assistant commissioner in charge of the project, who are now considering whether they should raise the threshold of what is recorded, thereby easing the burden currently being placed on gardaí. We welcome that this change is being explored but the AGSI's position on this remains crystal clear. It is that we need to take the system back to a major crime investigation management system only and not include everyday sorts of crimes such as the theft of a bottle of Lucozade from a shop.

On oversight, one of the things that deeply affects morale within the Garda organisation is how the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, conducts its business. The unfair and prolonged investigations into gardaí, where there is absolutely no accountability by GSOC, even when investigations go on for years, is having an extremely demoralising effect on the membership and has an impact on their professional and private lives. The AGSI has been saying for some time that there must be some accountability by GSOC. Our executive has spoken to the Minister for Justice about whether a legally qualified person needs to be appointed to manage GSOC in cases where there is a complaint against an injustice that definitely has been done to a member or where a case is of such a prolonged nature that somebody independent needs to looks at it and ask why it has been going on for six or seven years. That legally qualified person could have the power either to conduct the investigation or to terminate the investigation if it is totally disadvantageous or unfair. At the moment, there is no accountability and it is extremely demoralising. Some of the recommendations that have been made by GSOC to the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, recently, which we cannot go into for the obvious reason that they are now part of a court process, highlight GSOC's lack of oversight and accountability. What it does is very demoralising for our members. I am happy to take further questions.

Deputy Niamh Smyth

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. They shared many common themes around the frustrations and concerns of gardaí. My conversations with gardaí across Cavan and Monaghan are very much reflective of what the witnesses have presented today.

I have a question for each of the presenters, beginning with Mr. O'Connor of the GRA. On community policing, we have heard him talking quite a bit about the impact of the changes, particularly around rostering. I would like to tease out the implications, especially for rural counties. I admit to being parochial, in that I am mainly concerned about divisions like Cavan-Monaghan, which includes Louth. Great work is being done on community policing, which Mr. Gallagher mentioned. There is great engagement with businesses, schools and elderly people. Gardaí working in the area often tell me they are receiving information they would not have obtained before there was visible community policing. We all recognise that element of visibility as being incredibly important. Will Mr. O'Connor elaborate on that?

Ms Cunningham spoke in her opening statement about the three-county divisions and the impact it is having on the issue of visibility. Will she elaborate further on that? I am mindful that our chief superintendent, Alan McGovern, who is doing an incredible job, has been asked to police an area that includes very busy areas in near-cities like Drogheda and Dundalk, right back over to Blacklion. That is a vast area that incorporates vastly different types of criminality. I do not understand how it can be done. I would appreciate Ms Cunningham's view on that.

We have seen how tourism was impacted long before there was the reputational damage to which Mr. Cummins referred. Can he put a figure on how restaurant owners and publicans have been affected in terms of their turnover, which we know has a ripple effect on their staff and on the viability of their businesses?

I would like to delve further into Mr. Gallagher's conversations with businesses, the liaison work he is doing with community policing and his view that the four-day roster does not provide adequate continuity. I understand the issues that arise when cases happen. I am not saying it falls off a cliff but I understand the difficulty. Will he expand on that?

Mr. Brendan O'Connor

We absolutely share the view that community policing has a massive impact within communities. We are talking about the sort of crime that really impacts on quality of life, such as antisocial behaviour and that type of thing. On rostering and making personnel available, the first point is that the adoption of the GRA proposal on rosters and the Commissioner not moving back to the five-day roster has meant a lot of people who are not permanently allocated to community policing but are assigned to those duties will continue in that role. The roster proposal we put forward has a non-core element, which means those community officers will not be working the twilight hours, between 4 a.m. and 7 a.m., and will be more available at the times the community needs them.

Deputy Patrick Costello

I welcome all the witnesses. It is unfortunate that we have tried to cram so much into this session as we could probably devote several hours to each individual topic in and of its own right.

The aspects relating to the policing of Dublin city perhaps overlap to a certain degree with morale and the visibility of the organisation. We are all agreed that the visible presence of Garda members on the street is pretty much what everybody is looking for. From the sense of it, that is what the Garda are also looking for, as well as that they are appropriately trained and equipped, as outlined by the witnesses in the submissions.

I find some of the submissions on the policing of Dublin city have a couple of omissions in them. There is a lot of talk about illegal drugs but there is no mention of alcohol, which is a much bigger contributor to crime and antisocial behaviour and to a lack of safety in Dublin city centre and yet that never seems to get mentioned at all.

I also completely reject the idea that social housing in the city centre is a cause of crime. I say that because due to the decanting of residents and redevelopment by Dublin City Council, there is probably less social housing in the city centre. At a time there is less social housing in the city centre and we are claiming crime rates are going up, how can social housing be a cause of crime in the city centre? I find that quite offensive to the residents of those social housing complexes.

Equally, if the members of the RAI are very concerned, do not feel safe and believe that things are not going the right way, are they reporting this? Mr. Gallagher said his organisation has to be economic in this regard so as not to waste Garda time, but is he reporting these issues because when this is put to the Garda Commissioner, he points to the recorded figures, which show that assault in public places, for example, are on a downward trajectory. Which is it? Are these incidents being reported? Are the numbers wrong? Is people's sense of safety wrong?

In terms of the aspects of the protest, for me it is not just about protest. We can talk about protest and the legitimate right to protest but many of the concerns expressed are about simple harassment and intimidation. Libraries across the country have been targeted and subjected to harassment and intimidation rather than protest. It is the same thing that the Garda are experiencing in regard to cameras and social media put in members' faces and violence and threats? We have seen the same with vaccination centres around the country. I am deeply concerned that teachers in schools are going to be next. If we are sitting back and not doing anything when these people arrive into libraries, how are schools to know that they are going to be safe?

One of the comparisons that is quite frequently made is with the court-ordered evictions and the treatment of the Debenhams workers compared to people who are actively engaged in violence and harassment who do not seem to warrant any response. I appreciate that much of this should perhaps be aimed at senior management. I cannot remember which submission mentioned that this was an issue of direction and policy guidelines. What is the difference? What is it that makes the Debenhams workers receive a very strong and robust response whereas those who are actively travelling around the country harassing and intimidating people seem to get no response whatsoever?

An Cathaoirleach

Does Deputy Costello want to direct the question to any particular witness or across the board?

Deputy Patrick Costello

Across the board.

An Cathaoirleach

We will start from the top with the GRA and take it down.

Mr. Ronan Slevin

That is a difficult question to answer. I will concentrate on the issue in terms of policing. Visibility on the street comes back to the main issue we have, which is resourcing within the job. The fact is that we are struggling to keep members but we also currently have in excess of 1,000 vacancies for members within An Garda Síochána if we go along the lines of the Government commitment in 2018 that we would have 15,000 guards. That has been reviewed upwards to 16,000 guards, which if accepted indicates a shortage of 2,000 guards on the street. That is more than 100 guards in a division who could be deployed. With that level of shortage of members, the consequence is a lack of visibility on the street and more people who are committing offences not being brought to justice. Unfortunately, that is something that we cannot solve, unless we have the resources to do it. I will leave it to my colleagues to respond to the questions on other matters.

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

Operational matters such as the policing of protests do fall under the remit of the Garda Commissioner, so in a lot of ways it is outside of our remit to be able to comment on that.

However, I can say it is difficult for gardaí because they are damned if they do and damned if they do not. We look at how protests are managed by other police forces and see criticism of a light touch. Then we see a more robust approach taken to people who protest and that is also strongly criticised. It is always a fine line. The members we represent follow the guidance of the operational commander on the scene at any protest. The response advised by the Garda Commissioner is a phased response that starts with the use of communication, leading up to the presence of the public order unit and a soft cap approach. It is a deterrent style. It is difficult for us as a staff association to comment on the operational command of our senior officers other than to say we follow that guidance. The policing of protests is challenging. It is also challenging for our members. After a protest is over and members go back to their stations, there is a lot of stress attached. Looking after garda welfare, training in peaceful crowd management, which we constantly look for, and the use of body-worn cameras should all exist. We have been waiting a long time for body-worn cameras. The Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) Bill 2022 is being discussed in another room here this afternoon. We are probably one of the only police forces in Europe that still does not have body-worn cameras.

Deputy Patrick Costello

Are there adequate critical incident stress management procedures in An Garda Síochána?

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

In recent years, the organisation has improved strongly on post-incident debriefing and the availability of welfare officers when they are needed. We find more and more that they are involved in incidents and are certainly available to our members afterwards.

An Cathaoirleach

Ms Cunningham mentioned the Bill relating to body-worn cameras that is being debated in the Seanad. Our colleague, Senator Ward, who was here has gone to debate it. There was a lot of debate in the public domain in the past year or two. For the record, the committee endorsed the idea of body-worn cameras from the start. We had no issue whatsoever. There was a separate concern around facial recognition technology, but we had no issue at any stage with body-worn cameras. In fact, we recommended that such cameras be rolled out. I share the concern that it did not happen sooner. It is probably because a move was afoot to add additional elements that were not considered at this committee. However, I agree with the Ms Cunningham that the sooner body-worn cameras get out there, the better.

I will come back to Mr. Gallagher. We have to go around committee members first, but I will make sure to get to him in the next round.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I will make an unapologetic Dublin-centric presentation.

I would like the two garda representatives to respond on the overall numbers of resignations from An Garda Síochána. The figures I have show that there were 26 resignations in 2013, 27 in 2014, and the numbers were similar until 2017 when there were 41. In 2018, the number jumped to 77; in 2019, there were 72; in 2020, there were 70; in 2021, there were 94; and now we are in a situation where the witnesses suggest there have been 116 - my figure was 114 - so far this year. We are at crisis levels. I understand that not only is the number of people applying to An Garda Síochána not as high as we would like but the standard of applications is not as high as we would like. The witnesses made the practical suggestion of an independent pay review body for An Garda Síochána. Who should be tasked with driving and delivering that and should a Dublin allowance be part of the conversation? For those working and living in Dublin, the dynamics of city are different and housing is much more expensive. Is there a need to examine the London model and perhaps expand on it?

The witnesses spoke about community policing. I reinforce what Deputy Smyth said in that in my experience community policing in the most important arm of An Garda Síochána. It builds relationships and understanding, it prevents crime and, in my constituency, it seems to the be section under the most pressure. It is getting the biggest squeeze and is certainly not being expanded.

I agree with Deputy Costello about the other two presentations on social issues in Dublin. Alcohol was not mentioned. Are we to believe that the only drug taking in Dublin is done on the street? I am quite sure people are taking cocaine in restaurants, pubs and nightclubs and they are getting intoxicated with alcohol in those various hostelries or wherever. The cost to the Exchequer of alcohol consumption is approximately €3.8 billion per year.

On the RAI's suggestion of zero tolerance, we had that discussion for approximately 25 years. It is an old suggestion. I assume the difference between a drug taker in a restaurant and a drug taker on the street is that one is visibly poorer than the other and, therefore, less attractive to the eye than the other and one has less money to spend than the other and that is why we focus on the poorer person.

I also take issue with the association's opposition to the medically supervised injection facility. Everywhere in the world that has had an injecting facility it has been shown that drug litter goes down, street injection goes down, the visibility of drug taking goes down, which might not be of interest to the representatives of the restaurants association, but they say they are compassionate, and HIV infections and hepatitis C infection and overdoses go down. I would expect those who advocate for a safer place in which to do business would be the first to advocate for an injecting facility, which has been legislated for and is coming down the tracks.

I also agree with what Deputy Costello said about social housing. These are old arguments that do not stand up to any scrutiny. If witnesses are going to peddle old arguments at an Oireachtas committee, we will not get anywhere. The answer to these problems is not purely in policing; it is also in social cohesion, social justice, education, empowerment and so forth. The presentation about what young people do from flat complexes is an old stereotype at which people would correctly take offence.

I have a quick contribution on the pay review body. It will obviously be overseen by a Government appointee, usually from the Minister for Justice. The important thing about a pay review body for An Garda Síochána is the ability for gardaí to negotiate their own pay still falls under an ad hoc arrangement, where we are invited to the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, when it facilitates national pay talks. Other public servants have their pay negotiated by the public services committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, ICTU, which represents the trade union side. We are not a trade union, so we are not in the main room. The only reason therefore we are at the WRC is our insistence that the Government gives us the right to negotiate our own pay. For years we were left outside the door while national pay negotiations went on, with no voice at the table to bring forward the unique issues that affect An Garda Síochána. There has to be a forum where we can bring forward the differences between us and other public servants. Nobody else will be asked to take a badge out of their pocket when they are off-duty or not in their place of work, identify themselves as a member of An Garda Síochána and enforce legislation, if that is what they are required to do. That makes us different to any other sector in this country. It would also be useful to address the important issues of retention, pension entitlement and the salary increments available to members to make the job more attractive. They have not been revisited for years. The establishment of a body would allow us to get into discussions to manage all of those issues.

Mr. Ronan Slevin

It is undeniable that resignations are on a worrying upward trend. There have been 116 so far this year. It will probably top out at 150. If we combine that with the retention issue, keeping people in the job when they reach retirement age is a big issue. All of that comes back to the morale issues in An Garda Síochána. It cannot be denied. The GRA conducted exit interviews of 40 members who left in the past 18 months, and 100% said that morale is the biggest issue in the job. Our biggest issue is trying to convince the Commissioner that there is a problem with morale. His insistence that there is no morale issue is a problem, when it comes to dealing with the problem. You have to recognise the problem before you accept there is one. That goes back into the myriad of issues we have relating to welfare and pensions. Pension provisions for all new entrants since 2013 mean that when members retire they will probably just about get €12,000 per year. That is insufficient, especially in view of the fact they are currently forced to retire at 60. They have six years before they hit retirement age and gain access to the old-age pension. That is a huge issue for members. When new members realise this, it is one of the reasons they leave. There is an over-reliance on discipline as a training tool. People are afraid to do their job. Members are working in an intense environment and dangerous situations, as we have mentioned already. They are being recorded and every action they take is being put up on social media. On top of that, people fear that if they step out of line in any way or make a mistake, they will be disciplined as a result. They could lose their job as a result of that discipline. All of those issues go together when it comes to people making their minds up to resign. While we are at a loss as to why people are not joining, retention is something the Commissioner can address immediately by giving members a proper work-life balance, reducing the amount of bureaucracy attached to their core functions and addressing the issues of morale.

Senator Robbie Gallagher

I welcome all of the witnesses and thank them for their contributions. I also thank An Garda Síochána for the difficult job it does every day on behalf of us all. I am sure I speak for all committee members when I say that.

The word "morale" has been bandied about quite a lot this afternoon. Based on the contributions, it is clearly a big issue. I am astonished things are as bad as they are, which poses the question. Someone is asleep at the wheel here. We have arrived at a point where a number of witnesses have used the word "crisis" with regard to Garda recruitment and retention. Is Garda management not listening to gardaí on the ground? Is that the problem? How would gardaí describe their relationship with top-level Garda management at the moment? The witnesses might also comment on the numbers. Based on present trends we are on course for approximately 150 members to resign this year. That is a frightening number. At the other end, Ms Cunningham mentioned there have been fewer than 5,000 applicants for the current recruitment campaign. Four or five years ago, I understand that figure might have been 25,000. There has clearly been a problem here for a long time. Someone is asleep at the wheel if that situation has been allowed to develop. We are using the word "crisis" a lot this afternoon.

Ms Cunningham mentioned a number of things, including the right to disconnect. Perhaps she might elaborate on that. It seems from what she said in her contribution that gardaí are on call nearly 24-7, which is difficult for a lot us to fathom, although perhaps some of the political representatives here fall into the same bracket. That does not justify members of the force being expected to be on call 24-7. Another comment I would like her to elaborate on concerned the right to strike. What are her thoughts on that and where that is coming from? How does An Garda Síochána compare to other police forces throughout the world when it comes to the right to strike? Does Ms Cunningham feel that would be an advantage as an avenue for members to avail of, if it were brought in? I would appreciate a response on that.

Mr. Cummins mentioned a number of things in his contribution, including the €10 million recently allocated. Does he feel that has made a difference? Can his members see a visible change in Garda presence on the ground as a result? Does that suggest it is a simple resource matter? As I go about my business around the country, the question I most frequently hear people ask is when was the last time I saw a member of the Garda on the beat in a town or village. I can only speak from my own experience. I cannot remember the last time I saw a member of the Garda patrolling Monaghan Town, Carrickmacross, Clones or Castleblayney. That is one example, but it is a comment I hear frequently and clearly shows a problem.

Mention was made earlier of the three-county model currently in train. I would like to hear some insight into that. I understand a review was carried out or is ongoing and some counties that were part of a three-county model no longer are. Perhaps those might be listed and what criteria was used to reverse that decision. In my own area of Cavan and Monaghan and Louth, I have always been a strong voice against that model.

It will not work and is crazy. Our starting point is a lack of resources. We are now lumped in with the two major towns of Drogheda and Dundalk, which are close to Dublin, and most of the action, as it were, will happen in those areas. In the event of an incident, members will be taken from Cavan and Monaghan to those towns. How does the review stand? Mention was made of a drugs unit in Cavan and Monaghan and how many members it had, but my understanding is that we do not have one, never mind the question of how strong it is. There are serious issues in this regard and I would like the witnesses to comment on them.

Mr. Gallagher mentioned the rosters and stated that, in order to have specialised units, we would have to take resources from somewhere else. The reality is that they would be taken from the front line. Is it Mr. Gallagher's view that this should not happen until such time as the front line is of an adequate strength to allow people to be moved from A to B?

Mr. Ronan Slevin

The Senator spoke about resignations. Another issue will affect the number of gardaí on the street. Next year will mark the anniversary of accelerated recruitment to Templemore, so more members will become eligible for retirement. Every year, the number of resignations and retirements is approximately 500. We must bear in mind that, in 2022, only 300 recruits passed through Templemore. This year, we will be lucky if we get 625. Given the 500 gardaí who left the force last year and the 500 who will leave it this year, we will be in the negative. This is a crisis and it must be addressed as a matter of urgency.

While it is difficult to encourage people into the job when there is such bad publicity from ourselves in respect of the issues, those issues have to be fixed. If we can get a positive message to come from the associations about what the job is like, that will encourage more people into it. The list of issues that we have been discussing with Garda management in recent years has to be addressed urgently. The Senator was correct to say that the word “morale” was being bandied about but of the 40 people who left the job whom we interviewed, every one bar none said that morale was one of the main reasons for leaving. It needs to be addressed urgently so that we do not dip below current numbers.

With an ever-increasing population, the fewer than 14,000 gardaí are struggling more every day. The Senator rightly said that gardaí were not seen on the beat any more. Members are being brought in from outside stations just to supplement units in larger urban areas. You cannot get away from the fact that we are only able to police now because of overtime. I believe a figure of 20% has been given for how much is being spent on members supplementing units to ensure a standard of policing that just about delivers a service to the public. This is unsustainable. It is even unsustainable for our members to do that amount of overtime. This has to be addressed.

Regarding the Senator’s other question, there is a perceived disconnect between members on the ground and Garda management as regards having the former’s issues addressed. We are a solutions-based association and we always strive to find solutions to the issues we face but if they are never addressed, the effect on the ground is that members feel as though they are not being listened to and their concerns are not being taken on board. It does not bode well for the message going out to the public that this is not a job we would encourage anyone to join.

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

I will take the Senator’s question on the right to strike. Traditionally, when people spoke about gardaí going on strike, it was unpalatable and they said that it would have been unbecoming of a disciplined organisation to be able to do so. The AGSI is not talking about going on strike without the establishment of a code of practice for essential services like An Garda Síochána. When industrial disputes have occurred in the Garda in recent years, and because we do not carry a controlled right to go on strike or an industrial relations mechanism similar to strike action, we end up with individuals saying that they will withdraw their labour on particular days. That leaves management and the Government in a lack-of-control position and creates unease and unrest in the communities we serve. It would be far better if the Government considered engaging with the Garda staff associations around establishing and agreeing upon a code of practice for minimum service requirements in the event of an industrial dispute. Does the Senator understand what I am saying? This would remove all of the vulnerabilities under the current arrangements. The staff associations know they are constrained by law in advocating for people to withdraw labour or go on strike, so individuals end up taking this course of action. This is why we are saying that the Government should enter into talks with Garda staff associations around these issues for better industrial relations mechanisms for the organisation. That is an appropriate request to make.

Regarding the operating model in the three counties to which the Senator referred, Kilkenny, Carlow and Kildare were similarly a three-county model originally. They have now been divided. Carlow-Kildare will be a Garda division and Kilkenny will join with Waterford, which is far more appropriate for the management of services required in those areas. Significantly, the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland and APSFF recommended the amalgamation of Sligo, Leitrim and Donegal. This is why we question whether the commission's recommendations are still valid. Anyone who has ever travelled through Donegal will know the vastness of the area that a division up there has to police. The AGSI has recommended from the outset that Donegal should remain as a stand-alone division. We are pleased that that has now happened. The reviews were taken with Garda management – the chief superintendents responsible in the area – and I am sure that the Minister for Justice was consulted. We are beginning to engage on the model’s effect on inspectors and sergeants from a supervisory perspective. Changes have been made to three-county models. I mentioned the two three-county models that still remain. We are advocating that they be changed back to two-county models for the sake of a more visible and controlled policing presence. What we do not want is the centralisation of Garda resources in a single location from which they are dispersed out on a call-answering basis. What we want to see is people in Donegal having a stand-alone division, where the policing requirements of Donegal from a legal perspective are met and the service caters for the needs of the community.

The Senator asked about the relationship with Garda management. We in the AGSI would always say that more consultation is needed with Garda management. Sometimes, we fall into the traditional perception of staff associations being on one side of the table and management being on the other. It is far better to have collaborative processes because everyone would be engaged. We are critical of the office of the APSFF, which is run by the Department of the Taoiseach, because it has not asked the AGSI for consultation despite us raising the matter with the Minister for Justice a number of times. Collaborative approaches in organisations work better. In a reform agenda like the APSFF, more consultation with staff associations means more buy-in from members because they feel like their voices are being heard. We would always say that there is room for greater consultation.

An Cathaoirleach

Do the representatives from the two other groups wish to comment?

Mr. Adrian Cummins

I will briefly answer the Senator’s question on the extra €10 million that was given. That money was very welcome and we could see increased visibility on the ground afterwards, but let us look at the data. There had been 2,353 assaults in Dublin up to that point, so why did it take a US tourist to get the extra €10 million? If it had not been a US tourist, would we have got that money? I do not believe we would have got another €10 million if it had been someone from Dublin. That it was a US tourist rang alarm bells, given tourism’s value to the economy. If London is at 396 police officers per 100,000 people and Dublin is only at 255, we have a long way to go.

It is down to resources.

Mr. Anthony Gallagher

In answer to the question, if we do not have a strong, visible presence in a preventative mode, we will have the perception that there is less public safety or that there are public safety issues and we will actually be spending more time on investigations. I am biased in favour of supporting the front line because I spent all my service in the front line. A question arises from the Senator's question and I am wondering if ex-colleagues may be able to answer it. If the burden is being carried by the front-line uniformed section, is that where we are seeing the resignations because of the stress factor and because of that burden?

An Cathaoirleach

That concludes the first round from the members present. One or two other members have been dipping in and out but they are in the Chamber at the moment. I am going to invite members to indicate for a second round but I will put a few questions before I do that. Members have had thematic questions but I have picked up a few others as we have gone along. There was reference to recruitment in, I think, the GRA presentation and definitely in the AGSI presentation. The two most recent budgets announced it was intended to recruit 1,000 members in the year ahead. I think the statement said that only 600 were recruited in the last year or possibly the year before. Why was that?

Both representatives associations elaborated on potential recruitment issues, one being the pension. On the pension, I invite comment from the two associations and from anyone who wants to express a view. My understanding is that there is an anomaly if a member of the force retires and then goes on to do some part-time work in any area. Rather than losing, say, a day a week from their pension payment on a pro rata basis, I understand they actually lose a third of the pension. Am I correct in that? Have the GRA and AGSI made representations on that issue? What are their views on it?

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

Pensions regulations and rules changed between 1995 and 2013. Prior to 1995, a person got a State pension, in its totality, once they retired as a member of An Garda Síochána. After 1995 the rules changed. People receive a two-thirds State pension and a one-third supplementary pension from the Department of Social Protection until they reach the official old-age pension age. This supplementary pension is a conditional payment. No longer is it automatic. People have to claim it first in the form of jobseeker's benefit. They have to go down to the local office the day after they retire and basically make a declaration, which is false, that they are available for work. Unfortunately the Department is bound by its own regulations. Those who do not sign that declaration do not get the supplementary pension. Even though they have just retired, they have to make that false declaration.

We will certainly put that question to it.

To go back to the representatives of the Restaurants Association of Ireland, would it be fair to say there has been a decline in commercial activity in certain city centre areas, both in their industry of hospitality and in retail and other trades? Is there a sort of circle of doom because there is less footfall and more crime or are places closing and generating a doom spiral? Is that beginning to happen? I do not want to talk down the city or the industry but being honest about it may help to start getting the solutions.

Mr. Adrian Cummins

It is probably a legacy of the pandemic when the city centre was essentially shut down. When it was reopened, substantial numbers of the workforce were working from home from Tuesday to Thursday. What we are finding now is that businesses are in decline and late-night trading is not happening as much as it used to. The hardcore facts show that some of the hospitality businesses not too far from here are reporting they are 30% to 40% down in their trade compared with pre-pandemic times. That would correlate with people working from home and there being less activity in the city centre. When there are high profile cases of tourists being assaulted or when street crime is in the news people get a bit anxious and edgy and footfall declines in certain demographics as a result. We do a lot of polling of consumer attitudes and the decline is reflective of the fact that people do not feel safe. That is something we have to address, not just us but all the city agencies and Dublin City Council. We are trying to work with them to make sure we can bring the capital city back to where it was and should be.

An Cathaoirleach

The GRA may have touched on my final question, which is on overtime being used to increase resources on the street at particular times. Is such overtime voluntary or mandatory? If a big event such as a concert, a GAA match or the budget is coming up - Members appreciated the services that were provided in the House that day - and a major ramp-up of operations is covered by overtime, is that overtime optional for Garda members? Is it voluntary? Could it be a scenario whereby a call-out is made and Garda members say "No thanks, I am busy this weekend"? How does that work?

Mr. Brendan O'Connor

The vast majority of work is done on a voluntary basis but when there are specific operations, a VIP visit or a massive security risk, members would be directed. The word "additional" is often rolled out in these contexts, as in this €10 million will result in additional gardaí. However, there are no additional gardaí. We are asking the same group of people to do more. The people in the busy areas suffering burnout were referred to early. It is the people in the busy city centre stations who are at the coalface of policing. There is no let-up ever in the demand and they are constantly being asked to do more and more. Sometimes, if there are not sufficient resources available, people may be brought in from the suburbs or outlying stations and then a suburb in north or west Dublin is stripped to facilitate the policing of an event in the city centre. At the end of the day, it is the same problem. There are not enough people and there are more demands on the service. That is not sustainable for our people.

People think this is positive for earnings but it is not about earnings. It is about a work-life balance because people's health and well-being are suffering as a result of the increased burden being put on them. It is not a solution. It is another acknowledgment that the existing resources allocated to the city centre stations are not sufficient to provide the required police presence. The fact is it takes an additional €10 million just to provide what would reasonably be expected as a visible police presence.

An Cathaoirleach

I will move on to Deputy Farrell who has had his hand up online.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I thank the witnesses. I apologise for not being physically present but I had to be in two places at once and I was contributing in the Dáil as well. I thank them for their opening statements and their answers to questions thus far. I will touch on a number of matters on which I hope they will be able to comment. Regarding the issue of rosters, I am obviously pleased to see there has been an agreement that an arrangement can be made to fix on a mutually agreeable roster. The GRA has repeatedly said the target should be to achieve adequate work-life balance. I endorse that view. It is one I firmly support. Has the switch to a hybrid roster resulted in an increase in the number of policing hours available? That may be a question for the AGSI.

Appropriate training was mentioned in the opening statements of both Garda organisations. What sort of appropriate training should be provided? This may be an issue for discussion at a later point. On the point made about on-the-job training, I was of the view that once a garda was attested after 32 weeks, he or she was deployed to a Garda training station. Will the members of An Garda Síochána present comment on the level of resources that are available within the training stations? Is it their view that they are sufficient to meet the training demand?

What are the views of the GRA and the AGSI on the support provided by the Garda Reserve? What would they like to see happen with the Garda Reserve? I know there is a paper being discussed and I would welcome their views on that.

I direct my next questions to the representatives of the Restaurants Association of Ireland. Alcohol was not mentioned in the opening statements, although it was touched on by a number of members, including Deputy Costello. I too am surprised by this because the vast majority of the issues of which I am informed, particularly in the city centre but also in our towns and villages, are alcohol-related rather than drug-related. One of the city centre issues of which I am acutely aware, and I know housing was mentioned, is the concentration of addiction services and the impact that has on the city centre. Does the RAI have any knowledge of this or is it talking to the HSE or Dublin City Council regarding that concentration? I should point out that I am firmly in favour of the provision of addiction services right across the country. Regardless of location, city centre or otherwise, I would like to see them put into places where they are required.

It probably is in one sense but it is also the idea of finding spaces for members to be assigned and resources to go to those courses. There is a restriction on the number of courses that can take place due to the number of instructors that we have. That has increased in the last year and we hope to see an improvement in the number of people being given those courses. It is a necessary requirement that those people are trained as a matter of urgency because every district patrol car should be manned by a qualified driver who can respond to emergency calls in an appropriately hasty manner when required. That is not the scenario at the moment.

On the Garda Reserve, last week, we were furnished with the new reserve regulations. We will consider those as an association at our next executive meeting, the week after next. When we track back to the origins of the Garda Reserve, it started off based on the premise of volunteerism, contributing to the community, and people coming in to assist An Garda Síochána as volunteers. They would be there to strengthen the visibility of Garda presence. It then changed somewhat and it almost became a fast-track method to join the organisation itself. People were joining the Garda Reserve for a different reason. If they got into the reserve first of all, that was then seen as a fast-track method to get into the organisation itself. For us as supervisors who have to assign and seek Garda reserves not only to work, but for the duties that they can be assigned to, we identified several issues. Often, the people who were volunteering to be Garda reserves were full-time workers and had full-time jobs. When they came in to work for us, the mandatory rest that they would be entitled to as employees had already been exceeded, thereby creating a difficulty for us in that we could not assign them to duty because they did not have adequate rest between their normal job and the job that we would require them for.

Other issues that emerged were about the availability of reserves at the time when one would actually need them. For example, a big sporting event such as a GAA all-Ireland here in Dublin might need volunteers or reserves. They would not be available at the times they were needed. There have been occasions where the reserves have contributed very well to the organisation. There have been difficulties from a supervisory and allocation perspective. We need to go back and establish what the purpose of the Garda Reserve is. We look forward to looking at the regulations in that regard and, from our point of view as supervisors, seeing if it is something that will be an addition to the organisation and to society generally.

On the issue about training, we are concerned about training in An Garda Síochána. We have been vocal as an association with Garda management in that regard. We have seen a decline in person-to-person training. We now mostly use a learning management system, LMS, for training in new policies and procedures, where a vast amount of law is dumped onto a portal and members are told, within their working day, to go onto that portal and complete some kind of a training course. There is no return to see how adequately that is being put back into the job, to see whether the training relates to the job. It is more of a box-ticking exercise to see if the training has been completed. People are left to interpret policies and procedures in the organisation by way of a portal where there is no interaction with anybody else. It is entirely unsuitable as a single methodology to train members of An Garda Síochána. As a blended approach it has a place, but the amount of in-person training that goes on in An Garda Síochána for ordinary front-line members is low and something that needs to be significantly improved on.

We are concerned about things like pursuit policies. We do not have a pursuit policy and we have seen very well publicised cases recently about pursuits, stand-down of pursuits and all of the issues that emerged regarding people driving the wrong way down motorways and so on.

Like our colleagues in the GRA, we are concerned about the driving instructor training that the organisation has the ability to provide at the moment. We know our colleagues in the driving schools are doing the best they can, but more is needed for all issues regarding driver training and training generally.

Deputy Alan Farrell

Are gardaí rostered for training?

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

No. It is regrettable that people are supposed to be sitting at some kind of a screen during the working day. The public are coming in, prisoners are being dealt with, the phone is ringing and somebody else is logging something on PULSE, while people's management are writing to them asking if they have completed that training module. They are expected to do that as part of their working day. It is entirely unsatisfactory.

An Cathaoirleach

That concludes that engagement. I am concerned about the issues Ms Cunningham mentioned regarding pursuit. I believe the public would have a view that members should be able to do, within reason, whatever necessary to prevent crime and apprehend criminals. That whole area needs to be looked at. I note Ms Cunningham's remarks on that.

Deputy Pa Daly

I hear about gardaí saying that they feel they are not being listened to by management and so on. Does Ms Cunningham feel, given what she has been saying about the reserve regulations and promotion regulations that are coming in, and the lack of engagement from the Department, that gardaí are being listened to by the Government?

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

One of the issues in my head is that there are many parallels with the Garda representative associations and the Defence Forces, which also do not have a right to strike. In the past the Defence Forces have asked for an independent pay review body. There is some difference between PDFORRA and RACO and there were concerns around how binding agreements would be. I was going to suggest that perhaps there is something we can learn in that regard. Given the pay, conditions and morale challenges within the Defence Forces, perhaps we are learning how not to do things. There is certainly common cause and similarities there. If a structure can be agreed that works for one, I am sure it would work for the other. At least that way there would not be a stand-alone body and efficiencies could be offered from the perspective of the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. Ms Cunningham wants to come back again and I will let her comment on that.

One of many issues in the Defence Forces is that members are not being released for training and, therefore, training is not happening, which affects readiness and availability for work and, ultimately, impacts on the mission. From what the witnesses have said, the same is happening in the Garda. How can we expect somebody to be able to turn on the lights and respond if they are not certified or qualified, given all of the high-profile incidents we have seen?

Regarding access to the Minister, is there at least access to civil servants? Depending on the Minister, access to civil servants may be more important. If witnesses only get to see the Minister for Justice twice a year, do they get to see the officials behind her?

Ms Antoinette Cunningham

The similarities between the Garda and the Defence Forces around recruitment and retention almost mirror one another at this regrettable stage. We are again calling for an independent pay review body for gardaí because RACO and PDFORRA have now become affiliated with the public services committee of ICTU, which is representing their interests in pay talks. We are a non-ICTU affiliate and remain outside of that sphere. There is a slight difference in the pay and conditions in that the Defence Forces' representative bodies have representation from ICTU. We believe that strengthens our case.

We do not have access to senior civil servants. We have an internal Garda conciliation process, which includes a representative from the Department. That representative has certainly not progressed issues out of that forum on behalf of AGSI. I can say that with certainty because I see items that are still on the agenda from 18 months ago and remained there because they have not been progressed.

An Cathaoirleach

Very good. That brings us to the end of our session as the second round has been completed. We said we would allow three hours and took two hours and 15 minutes, but it was a very good conversation. I thank all of the witnesses for their time, input and experience and members for their questions and comments. I propose we publish the opening statements on the committee's website. Is that agreed? Agreed. I take it there is no other business members want to raise?

The committee will complete a report in due course. That is how this works. It is a slightly unusual procedure on this occasion; normally we would produce a report which we would publish but this process comprises a two-part session. The Minister and Commissioner will join us for engagement in the next couple of weeks. They will have an opportunity to address the same issues. We will put some of the points made here today to the Minister and Commissioner. It is very useful to have had that exchange and a two-part series of meetings.

The committee is adjourned until Tuesday, 7 November 2023, when we will have a short private session to deal with housekeeping and a public session with, as I mentioned, the Garda Commissioner, Mr. Drew Harris, and the Minister for Justice on some of the topics we discussed today.

The joint committee adjourned at 6.17 p.m. until 4 p.m. on Tuesday, 7 November 2023.