Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality debate -
Wednesday, 28 May 2014

Garda Oversight: Discussion (Resumed)

Chairman

Apologies have been received from Senator Tony Mulcahy. I want to apologise for the delayed start to the meeting. There was a Vote in the Seanad and we waited for our colleagues from the Seanad to arrive back. That is the reason we suspended.

The purpose of the meeting is to have a discussion with a number of people who made written submissions on the review of the effectiveness of legislation relating to the oversight of An Garda Síochána. On behalf of the committee I am very pleased to welcome Baroness Nuala O'Loan. She was the first Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, a post she held from 1999 to 2007. She is very welcome. I thank her for being here today and giving us her time and expertise.

I welcome Ms Noirín O'Sullivan, Acting Garda Commissioner, and her team. I also welcome Mr. Ronan Brady, lecturer in journalism, Griffith College, Dublin and thank him for being here.

The format of the meeting is that witnesses will be invited to make an opening statement which will be followed by a question and answer session. I ask witnesses to keep their opening statements as brief and to the point as possible. It would be very much appreciated if they could keep them to around five minutes or thereabouts.

I wish to advise all members, witnesses and observers in the Visitors Gallery to please turn off all mobile telephones or switch them to aeroplane, safe or flight mode, depending on the device.

It is not sufficient to put them on silent mode as this will maintain the level of interference from the committee and impacts negatively on broadcast. If, in the course of proceedings, there is interference I will ask everybody to switch off their mobile telephones completely or withdraw from the room because it is very annoying for people in television and broadcast to have to endure such interference.

Before beginning I draw the attention of all witnesses to the position in regard to privilege. I ask witnesses to note that they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if witnesses are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. Members should be aware that under the salient rulings of the Chair, they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I invite Ms Nuala O'Loan to make her opening remarks.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I thank the Chairman and express my appreciation for the invitation to appear before the committee.

The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission has been in existence for some nine years now and has done some very good work. However, following recent events, there is an opportunity to enhance and refine the law to make it a more effective and more independent organisation. It is for the Irish State to determine how it legislates for police accountability and my observations, which are the product of my personal experience as Police Ombudsman and my work with policing and police accountability organisations across the world, are offered simply to assist in the reform processes.

International experience would suggest that real independence and impartiality are key factors for the success of an independent investigative organisation. The Garda Síochána Act does not mention either independence or impartiality in the objectives which it sets for GSOC. It would seem to me that the term "fairness" is a weaker, less specific term. For example, it would be possible to deliver an equally bad service to everyone. That would be fair but it would not be acceptable or effective. I urge the inclusion of a duty on GSOC to act with impartiality and independently. I also suggest that GSOC should be resourced to investigate every complaint rather than referring matters back to An Garda Síochána for investigation. This is necessary to demonstrate de facto the real independence of GSOC. It should have the power to investigate policy and practice matters of its own volition. These are the issues that enabled me as Police Ombudsman in Northern Ireland to deliver a service.

GSOC cannot currently investigate complaints or allegations against the Commissioner. The committee has heard evidence of this. I do not know of any other similar organisation where this is the case and it is not sustainable if GSOC is to be perceived as effective. There will always be a suspicion that accountability is okay for junior officers but the chief has to be protected. GSOC needs a complete entitlement to material to be able to do its job. Currently the Commissioner can withhold material and advise the Minister to withhold material. That could lead to a perception of cover-up.

The appearance of independence is important. GSOC was required to take as staff former civil servants and its current staff are civil servants - part of the apparatus of the administration of the State. There has to be a complete separation between GSOC and the State. The current arrangements whereby serving gardaí are based in the GSOC office is not conducive to any perception of independence, and perception is profoundly important. I cannot conceive of anything which serving gardaí could bring to the office now in terms of explanation of Garda practices which GSOC could not acquire through retired or former gardaí. GSOC needs an uninterrupted, immediate right of access to search police premises. I dealt with that issue at some length in my initial submission. This does not exist and is necessary. The Garda Commissioner should be under a stated obligation to secure, preserve and provide evidence in every case.

Current law enables officers subject to complaint to veto attempts at an informal resolution process. There is a very low level of informal resolution here. It is in the interests of everyone that simple, less complex complaints be dealt with more effectively.

The provision which causes me considerable concern is the provision which enables prosecution of a person who makes a false or misleading complaint. I consider that provision to be disproportionate, since it could well deter genuine complainants. From my experience, it is not easy for most people to make a complaint against the police. Many states contemplated introducing a provision like this at the request of the police and police representative organisations but decided against it. Were I making change, I would repeal the section. Although a person can defend themselves, the mere fact of the possibility of prosecution and the risk of a heavy fine and a prison sentence is a disproportionate disincentive to making a complaint which may be perfectly well justified.

The legislation does not provide a right to GSOC to make recommendation for change in policy or practice following a conduct or criminal investigation. I am aware that some such recommendations are made. Such a provision would enable a better outcome for the people of Ireland from the investment currently made in police accountability.

I would like to say more but think it is better that I give the committee the opportunity to ask me questions.

Chairman

I invite Ms Noirín O'Sullivan to make her opening statement.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I thank the Chairman. I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss the Garda Síochána Act 2005 with the committee. I have provided a document outlining our submission on a section by section basis, as requested. I have also given the committee a printed version of the opening address. To make the best use of time I propose to touch on a few of the key issues outlined.

The revision of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 presents a unique opportunity for us to make sure we have the modern well-governed customer-facing police service we need. As interim Garda Commissioner I have already launched a substantial reform and renewal programme to make sure An Garda Síochána continues to have the trust, respect and confidence of the diverse communities it serves with pride. We are at a defining moment in the history of the policing service, a moment at which the principles of accountability, transparency and professionalism must be at the core of a strong, confident and connected policing service and at which such principles must be seen to be at the core of everything we do in order that we are trusted and valued by the public we serve. The revision of the Act is necessary because in the ten years since it was first drafted, Irish society and public expectations of its police service have changed. The new Act must reflect this new landscape in which we now operate. The 2005 Act brought about some very welcome changes but it is time to move forward to a new era of enhanced accountability.

At the outset it is important to acknowledge the enormous contribution made on a daily basis by every member of the Garda Síochána. Day in and day out, the men and women of An Garda Síochána serve this State and our local communities and work to keep them safe and secure. They interact with families and individuals at some of the most challenging and vulnerable moments that are encountered in life. Much of this work does not, and often should not, make headlines but it does touch hearts and minds and it does make a difference.

Throughout its history An Garda Síochána has met and overcome new challenges, whether they came from the paramilitary threat that hung over this island for decades, from organised criminality or from emerging technologies. We have done so in a spirit of doing what is right for the community and the country as well as what is in the interests of delivering professional and accountable policing.

The Garda Síochána Act 2005 was a significant legislative initiative which brought clarity to the management and oversight of policing in this country. It addressed the changing policing environment and enhanced our ability to meet the emerging challenges of delivering an effective, professional and accountable police service. Since the publication of the Act, An Garda Síochána has been and continues to be subject to significant oversight from a range of different institutions: the Oireachtas, including this committee and other Oireachtas committees, the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, the Garda Inspectorate, and judicial oversight of activities relating to State security.

Our relationship with our external oversight authorities must be professional, transparent, open and demonstrate full engagement. Such oversight is not just welcome but vital in a modern democracy. An Garda Síochána recognises that accountability and transparency must be among the fundamental principles upon which we develop our policing service. That complex task will be greatly helped by an independent policing authority. This authority, together with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission and the Garda Inspectorate, will enhance public confidence in our policing function and frankly, right now, that reinforcement is necessary.

I turn to some specific proposals from An Garda Síochána which draw both on our professional judgement and expertise and our practical knowledge and experience of providing a community-focused police service. As I see it they fall into three broad categories: first, accountability and transparency in the delivery of policing; second, investigation of complaints about policing; and third, effective use of resources and ensuring best police practice.

An Garda Síochána welcomes the proposed establishment of an independent police authority as a means of enhancing the delivery of a modern dynamic policing service and ensuring it meets the needs and expectations of the community. We know that there are examples on these islands and further afield of how such authorities can operate. The structure and make-up of that independent authority is a matter for Government and the Legislature. The key element for us is to ensure the authority and its members are consistently guided and motivated by what is good for the community and good for policing.

Our renewal programme is focused on ensuring we are in a state of readiness to provide the level of governance and accountability to serve the requirements of that authority, when established. It is vital that we are accountable to national independent bodies.

It is equally important that we are accountable to local communities. The Irish model of policing admired by many police services around the world has been built on listening to, engaging and working in partnership with local communities to identify and solve problems. To date, the joint policing committees have had a major role to play. These partnerships between local stakeholders and An Garda Síochána have successfully identified solutions for issues that impact on local communities. These structures should continue to have a meaningful role and to be focused as locally as possible.

In respect of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, a strong and fully functioning commission which commands the confidence of the community plays a vital part in maintaining trust in policing. We are committed to ensuring constructive engagement with GSOC to achieve our mutual objectives. Our written submission proposes a number of changes to the workings and powers of GSOC. These key proposals include that gardaí should not investigate gardaí. As Baroness O'Loan stated, all complaints of a serious nature should be investigated by GSOC personnel, not by members of An Garda Síochána. This provides independent objectivity. We support GSOC's submission that the definition covering what incidents fall into the serious crime category should be extended. We also support the initiative to allow GSOC to resolve complaints by way of informal resolution with the consent of the complainant and the member complained of.

In respect of the Garda Inspectorate, since its inception the Garda Inspectorate has produced a number of insightful and valuable reports that have helped improve An Garda Síochána. However, it is worth bearing in mind that some recommendations require resource investments which are difficult in the current climate in which An Garda Síochána – like other public bodies - has had to operate.

I also want to mention something in respect of receiving and responding to feedback. I have stated from the outset that An Garda Síochána must be open to internal and external criticism if we are to strengthen and grow. Dissent is not disloyalty, and different and differing views must be heard and supported as they can help to improve the service we provide. Sometimes those criticisms may not be fully correct or justified but we need to learn to listen and to understand, and where there are issues that need to be addressed we must take appropriate action immediately.

In that context, the proposals for internal change include a restructuring of our internal affairs and professional standards department. This would see the aligning of internal affairs, which directs investigations into allegations of Garda misconduct and examines internal disciplinary matters, and liaises with GSOC, and also the Garda professional standards unit, where standards and procedures can be reviewed so as to highlight areas of strategic concern and proactively address systemic challenges.

We would also submit that the remit of the internal audit unit within An Garda Síochána should be strengthened to enable it to audit and report on strategic, operational, financial and reputational risks to the organisation. The unit should also be empowered to provide an objective opinion to the chair of the independent audit committee concerning systems, procedures and controls which will then bring the matter to the attention of the Commissioner. We also submit that there is a need for An Garda Síochána to conduct public attitude surveys as is already provided for in the Act and we would submit that there should be an alternative public consultation forum that could be held to enhance that process.

Finally, I recommend that the official title of "An Garda Síochána" be adopted in the interest of consistency. In the previous Act it was "The Garda Síochána", and we believe in the interest of consistency it would be "An Garda Síochána".

An Garda Síochána and its members hold a privileged position in society. We serve with energy, dedication and pride and must be held accountable, at national and local level. We are at a point in our history where we can build an organisation so that the Irish police service is a case study in responsive excellence, a leader of national and international best practice, and a constantly evolving force for good in our nation.

It is my job to get on with reshaping An Garda Síochána so that it is worthy of the people it serves and worthy, too, of the great people who work within it. An independent policing authority that will hold us to account for the delivery of a modern dynamic and human rights based policing service is welcome. This authority, together with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission and the Garda Inspectorate, will enhance and ensure public confidence in our policing functions. A revised Garda Síochána Act has a major role to play in helping us reach that goal of being a world-class police service that meets the needs of all communities and citizens for the benefit of the State.

I thank the Chairman and the committee for their time and will answer any questions.

Chairman

I thank the Acting Commissioner. I ask the next contributor to make his opening remarks.

Mr. Ronan Brady

The key points I wish to make are as follows. The Freedom of Information Acts should be extended to the Garda. The 1997 Freedom of Information Act was carefully drafted so as to allow this. Section 23 of the Act already contains the necessary protection for confidential matters in the struggle against crime. Since 1997, all that has been required for the extension of freedom of information to the Garda has been a decision of the Government. No further legislation has been required.

Ireland is nearly unique, in so far as my studies go, in not extending freedom of information to the Garda. In other countries, progressive policing organisations and police officers have sought to bring their organisations under a freedom of information regime, arguing that it is vital in maintaining public confidence in the policing service. In Ireland, however, the authorities have fostered Garda antagonism towards openness, manifested in the legislation preventing proper contact between the media and serving officers. It would be absurd to claim with certainty that the extension of freedom of information to An Garda Síochána would have prevented the scandals that have recently been unearthed by Garda whistleblowers but it would be equally absurd to deny that a freedom of information regime would have made these scandals less likely.

Members of the committee can see my credentials, such as they are. They are printed for them in the presentation. I will move on to the key points I want to make.

First, the 1997 Act was an enormous step towards openness in a country where bureaucracy and censorship were more normal. In 2003, there was a kind of bureaucratic coup in the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Act 2003 which was intended to reduce the effectivity of the 1997 Act. Both parties in the current Government have undertaken to reform that. They are preparing legislation and have already implemented certain aspects of legislation in this regard. However, one aspect does not require additional legislation, that is, this one. It is not a radical measure.

There is what some journalists have pointed to as "a convenient confusion" that in some way freedom of information would inhibit intelligence gathering or crime investigation. That is not the case. The Freedom of Information Act protects the necessary confidentiality of policing work. The more forward-looking police leaders in our nearest neighbour have been positive about freedom of information legislation. Sir Hugh Orde, of whom the committee will be aware and who went on to head the Association of Chief Police Officers, ACPO, in the United Kingdom, states that he pushed hard to place that association under the Westminster Freedom of Information Act 2000, and this was accomplished wholly voluntarily in 2011.

The ACPO website provides easy access to disclosure logs. These are the letters that they send out. They are the documents that they circulate among themselves. They are redacted - material that could compromise confidentiality is blacked out - but, in the course of my studies, I have read letters to chief police officers from ACPO about intelligence training and other highly sensitive matters. The redaction means that no terrorist could possibly divine any information that was useful to him or her, but by openly displaying the existence of these letters, ACPO is enabling serious journalists to ask more serious questions. Of course, ACPO is within its powers to withhold certain information if it is not in the public interest to release it. The logs contain information on such matters as terrorism and allied matters, criminal justice and performance management. I have read the Metropolitan Police's disclosure logs as well. These include, for example, the number of 999 calls which the police have missed.

In 2004, assistant chief constable Ian Readhead of the Hampshire police testified before a committee, not unlike this one, in Westminster. He was asked has freedom of information inhibited police work, and his answer was emphatic. He stated:

No, I do not think so for one moment. There is a clear balance to be drawn here between the right of the public to know and the right of the Service to sustain public safety in general, and the legislation gives ample opportunity for us to be able to secure information and keep information confidential which would threaten public safety if it were exposed. I do not think that is the issue at all.

The assistant chief constable mentioned the culture of the service, whereby there is a tendency towards secrecy, and said he did not think that was sustainable. He concluded by stating: "There are many things that you could say about the way in which the Special Branch carries out its business which would not prejudice public safety at all."

Members will be aware that I also am a representative of the National Union of Journalists and Irish journalists find little evidence of such views among An Garda Síochána. The Garda press office was described by one of my colleagues as a bulwark against openness, which frankly is what most journalists feel about it. Section 62 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 contains a presumption of criminality against disclosing information to journalists, inter alia, without the approval of senior officers. This is enormously disproportionate. The international free speech NGO, Index on Censorship, has stated, quite rightly, that this legislation is “not the behaviour of a European democracy”. It is, however, quite consistent with the hugger-mugger attitude concerning the Garda Síochána. The absence of outside scrutiny contributes to behaviour such as the refusal to co-operate with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC. It also contributes to a commonplace secrecy tactic whereby one defines a hot topic as an operational matter, even when disclosure would in no way inhibit any operation.

None of what I have said should be construed as anti-garda. Speaking personally, I have good reason to thank gardaí for their kindness and their protection on many occasions. I have also worked with the United Nations internationally and in Asia and Africa I have encountered UN officials who class An Garda Síochána as one of the best police services in the world, based on the work done by gardaí on UN assignments. Regretfully, however, I must agree with my colleague, Ken Foxe, who has stated a genuine argument can be made that had freedom of information, FOI, been in place within the Garda over the past 20 years, it may have made it a more open institution and helped its members to understand that legitimate inquiry is not dangerous. He went on to state that a more open, more questioning culture across the Garda may have helped to avoid some of the enormous reputational damage it has suffered in recent months.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Brady and greatly appreciate his contribution. In the spirit of his contribution, is it okay for the joint committee to publish the opening statements, as our media friends are anxious to see them? Is that agreed? Agreed.

We will now proceed to questions and I ask my colleagues to be brief, concise and to the point. The entire point is to elicit information and if people wish to make speeches, they should do so in the Chamber and not here. I have a list of members who have indicated as they caught my eye and I appeal for focused questions. I will intervene if someone is rambling away and making a speech. I am sure members will excuse me for so doing, as it will just be to be helpful. Deputy Farrell is the first member to have indicated.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I thank the witnesses for their attendance this afternoon. I only have two or three questions and although I intend to direct them towards an individual, any witness to whom they are not being directed should feel free to weigh in, if he or she has something to say. I will begin with Baroness O'Loan, who mentioned there should be a provision to allow for GSOC to investigate or have access to a Garda premises. I will extend that a little by inquiring on her views as to how far that should go. In the context of GSOC's remit, is one merely talking about Garda stations and Garda headquarters or should other facilities be included? While I am merely thinking aloud, in the case of an ongoing investigation into issues relating to a particular member of the force, for instance, would this extend - with the assistance of the courts - to looking at the personal premises of a serving member?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

Yes. On the issue of access to personal premises, that is, to the homes of serving guards, to their cars, caravans or whatever it is, I am not fully experienced in criminal law here but that would be dealt with in the process of criminal investigation and I would expect the normal warrant process to apply to that. Consequently, that would be possible, were one conducting a criminal investigation. Very often before that, however, there is a question about whether material may or may not be held in a police station or a Garda station. My experience has been that very often, there is material that may well be useful to an investigation, which is kept in lockers or desks or even, in the North anyway, in the roof spaces of stations. The problem as I perceive it at present is that the legislation provides for notice to be given. In most situations, GSOC would be able to give notice that it wished to come in and look for something or to ask for something but in order to have independence, there must be a right to go and to enter. We had that right in the North and it was a necessary part of some of our investigations.

Deputy Alan Farrell

As a follow-up to that question, I was thinking, for instance, of when a serving member of the force happens to have certain items on their own premises. While such members are carrying out the course of their duties, they just happen to have it in a personal vehicle that they might be using, for example. There have been instances mentioned in recent years of serving members of An Garda Síochána using their own vehicles. I wonder whether the role of GSOC would include that. While taking on board what Baroness O'Loan said about the criminal investigation, I am just thinking of an investigation being carried out by GSOC and whether, in her view, it would or should extend to that.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I think it depends on the nature of the investigation but if GSOC was investigating misconduct and if it is an allegation that merits investigation, then, yes, it should have access to that. If An Garda Síochána is not providing the gardaí in question with vehicles that enable them to do their job, then it must be approving the use of their personal vehicles, which must then make it within the territory of GSOC. While that possibly would require legislation, I think that should be possible because otherwise, one will or may lose the opportunity to retrieve evidence.

Deputy Alan Farrell

As for GSOC investigating the Garda Commissioner, the Northern Ireland Policing Board obviously has a role to play in this regard and I note the joint committee will visit Northern Ireland and Scotland very soon. As I have heard a great deal of commentary on extending that remit to GSOC, is this an absolute as far as Baroness O'Loan is concerned?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

It is an absolute. The situation in the North is that the Policing Board is the disciplinary authority for chief officers. The chief officer is the disciplinary authority for other officers. Consequently, the Police Ombudsman in the North has full power to investigate allegations against the chief officer. I have stated publicly that to me, this is something without which I would not be prepared to operate.

Deputy Alan Farrell

My final question is one I am not entirely sure Baroness O'Loan will be able to answer. In the course of the last public hearing on this issue a couple of weeks ago when the Garda Síochána Inspectorate and GSOC were present, a discussion arose on the dual functions they conduct, where there is some crossover and whether the existence of both organisations as separate entities should be continued. What are Baroness O'Loan's views in this regard?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

My experience would suggest to me that they carry out completely different functions. While I would anticipate the Garda Síochána Inspectorate would have a programme of rolling investigation of current policies, practices, training resources, use of resources and so on and would report on each investigation it does, GSOC has a completely different function, which is to investigate allegations of misconduct. From allegations of misconduct, there always arise questions on management, training, supervision and that sort of thing. In the North, we had a power to conduct policy and practice investigations of our own initiative without the consent of the Minister. We would gather together the information and where we became aware of a trend of problems, perhaps about management, about securing evidence or about dealing with minorities, we would then conduct a policy and practice investigation and publish the results of that investigation on the website. That is an enormously important contribution to the efficiency of policing. It derives from the investigation of complaints and for GSOC to then hand that to the inspectorate to conduct these focused investigations would require the inspectorate to go back to the beginning. That, therefore, would require, if one likes, a duplication of some of the work that already has been done by GSOC.

I would retain the current structure of GSOC and the Garda Síochána Inspectorate.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I thank the acting Garda Commissioner for coming before us. The only observation I can take from her submission is that the role of investigating misconduct by gardaí should be assigned to GSOC. I do not think that is a particularly shocking statement given the circumstances in which we find ourselves. Should a serving member of the Garda be seconded to GSOC or how else might we provide GSOC with the necessary expertise? Should we provide it with retired members of the Garda or would it be the case that somebody could make a career change, never to return?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

It is our view that it would be in the interest of impartiality and independence, as Baroness O'Loan has already noted, for GSOC to investigate all complaints against members of An Garda Síochána. In terms of where GSOC may get policing experience or policing knowledge, we would think that for the sake of independence and objectivity, it would be preferable not to have serving members of the Garda seconded to GSOC. However, it would be open to GSOC to employ members of the Garda or other policing services who may have retired recently and have recent policing experience. That may be beneficial.

Deputy Alan Farrell

One of the issues that arose during our last discussion with the AGSI was ongoing training. In regard to interpretation of current legislation and new legislation coming through the Houses, what is Ms O'Sullivan's view on members of the force acting up without continuous professional development in the area of interpretation of the law?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Training is a fundamental part of policing not only in terms of experience on the ground, but also for personal development. One of our imperatives under our transformational programme is to identify the training priorities required for all of our members. We are focused on getting that up and running quickly, beginning with issues around performance management. We are introducing a new performance management and accountability framework, and providing training in that regard and in terms of the developmental issues that will arise in that context. The recent Guerin report made a number of recommendations and an implementation team is considering those broader recommendations and prioritising training requirements, including basic police training such as the taking of statements and keeping up with revised and new legislation.

Ms Nuala O'Loan

On the question of investigators who are employed by GSOC, I draw the committee's attention to the growing body of independent investigators who have never been police officers. In my former office, which is now 14 years old, we recruited a number of bright young graduates and sent them on university-based investigative training courses. They received all of the training that normal detectives would get in forensics and crime scene analysis. GSOC adapted our training programmes to some degree, as did the Independent Police Commission in London. There is a body of independent people who can be recruited and, indeed, GSOC has already recruited staff from the Police Ombudsman, which has also recruited back staff who worked for it before subsequently working for GSOC. I suggest that is a very healthy interchange.

Deputy Alan Farrell

It is important that all professionals receive continuous professional development as the core of their ongoing work. I concur that bringing people in from outside is always a good thing. Ms O'Sullivan mentioned the internal audit and internal affairs type of structure in the force and spoke about whether that should be moved to GSOC as part of its role. Perhaps that would not include the auditing element but the investigative element could certainly be considered. I ask her to outline this in more detail.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

In regard to the role of the internal affairs unit, we have a statutory provision for the establishment of a professional standards unit which will carry out thematic audits around policies, practices and procedures. This is very useful in terms of identifying adherence to policy, practical or procedural issues or any systemic challenges that arise. The role of the internal affairs section is to pursue any disciplinary issues that may arise in respect of members of An Garda Síochána. The disciplinary regulations set out an internal framework whereby members are investigated for disciplinary offences which may not amount to misconduct. All cases of misconduct are referred to GSOC but the internal framework can deal with disciplinary offences that do not amount to misconduct or malpractice. We envisage that the role of the professional standards unit in internal affairs would be come more robust to allow us to proactively identify any issues arising and, as happens in other jurisdictions, to allow us an opportunity consider integrity testing among members and identify issues before they become problems. Where issues arise involving misconduct, malpractice or misbehaviour amounting to potential criminal behaviour, we would refer them to GSOC.

I would like to provide more clarity in regard to some of the questions that Deputy Farrell raised earlier. In regard to the powers of GSOC, under the Garda Síochána Act, GSOC enjoys all the privileges and powers of members of An Garda Síochána. As Ms O'Loan has noted, the power to search a member's private dwelling or private car is available. It is important to note there is nothing that is beyond bounds.

Before I conclude, I should introduce the team accompanying me. Assistant Commissioner Donall Ó Cualáin is in charge of the western region. Assistant Commissioner John Twomey is in charge of the Dublin metropolitan region and traffic. Both officers have extensive experience in rural and urban policing. Mr. Cyril Dunne is our chief administrative officer and Mr. Kenneth Ruane is our head of legal affairs. Together we are leading the transformation programme I mentioned earlier and we can speak further about what we are doing if members so wish.

Deputy Alan Farrell

My last question is for Mr. Brady. As I do not have particular knowledge of the area of freedom of information in respect of An Garda Síochána, I appreciate his enlightening contribution. Why does he believe a serving member of the force, at any level, should have access to the media? In a hierarchical structure like the Garda, would it not be more appropriate to go to a senior officer or the press office? I do not have a particular axe to grind; I am just asking a question.

Mr. Ronan Brady

In many police services throughout the world, journalists speak directly with members of the police service without any particular problems. In the United States it is extremely common and in other parts of northern Europe it is also common, although there are greater restrictions than in the United States. Section 62 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 provides for a presumption of criminality against any officer who speaks to a journalist. That is an extremely disproportionate position to take and it threatens the normal interplay between members of the media and gardaí. The idea that everything has to be referred upstairs is exactly part of the problem that members have been discussing.

There needs to be a sense of responsibility on the part of ordinary folk doing a professional job and a recognition that they do so in a public arena. Section 62 is far too punitive.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

The relationship with the media is very important and it must be managed constructively. It also needs to be managed in a balanced and proportionate way with regard to the rights and privacy of individuals. This is an important factor that needs to be considered in any amendment to the legislation.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I am all in favour of openness but I agree with the Commissioner about the management of information, especially to prevent disinformation. I think of a case, for example, where somebody at an incident scene said that something had happened and described the incident scene in a particular way. That was reported very widely. It subsequently transpired that the officer who made that statement had not been fully informed and when all the information became available, there were then suggestions of a cover-up. I would hesitate to go towards the freedom to speak to the media to the extent that the witness is suggesting.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

It made a lot of sense to me that at our previous hearings GSOC suggested that the more minor complaints from the public or from members of An Garda Síochána should be dealt with in an informal resolution process. I note that Ms O'Loan's detailed submission also includes that recommendation. I am interested to hear the views of Ms O'Loan and of the acting Garda Commissioner.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

When I left office, about 11% of our complaints were dealt with by a process of informal resolution. As it was not mediation, therefore it did not require the consent of the parties. Officers had to co-operate with the process. We dealt with rudeness complaints and minor failures of duty, for example, in that way. Officers were very resistant to it on occasion but the reality was that it was actually a huge learning exercise, like on-the-job training, both for officers and for members of the public. In the case of members of the public, it was about what they could legitimately expect of policing and for officers it was about the impact on people of the way in which they conducted themselves which may have been off-hand or brusque and which may have resulted from them working a very heavy shift, for example. Nevertheless, this was interpreted by the member of the public as being rude and not the kind of service to which the public is entitled. An informal resolution process can actually inform both parties and improve the service delivery by the officer. Very often, having done this process, the officers in question are quite ready to apologise and very often the member of the public will accept the apology and will say he or she did not understand it was quite like that.

I think it is in the interests of effective resolution of complaints. The current situation where a garda can refuse to participate and can say he or she is not going to mediate is not helpful to policing here.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

The informal resolution process is a very important factor, as Ms O'Loan has said. The majority of complaints made to GSOC are complaints which we and GSOC would assess as being service level complaints, exactly as Ms O'Loan has described. They would be behavioural issues as opposed to issues of misconduct or misbehaviour. There is certainly a lot to be learned from those complaints. It would be a very positive move if we could come to a form of either agreement or triage. We have had discussions with GSOC about whether it could triage service level complaints which could be referred back to An Garda Síochána, with the consent of the complainant, saying that the complaint would be dealt with. Line management would deal with the bad behaviours. Ms O'Loan's point is very important about the learning that emanates from these complaints.

I regard the informal resolution process, with consent, as being the next tier. However, we need to be very careful to achieve balance. At the last committee meeting there was a suggestion of members of An Garda Síochána vetoing the engagement with the informal resolution process. We need to find a methodology that allows us to balance the rights of all the individuals, including the complainant and the person against whom the complaint is made, in order to achieve that informal resolution. In my view, the service level agreement would allow us to have a tiered response to complaints and would make it a much more effective system and free up the resources and the time of the ombudsman commission to deal with the real issues that need to be dealt with such as misconduct, misbehaviour and criminality.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

At last week's committee hearings, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, Amnesty International, Transparency International Ireland and other contributors raised the issue of security oversight. Unlike in the North of Ireland, An Garda Síochána has responsibility for intelligence, security and policing all under the one roof. The contributors last week made the suggestion that we need more scrutiny similar to international practice. What are the acting Garda Commissioner's thoughts on the suggestion of this committee having a role in scrutinising the crime and security branch of An Garda Síochána, the Defence Forces G2, subject to certain restrictions which apply, for example, in Britain or the United States? There was a consensus that we need to see improved oversight of that area while not interfering in the important work of the Garda Síochána.

Chairman

If I may interject in order to be helpful, this matter was raised in the context of the establishment of a Garda authority, a policing authority and whether the security element would be removed and how it would be dealt with, bearing in mind the significant connection between organised crime and security elements.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I thank the Chairman. The dual mandate for An Garda Síochána which combines the security and policing functions is admired by a number of international observers. It was recently the subject of very positive commentary from a United Nations executive directorate. It is a very important function which has served the State, the nation and the people very well. We should remember that at the heart is the safety of communities. As the Chairman has said, there is a very close correlation between the policing function and the security function, in particular, in the context of local policing on this island and the trust and confidence of the people of the country which has been built up over several years.

On the question about oversight of the security side, there is extensive independent judicial oversight which reports directly to the Oireachtas. It is independent oversight of the range of security activities. In my view this should remain and it should be strengthened. I would see it working in the context of the policing authority and then the security function. I do not see them being incongruent in any way. They can be complementary and be a support to each other when it comes to accountability, oversight and governance. The way I envisage it working is that the Garda Commissioner would be accountable to the policing authority in respect of all policing matters and also reporting to the Minister, the Oireachtas and the Government on the security side. That is the way it works in a number of other jurisdictions, in particular in Scandinavian jurisdictions, and it works particularly well.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

During my tenure as police ombudsman, the PSNI had primacy in all national security matters, just as it is with the Garda, and it was responsible for all national security issues. The consequence was that under the legislation I had complete power to investigate national security matters. Because of the interconnect between organised crime and national security, one must think of national security as being more wide than just in terms of anti-terrorist policing. There can be a big economic threat to national security. The right for GSOC to look at national security matters, to look at intelligence in particular, which I think seems to be, from the evidence I have read, one of the stumbling points between GSOC and An Garda Síochána, is fundamental.

When I started as police ombudsman it was anticipated that I would not look at national intelligence matters. The reality was that it was necessary to do so to do the job. There is no reason an independent investigative organisation cannot protect national security matters just as well as the police. The same kind of people do the job and the same kind of vetting levels or protection of information procedures have to be applied. In particular, GSOC, if it is to do this work, will have to have special intelligence cells, for example.

It would be profoundly important - I do not in saying this mean to be in any way disrespectful - that because An Garda Síochána can point to national security as a reason for refusing access, this would not viewed by the public as a cover-up. I believe there is a huge risk of that. I would commend to the committee, if necessary, an extension of the legislation to make absolutely clear the duty of the Garda Commissioner to provide all material necessary and that the call in terms of whether material is necessary for the investigation be GSOC's. The responsibility of GSOC then is to prove to An Garda Síochána that it can protect that information. This relates back to Mr. Brady's comments about dealing with the press. It is not possible to do that when dealing with intelligence matters.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Perhaps I can clarify the matter. In terms of the reporting arrangements, which is what I understood the question to be about, I stand by what I said. For example, taking the example in the UK or Northern Ireland where the British Security Service has primacy in terms of-----

Chairman

I must ask everybody to check their mobile phones are switched off as they interfere with the broadcasting system.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

As stated by Baroness O'Loan, previously the BSS had primacy for national intelligence and security matters in the North. There are separate arrangements along the lines I have mentioned in terms of the differentiation between the two functions. As stated by Baroness O'Loan, where there is a complaint of misconduct, misbehaviour or criminality on behalf of a member of An Garda Síochána, whether he or she operates on the security or policing side, it is right and appropriate that GSOC would investigate it. We may be talking about two different things. I was speaking about reporting arrangements in terms of the segregation of the policing and security function, which I think is critically important. Any changes to the Act require careful determination. In terms of GSOC having primacy in relation to investigations, that applies to members of An Garda Síochána irrespective of on what side of the organisation they work.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

I have a few other questions for the acting Garda Commissioner. In regard to all of the recent debacles and, in some cases, scandals that have emerged, what are the learning curves for senior management in An Garda Síochána in terms of dealing with whistleblowers and serious allegations? I am sure the acting Garda Commissioner has had an opportunity to read the Guerin report, the Comptroller and Auditor General's report in relation to the penalty point issues and the scale of maladministration in that regard and the Garda Inspectorate's findings. What are the lessons for senior management in relation to all of that?

Chairman

The acting Garda Commissioner might respond to Deputy Mac Lochlainn's question in the context of the 2005 Act and any changes that might be made in the future.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

As I said in my opening address and have said from the outset, we are committed and open to listening to the concerns of our own members and to internal and external criticisms. As I said earlier, while these may not always be fully right there will be issues in respect of which we will need to take prompt action. One of the big learning curves is in terms of the perception of insularity. We need to engage in much more open collaborative engagement, be willing to discuss matters in a much more open way and demonstrate what we are doing about particular matters. The team I have brought with me, together with the remainder of the senior management team, are leading the way in transformational change, addressing the issues that have been identified. One of the big issues is the culture of insularity. Members will have heard me say before that there must be greater engagement with those who are our critical friends internally and externally. We must support people in doing that and empower them to come forward and engage with us in a much more open way. We must ensure we engage, listen, understand and act. That is key issue for us.

The Deputy mentioned the inspectorate's report. There are lessons in everything. What is important for us is that we learn from those lessons and implement the change that is required. In regard to the Guerin report, we have already started an implementation programme around the broad recommendations in that report. Deputy Farrell asked earlier about training. That is one of the issues identified from that report, which we have prioritised.

To answer the Deputy's question, we must ensure that we listen, understand and take action as appropriate and that we engage with all of our stakeholders. We were very fortunate over the past number of years in that we have something which is pretty unique in terms of policing in the context of the strategic human rights advisory committee. I recently sought to meet with the committee in regard to a review of the Ionann report which is now almost ten years old. It would provide us with a great opportunity to identify what the issues are internally and externally. Public perception is really important. We need to restore public confidence in the Garda Síochána and are engaged in doing so in every way we can.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

The acting Garda Commissioner will be aware that there is a legal responsibility on senior Garda management to protect whistleblowers. It is reported again today in the media that Sergeant Maurice McCabe is very isolated, unable to attend work and has made repeated complaints about how he is being treated. I spoke to him today on the basis of the article in today's Irish Independent. I am deeply alarmed by what he told me today in regard to the lack of support from senior Garda management. Will the acting Garda Commissioner ring him and find out from him what the problem is and deal with the issue? I ask her to ensure that matter is resolved today. In fairness, he has been granted access to the PULSE system, which is welcome. Sergeant McCabe is at the epicentre of public opinion and represents the change that is necessary.

Chairman

While I will allow the acting Garda Commissioner to respond to the issue raised by the Deputy, it is not strictly a matter for today's agenda. I accept, however, it is a matter of public interest.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

It is important to provide reassurance to the committee. As I have already said, the main objective of An Garda Síochána is to provide a positive working environment for everybody and to support everybody in going about their job. That includes all members of An Garda Síochána, including members who want to and have brought matters to our attention. I am aware of the media reporting. I am also very conscious of Sergeant McCabe's right to privacy in terms of some of the issues reported and do not intend to breach that here. What I can say is that senior Garda management are very supportive of Sergeant McCabe and are in contact with him on a daily basis. On foot of some of the media reporting, I spoke today to the interim confidential recipient, Judge McMahon, and have asked him to facilitate and assist us in making contact with Sergeant McCabe's legal adviser to identify precisely what the issues are that we are speaking about.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

Can the acting Garda Commissioner personally take responsibility for dealing with this issue?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I will take responsibility to ensure that the matter is fully dealt with.

Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy

I thank all of the witnesses for attending this afternoon's meeting to assist us in our deliberations on Garda oversight. Some of the witnesses who appeared before us a couple of weeks queried whether the separation of the confidential recipient and GSOC was a good or bad thing. Perhaps Baroness O'Loan and the acting Garda Commissioner will comment on whether they believe the confidential recipient should come under the auspices of GSOC or if it should be completely separate.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

The question I would ask is can we for now park the definition of "confidential recipient" and the work done by the confidential recipient and think about the situation in which a serving officer wishes to bring something to the attention of the authorities, having failed to get a response from his or her internal authorities. In that situation, I believe it would be entirely appropriate for GSOC to be the recipient and to have a unit dedicated to such whistleblowing activity. If this were done, the whistleblower would be assured that the person to whom he or she was reporting was independent. However, one would have to buttress that by the introduction of a duty on managers within An Garda Síochána to deal positively with whistleblowers and make it a disciplinary offence not to positively respond to or manage whistleblowing. There is an article in the PSNI code of ethics, which is its disciplinary code, which makes it an offence not to do this. If one does a number of things together then this makes whistleblowing possible.

Whistleblowing is about improving policing. Nobody becomes a police officer to do wrong. Corruption, carelessness and laziness creep in. I would place it within GSOC with a statutory power. I do not believe it would be adequate to have a non-statutory recipient of some type outside that, so I would put it within GSOC and then give it the proper powers and the limited remit. One would not want them dealing with human resource disputes between members and things like that.

Chairman

Does the acting Garda Commissioner wish to respond?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

There is an opportunity under the Protected Disclosures Bill to put it on the type of statutory footing that Baroness O'Loan mentioned. It is equally important to point out that under our disciplinary regulations it is a criminal offence if somebody is being bullied, harassed or victimised in the workplace. That is an important point. As I said earlier, our aim is to create a very positive working environment and we will certainly not tolerate bullying, harassment or intimidation of any type of any of our members. With regard to the issue raised, the Protected Disclosures Bill creates an opportunity for us to identify the best mechanism to deal with it, and that will be very welcome.

Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy

There is an impression among the public that GSOC is answerable to nobody. Who is the best placed person to provide oversight of GSOC?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

There are a number of models that could be examined. If I may, I will return to the Deputy's previous question. I do not think it is enough to deal with bullying and harassment of whistleblowers. One must also have a function which deals with turning a blind eye - the blue wall where nothing happens when somebody does something.

With regard to oversight, my understanding would be that GSOC is responsible to the courts by way of judicial review. It must be responsible to the Dáil. There would be a requirement that one does not second-guess the process of criminal investigation and such matters, but I believe parliamentary accountability is the best process for calling to account an organisation such as GSOC. At present, as I understand it, GSOC reports to the Minister for Justice and Equality, and that is where the accountability lies. To my mind that is too close a relationship and there is not sufficient independence for the Minister or for GSOC in that arrangement. There is also not sufficient power for Parliament. I suggest that there should be a reporting to this committee, perhaps, or to whatever committee is considered appropriate, as well as the responsibility to the courts and to a freedom of information commissioner. There will be a raft of other levels of accountability also where GSOC is making decisions that might be challenged through other legal processes.

Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy

My other question relates to Mr. Brady's concerns regarding freedom of information and making An Garda Síochána subject to the 1997 Act. What are Baroness O'Loan's thoughts on that? Is it something she would agree with in its entirety or something she would consider on a conditional basis?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I am not familiar with the detail of the legislation and how it would apply to An Garda Síochána. In the jurisdiction in which I was operating we were subject to freedom of information provisions. There were special protections for ongoing investigations and the like. We worked with it and it was challenging and difficult, but it did not compromise investigation. I think it is a healthy process.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I understand the Freedom of Information Act is being extended to An Garda Síochána later in the year. We welcome that as well.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for both their written and oral submissions to the committee. My first question is for the acting Garda Commissioner. In the first two paragraphs of her written submission she talks about substantial reform, trust, respect, confidence, accountability, transparency and professionalism. Those are the main points in those paragraphs. Would she not say that on the ground the opposite has been the case in recent months and that people have lost their confidence and trust in An Garda Síochána? Many people, both within the Garda and in the wider community, are deeply disturbed about some of the evidence that has come forward from people such as the whistleblowers.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Over the last number of months public confidence in An Garda Síochána has certainly been impacted by many of the issues that have been raised. I do not think it is just confidence in An Garda Síochána but also confidence in the entire administration. It is very important that we work hard and tirelessly in the context of restoring that public confidence and demonstrating that, as an administration, we are collectively fully committed to addressing these issues and putting them right. In the context of An Garda Síochána specifically, we have the programme. A programme in itself means nothing; the issue is the actions under that programme. The first thing I did on becoming interim Garda Commissioner was to engage very widely with our internal and external stakeholders. By that I mean that I met, along with my senior management team, individual members of An Garda Síochána in stations. I considered it very important that in times of turbulence they knew there was strong visible leadership from the top and that the norms, values and standards we expect were being driven from the top.

There are almost 16,000 people in An Garda Síochána, including uniformed and sworn members, civilians and the Garda Reserve. I can give a good example. Last weekend, at the One Direction concerts which were attended by 250,000 people over three nights, I went to meet and brief our members who were dealing with that. As I said to them, there are so many things we can do. People ask me every day if I will go out and refute what is being said. I do not think it is right to refute what is being said. The right thing to do is to allow a process to take place where all of the allegations that have been made are fully investigated. We very much welcome that and will co-operate with the commissions of investigation. As I told the members both in the rural stations around the country and in Croke Park last week, the public confidence in An Garda Síochána will be restored by them and by the people in our support offices one encounter at a time. Every time a member of An Garda Síochána engages with somebody it is an opportunity to demonstrate the professionalism, dedication, energy and commitment that I spoke about in my opening address. I firmly believe that is how we will restore public confidence in An Garda Síochána.

From a leadership point of view, it is very important that we provide strong, visible leadership, that we hold people to account and, equally, that we hold ourselves to account for living up to the values and behaviour we expect of our members. Collectively, we can work together to restore public confidence in An Garda Síochána. The work that is being done in reforming the 2005 Act will help that and support the programme we have already initiated.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Basically, Ms O'Sullivan is saying she accepts that trust and confidence are two issues for policing in this country. Did she say earlier with regard to one whistleblower, Sergeant Maurice McCabe, that some of her officers met him and intervened to assist and advise him?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Yes. His local management team have been in contact with him and are there to support and assist him. That has been made very clear to him. He also has the welfare services at his disposal.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I have just received information that no officer has spoken to Sergeant Maurice McCabe.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

That is not my understanding.

Deputy Finian McGrath

We need to get this sorted out because we must have trust. That is a key issue.

Chairman

I understand that, but this might not be the forum for that. I invite you to meet with the acting Garda Commissioner afterwards and have that conversation.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I disagree.

Chairman

You may disagree, but that is my ruling. We must respect the privacy of the member in question. You can have that conversation afterwards with the acting Garda Commissioner.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Which member in question?

Chairman

The member of the Garda you mentioned.

Deputy Finian McGrath

As far as I am aware, the question came from him.

Chairman

Continue your questioning, please.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I just wish to say that I strongly disagree. It is very important that we get straight and honest answers.

Chairman

Okay. Next question, please, or I will call somebody else.

Deputy Finian McGrath

With regard to Garda management of the whistleblowers' issues, when Ms O'Sullivan was at senior management level, did she at all times agree with the policy for dealing with them at that time?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Our policy for dealing with all members of An Garda Síochána is, as I said earlier, to ensure that people enjoy and are engaged in a positive working environment. It is certainly my intention that this is the way every member of An Garda Síochána will be treated. In respect of the specific issue, it is important to provide reassurance regarding the members of An Garda Síochána we are referring to here.

I do not like speaking about the individual member.

Chairman

I would prefer if the acting Garda Commissioner did not at this stage.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I will say it in general terms. Every member of An Garda Síochána is supported in working, in coming to work and feeling free to raise issues. That is the intention of Garda management.

Chairman

We are focusing on changes to the Act and structures.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I know but it is very important-----

Chairman

I know.

Deputy Finian McGrath

-----to get in there.

Chairman

There are other issues.

Deputy Finian McGrath

If we want reform and change then we must get in there and ask the hard questions.

Chairman

Of course.

Deputy Finian McGrath

With regard to the whistleblower issue and the Garda Síochána Act, did the acting Garda Commissioner advise the former Commissioner to change his position on the whistleblowers? What was her personal position? Did she agree that they were disgusting?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

In terms of the whole issue of whistleblowers, which Deputy Corcoran Kennedy asked about earlier, I think everybody is on a learning curve right across the board, not alone the public but the private sector and not alone in Ireland but internationally, in terms of whistleblowers and how they need to be treated. The positive thing is that in every encounter there is learning from it.

I am very much engaged with the interim confidential recipient. As I said, we look forward to the Protected Disclosures Bill to provide some clarity around some of the issues. In the interim, I have been very engaged, from the outset, with the interim confidential recipient to ensure we have robust mechanisms and a clear path for people who want to raise issues and to ensure those people are supported in doing that and that they are supported, very openly and overtly, by Garda management.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Did Ms O'Sullivan ever personally order an assistant commissioner not to meet Maurice McCabe?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Certainly not.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Did she ever ban Maurice McCabe from using the PULSE system?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I actually restored Maurice McCabe's use of the PULSE system.

Deputy Finian McGrath

What about before that in the previous period?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

No, Deputy.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Did Ms O'Sullivan ever issue an order banning Maurice McCabe from using PULSE?

Chairman

We are moving away from the debate.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Is the answer "No"?

Chairman

We have moved away from the focus of the meeting. I ask the Deputy to get back to the Act that we are supposed to be talking about changing.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I can wait in case the acting Garda Commissioner wants to organise a response. I can move on to paragraph 6 of her submission but if the Garda management present want to answer my question, that is okay.

Chairman

The Deputy should carry on. He mentioned paragraph 6.

Deputy Finian McGrath

There seems to be some debate taking place among senior Garda management. If they want to answer my question, they are welcome to do so.

Chairman

The Deputy should listen to what the Chair is saying. He should carry on with his question.

Deputy Finian McGrath

My next question is on paragraph 6 which dealt with the organised criminality issue and gangland activities. Many people have said to me, particularly in recent weeks, that because of all of the shenanigans going on in the justice system between senior gardaí, management and whistleblowers, people have taken their eye off the ball regarding organised crime in this city. Is that true? Will there be a big focus on organised crime?

The bodies of two people from my constituency were found shot and dumped in a ditch. There are people who are being intimidated every day by drugs gangs and some of them have said to me that the guards need to focus on these issues. Can the acting Garda Commissioner give me a commitment today that there is a focus on that type of crime all of the time, regardless of what is going on in here?

Chairman

Again, Deputy, this is completely-----

Deputy Finian McGrath

The matter was mentioned in paragraph 6 of Ms O'Sullivan's statement.

Chairman

I know but we need to focus on changes to the Act. However, I will allow a brief response.

Deputy Finian McGrath

It was mentioned in paragraph 6 of her submission.

Chairman

I know. The Deputy has agreed to head up some work on this area and we are going to focus on it specifically as a committee. We need to spend time today discussing the Act because our time is quite limited, as the Deputy will know. I call the acting Garda Commissioner to reply briefly.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Certainly it was an horrendous act and it was a terrible and awful act for the families of the two missing people. I know they were from the Deputy's constituency. I have extended my condolences to those families. We worked tirelessly to discover and recover the bodies and, unfortunately, bodies were recovered. Our members worked tirelessly to do that work and it demonstrated our commitment in one sense.

The Deputy looked for a commitment. I am on public record over recent weeks as saying that our determination to tackle drugs, organised crime, terrorism and all their manifestations has not been diminished in any way. Our members are tirelessly devoted to doing such work. Since April of this year alone, over the past five weeks, we have seized drugs worth in excess of €29 million, which is evidence of our determination to continue such work.

Chairman

We will carry on this matter in the autumn when we will focus on this area specifically. Deputy Finian McGrath will head up a sub-committee on the subject.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Yes. I will go back to Ms O'Loan. She stated: "GSOC cannot currently investigate complaints or allegations against the Commissioner." Is she saying that if it does not happen, the new legislation will be ineffective?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

It is for the Dáil to determine the content of its legislation. I am saying that I do not think that I would be capable of operating a system in which the Commissioner was not accountable. I do not quite know how the legislation emerged in the form that it did. My anticipation would be that it will probably change.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Ms O'Loan also said: "Current law enables officers subject to complaint to veto attempts at an informal resolution process. There is a very low level of informal resolution here." Why is there a low level of complaints?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

My understanding is that the legislation says that the officer must consent to the process and that only 1% of complaints here are dealt with in this form because the majority of officers do not consent. This is something on which GSOC gave evidence. When I left my post of Police Ombudsman, we had 11% of complains of that nature being dealt with through informal resolution to the benefit of complainants, officers and the service.

Deputy Finian McGrath

It sounds like low level complaints should be dealt with. In every other job and position that people work in, 90% of complaints can often be dealt with and buried or got off the pitch, so to speak. Can Ms O'Loan give examples of places where there is a higher percentage of resolution? Are there examples of good practice available in terms of how low level complaints are treated?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I was not altogether satisfied with the way in which it was done because we had to allow police inspectors to do the informal resolution. We were involved but we had to allow the inspectors to do it but I would have preferred to have done it myself. We then tried to introduce a mediation process, but I left at that stage.

Having said all that, it is eminently possible to devise a scheme whereby these complaints are dealt with. It is important that where a thing can be dealt with by GSOC, it is dealt with by GSOC. For the Garda to do so almost inevitably costs more because, I guess, a Garda inspector or Garda superintendent will earn more than a GSOC manager who would do this kind of work. Also, it would be the inspector, sergeant or maybe the superintendent who would have to deal with it depending on the rank of the officer against whom the complaint was made. Therefore, it would be cheaper. It also enables somebody who presents with an apparently very simple complaint to gain trust in the complaints organisation - GSOC - and to present with something more serious because they are testing the system and asking themselves whether they dare bring it to the organisation.

Deputy Finian McGrath

I have two final questions for Mr. Brady regarding key points 1 to 3, inclusive, of his presentation regarding the 1997 Freedom of Information Act. He states that countries throughout northern Europe have made their police services subject to freedom of information legislation without negative consequences. What countries does he mean?

Mr. Ronan Brady

All the Nordic countries and Britain are subject to freedom of information. I gave very clear evidence about the way in which the system functions in Britain. I do not think there are any examples of freedom of information legislation releasing information that should not have been released, if the Deputy knows what I mean.

Deputy Finian McGrath

If I asked Mr. Brady to give examples of best practice, would he say the Nordic countries?

Mr. Ronan Brady

Yes, generally. May I clarify a remark I made earlier regarding a question asked by Deputy Farrell?

Chairman

Yes.

Mr. Ronan Brady

I draw the committee's attention to my reference to section 62 of the Garda Síochána Act, following which Deputy Farrell suggested that I said that members of the Garda should be able to talk freely to members of the press. That was not what I meant to say. My objection was to the presumption in favour of criminality on the part of contact between a member of the Garda Síochána and a member of the press without the approval of a senior officer. The presumption of criminality is the problem. Relationships with the media need to be managed, as the acting Commissioner said subsequently.

I recognise that but they need to be managed in the normal way in which they are managed in every other major social organisation and that is through disciplinary controls rather than through the automatic presumption that this is a criminal matter. What I was trying to say was that was disproportionate. I hope I have made my point clearly enough.

Deputy Finian McGrath

Mr. Brady referred to the Garda press office in his submission. He said it was a bulwark against openness. Can he clarify that?

Mr. Ronan Brady

I have never met a journalist who was positive about the Garda press office. It is seen universally by colleagues who talk to me as a problem, as a body set up in order to prevent information being distributed. I have never dealt with it but my students have and they have come back with basically an extremely negative experience. There should be greater contact between members of the Garda and the media, but not centralised. It cannot be centralised in the way the Garda press office is. It does not happen elsewhere, as far as I know.

Deputy Finian McGrath

In the Technical Group, we call it the "Clare Daly syndrome".

Deputy Niall Collins

I thank our visitors for their engagement, which is very enlightening. As previous speakers said, we have had hearings attended by other groups. I would like to ask the visitors for their views on the thoughts of, and presentations given, by previous groups.

I would like to ask Baroness O'Loan a question. Before GSOC's attendance at this committee, it made a number of public pronouncements in the media and to other committees on high levels and low levels of co-operation between An Garda Síochána and itself in terms of interaction in investigating complaints by members of the public. What was her experience in Northern Ireland when her office was established? Did she experience that and, if so, how did she deal with it? In fairness to GSOC and An Garda Síochána, that is an issue with which they are both dealing and they are working to try to bring themselves closer together, which is good to hear and is in the public interest. Did Baroness O'Loan experience that and, if so, how did she deal with it? What were the results?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I have published a number of reports in which I have commented on the level of co-operation I received at different times and in different investigations. Sometimes it was good and sometimes it was not. I had something which the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission does not have, which is that I had a statutory right to such information as I required. That was enormously important because when the police said to me, "You cannot have this, it is not relevant and we do not have it", I always had the right to go back and say, "My test, my choice, my search", and that was profoundly important.

The discussion should not be about whether there is an entitlement to look at material which may be relevant to the investigation because the police will not know precisely what one is investigating when one is investigating police officer wrongdoing and, therefore, it cannot judge the relevance of the material. It can judge the sensitivity of the material but that is a completely separate argument.

I was disappointed to read the recent comments at the previous session at which the Garda ombudsman commissioners gave evidence that there still seemed to be problems in this context. I would have expected that, nine years on, these matters would largely have been ironed out and that there would have been a process through which information would transmit seamlessly and in a timely fashion. It is a problem for every independent investigative organisation and it is one which can be, and should be, solved.

Deputy Niall Collins

From her experience as the Ombudsman in Northern Ireland and her knowledge of GSOC, what is her opinion on the resourcing of GSOC given the relative size of An Garda Síochána? In other words, how well resourced was her office in terms of the complement or size of the PSNI as against the resourcing of GSOC and the capacity it has to do its job in the context of the size An Garda Síochána?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I preface this remark by saying that when I was appointed police ombudsman, I made a decision that I would never exercise the power to refer back to the Police Service of Northern Ireland matters for investigation, so all investigations of all complaints were done within the office of the police ombudsman. That required a level of staffing and a level of resourcing which is far greater than that which GSOC has at present.

When I started there were 13,000 RUC officers and when I left, there were somewhere in the region of 7,000 to 7,500. I had somewhere of the order of approximately 150 staff. If one is to do the job, one must be resourced. My suspicion is that at the moment, there does not seem to be sufficient resources for GSOC to do the job it is charged with doing. However, I would have to qualify that by saying, I would have to go away and do a clear analysis before I could make a very much more definitive statement.

Deputy Niall Collins

I thank Baroness O'Loan.

I would like to ask the senior members of An Garda Síochána a couple of questions. I am not asking them for their personal opinions but for their collective view as a management team. I refer to the establishment of the independent policing authority. I am asking them about this because we all have an open mind on it, we are on a journey and we are trying to arrive at a consensus on how we set up the nuts and bolts of this new independent organisation. What is their view on the board of the independent policing authority, on its make-up, its complement and its components, for example, civil society groups, the Oireachtas and local authorities? Have they any views on the membership of it?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Before I answer that question, could I go back to the Deputy's earlier question on co-operation with GSOC?

Chairman

Okay.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

For reassurance for the committee, it is important to say that last week I met the three GSOC commissioners and they indicated to me that they were happy that things were improving and that they see significant improvements. We agreed to engage constructively to continue that improvement. That is important in terms of managing the relationship and to put that on record.

In regard to the independent policing authority, as I said in my opening address, it is very welcome and I think it will lend itself to independent objective oversight. The composition of the committee is a matter for the Legislature. As the Deputy quite rightly said, we have discussed it as a collective management team because what we are very determined to do is to ensure that our layers of governance and accountability are revised and renewed to provide a level of readiness to service the needs of the new authority. In terms of its make-up, I think it should be as extensive as possible in terms of representation but again, I know that is a matter under determination by this committee and by others, so I would leave that up to the people determining it. However, we will certainly very much welcome it.

Deputy Niall Collins

At what point does it become too big and too unwieldy? We see the images of the Northern Ireland policing board and it is two rows deep. Are we talking six, eight or ten people?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

We probably do not have a specific view on it but certainly if there are further discussions on it, we are very willing to engage.

Deputy Niall Collins

The last major review of An Garda Síochána was conducted by the Conroy commission in the 1970s which was to look at the structure of the organisation. What is the collective view on the current structure of the organisation? Is it top heavy or bottom heavy? Would Ms O'Sullivan like to see a reconfiguration of existing grades and the structure within the organisation?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

As the Deputy knows, there is a review going on under Haddington Road which the inspectorate is leading. We are very engaged with the inspectorate in terms of doing that. That is a very welcome review which is looking at the structures, the systems and the processes and it will go down all the way to numbers. In terms of what we are doing ourselves, part of the work we have undertaken is to look at the revised governance and accountability, so that will certainly take account of responsibilities and how they should be shared out to provide the level of openness and transparency I just mentioned. We are very engaged with the inspectorate in helping it to conduct its review, as are all of the staff associations.

We look forward to that and we think it is quite timely.

Deputy Niall Collins

Is Ms O'Sullivan suggesting, as part of the review, any new grades?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

New grades in terms of what?

Deputy Niall Collins

New grades in the structure.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

We are looking at the spans of control. One of the issues that came up in the Guerin report in particular was supervisory management control - the spans of that control, the allocation of personnel and the level of responsibilities. We are looking at these issues internally and also in conjunction with the inspectorate in terms of the overall review.

Chairman

So it is a work in progress. Next question, Deputy.

Deputy Niall Collins

A final question. At any time since Ms O'Sullivan has taken up the position of acting Garda Commissioner or in her role in the latter weeks and months of her predecessor, Commissioner Martin Callinan, did any member of the senior management telephone, write to or communicate with Sergeant Maurice McCabe to tell him he is a valuable member of the force, a valuable employee and that the force cared about him?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I do not want to go into the specifics, Deputy, but I can reassure the committee it is my understanding that several members of senior management are in constant contact with Sergeant McCabe. He has been afforded every support, including that of the welfare services.

The Deputy asked me a specific question earlier. Rather than tell an assistant commissioner not to meet him, I sent an assistant commissioner to meet him and to provide him with some reassurance. That is my understanding of what has been done.

Senator Martin Conway

I welcome the acting Garda Commissioner, Ms Noirín O'Sullivan. What I find very interesting is the experience in other countries of dealing with the freedom of information provisions. Does Ms O'Sullivan have a view on the freedom of information provisions? Should the Act be extended to include An Garda Síochána?

Chairman

The question was answered partially but a brief response should cover it.

Senator Martin Conway

I would like Ms O'Sullivan to elaborate further on it.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

In terms of providing reassurance, it is very welcome that the Freedom of Information Acts will be extended to An Garda Síochána. In the context of matters that Mr. Ronan Brady raised, and I know it is not specifically about freedom of information but of serving the public interest, it is the right thing to do. I know that Mr. Brady referred to centralisation but it is important to say that not only does the Garda have a centralised press office but also local people to deal with local media. It is a very useful mechanism for connectivity with people. As part of the renewal programme, we have a pillar around communications and renewed communications and a strategic communications plan. I do not like to speak of communications in those terms but let me explain what it means. It means reaching out to people through new mechanisms in media, such as social media and new ways of connecting with people. All of the measures combined contribute to the openness and transparency I spoke about in my opening address.

Senator Martin Conway

I thank Ms O'Sullivan for that answer. It is very welcome. I am sure as head of An Garda Síochána, Ms O'Sullivan was embarrassed to read the story in the Irish Independent and in the media in general. It might be useful for Ms O'Sullivan to state if she agrees with the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Varadkar who says the whistleblowers are "distinguished".

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I am on record as saying that we welcome all members of An Garda Síochána and our external stakeholders raising issues with us. It is very important to state that raising issues or criticisms are not a problem but a catalyst for change and improvement. That is very positive.

Chairman

Thank you Senator.

Senator Katherine Zappone

I thank the delegates for their presentations. In her presentation the acting Garda Commissioner states the Garda should not investigate gardaí. Does Ms O'Sullivan think that GSOC should be able to investigate complaints or allegations against the Garda Commissioner, as argued by Baroness Nuala O'Loan?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

It is very important that all members of An Garda Síochána from the top all the way down are subject to independent investigation by GSOC.

Senator Katherine Zappone

My next question is a follow-up to Deputy Collins's questions on the composition and so on of an independent policing authority. I was interested in Ms O'Sullivan's remarks and the way she tied them to her comments on local policing committees. Many recommendations were made for having a broad representation in the context of the independent policing authority and that part of it should be some form of civic oversight. Whereas the local policing committees appear to be relevant in terms of accountability, as Ms O'Sullivan indicates, that may not mean the same things as oversight. Would Ms O'Sullivan comment on whether the members of civil society who are part of the local policing committees would be appropriate potential candidates for the independent policing authority?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

That is a very important point. As I have said, we must be accountable to national bodies but equally it is extremely important that we must be accountable to the communities we serve. The joint policing committees and the local policing fora have been instrumental all over the country in terms of identifying local issues and using a joint problem-solving approach to actually solve the problems. That should continue and be strengthened in the new Act. It is how we provide a responsive policing service to all of our communities. It is important to have inclusive representation from all aspects of the committees but, as Deputy Collins says, without becoming over wieldy or too large.

Senator Katherine Zappone

I have a question for Baroness Nuala O'Loan. Under the Act, GSOC is restricted from expressing an opinion on the merits of Government policy or when a Minister is giving evidence, does she think this should be amended or charged? This may be relevant to the point made in her presentation about improving policing, as GSOC does not have the right under legislation to make recommendation for change.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

May I ask for clarifications on your question, Senator? Senator Zappone states that GSOC is restricted from commenting on Government policy.

Senator Katherine Zappone

Yes, any policy of the Government or Minister.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I would have thought that independence would indicate that one should be capable of commenting on it.

Chairman

This is a standard provision in all legislation, whether it should be there is another question. It seems to be a standard provision applied to civil servants in most legislation.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

Perhaps I could clarify, if I were to comment on a position taken by Government it would be in the context of whether the position was properly informed and things of that nature. It would have to be within the remit. The reason I asked the Senator to clarify her question was because I was not quite sure what it was. I think it is profoundly important that GSOC can look at police policy in practice and comment on it.

If the Government is deciding to spend X% of its policing and security budget on an aspect of policing, such as renewing all the fleet, is the Senator asking if that is a matter on which GSOC should comment? I am sorry, I do not think I have clarity on what the Senator meant.

Senator Katherine Zappone

I was raising the critical importance of independence of GSOC from Government

Chairman

Does Ms O'Sullivan wish to respond?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

As the Chairman has said, Government policy is a matter for the Legislature.

On the question of being able to comment on policing policy and make recommendations, I do not see an issue with that and I think working in conjunction with the inspectorate on that could be a very effective mechanism.

Senator Ivana Bacik

I apologise for arriving late. We greatly value the insights we have gained from the witnesses. I wish to address a question to the acting Garda Commissioner and to Baroness O'Loan, and I have a general question.

At the last set of hearings I asked about the Garda whistleblowers charter. Before the departure of Commissioner Callinan, I had written to him requesting a copy. The AGSI, which was represented at the last hearing had a copy of the charter but it was not sure if it was accessible to the public. I may have asked the wrong person in the past. Is the charter publicly accessible? Should it be publicly accessible? Should it extend not just to serving gardaí but also, for example, to police doctors or to those who are not serving members of the force but are working in Garda stations, and therefore are privy to internal police practices?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

Part of the work we are doing at present is revising and reviewing all of our policies to make them public-facing.

That will be an important aspect of the contribution towards greater openness and transparency and will help people to ascertain where to find things.

As I indicated, I have been in dialogue with the interim confidential recipient. We are examining the possibility of doing a revised protocol on the whistleblowers. We will engage with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission and Garda Inspectorate on this matter and the protocol will be publicly available.

Senator Ivana Bacik

Would it be helpful to have that in legislation or does it require statutory underpinning?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

The Protected Disclosures Bill will probably cover the issue. The reason we are revising the current protocol is to provide a bridge until such time as the Protected Disclosures Bill is enacted.

Senator Ivana Bacik

At our meeting with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission two weeks ago, I asked members of GSOC whether the three-person structure in place here has any disadvantages when compared to the model for the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. Should we consider having a one-person Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission in the context of the overall reform of GSOC? As the first Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, did Baroness O'Loan find it helpful to be the person in whom the entire identity of the office was located or would a tripartite model be better? Does Baroness O'Loan have a view on the matter?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

My view, which is informed by my experience, is that it was a very lonely and difficult place because the ultimate power of decision making resided in one person and decisions had to be absolutely evidence based. I did not find this a disadvantage, however. On the contrary, it was clearly an advantage to me because one of the problems with people wanting to complain about anything, whether it is their shampoo or policing service, is that they do not know how to do so or where to go to do so. That people could identify an individual as the policing ombudsman made for much better accessibility in respect of the office. From that perspective, the one-person model was beneficial.

I also took the decision to be out and about in the community. I took a policy decision that I would always allow anyone who wanted to come into the office to do so at any time. If I was free, I would speak to people, although that is difficult when one is trying to run a busy diary. This was, however, an issue of accessibility.

Different people will make different policy decisions. The three or five person model has advantages in that the burden is shared and one has a deputy if one falls ill. These are advantages. It is a matter for the Legislature to make up its own mind on the issue, as there is not necessarily a right way of approaching it. The people of Northern Ireland were served well by having one ombudsman. Further, ombudsmen are usually single individuals rather than commissions.

Senator Ivana Bacik

Deputy Anne Ferris asked me to put a question to the acting Garda Commissioner. I direct it also at Mr. Brady and Baroness O'Loan. The Minister has given a commitment to appoint a new Garda Commissioner through an open competition. This decision has been welcomed by everyone. Should this appointment be deferred until the establishment of the independent policing authority given that the independent policing boards or authorities we are examining elsewhere all have within their remit the power to appoint commissioners? Should we defer the appointment?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I do not believe I am sufficiently informed about the niceties of the public appointments processes here to make a decision on that issue. I can see advantages and disadvantages.

Mr. Ronan Brady

The Senator's question is above my pay grade.

Chairman

I am not sure if the acting Garda Commissioner wishes to comment.

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

An open competition is very welcome because I believe firmly that whoever is appointed Garda Commissioner should be measured by best international standards. It is vitally important to reassure people that they are getting a Garda Commissioner who can lead the police force and compares with best international standards.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

I have had a little time to reflect on the Senator's question. How long will it take to establish a police authority?

Senator Ivana Bacik

It is to be established by the end of the year.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

If it could be established by Christmas, I would wait until then to appoint a new police chief. One could start the appointments process by placing an advertisement. If, however, it will take two or three years to establish the authority, I would proceed with the appointment.

Chairman

The decision to establish an independent policing authority is vitally important. I note the use of the word "independent" in the title of the new authority. When the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission was being established an issue arose as to who would make the appointments. An independent panel was appointed and having met the joint committee, which gave them a fair wind, its members proceeded to appoint the commissioners. How should the appointment process for an independent police authority proceed? What is best practice in other jurisdictions?

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

There are many different models for appointing a police chief.

Chairman

I am referring to a policing authority.

Baroness Nuala O'Loan

The mechanism used for the appointment of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission is probably a good one. This committee or another committee of the Oireachtas could appoint a group of people who would independently appoint a policing authority. In my terms of reference, at least an element of the appointments process should be by open competition. I envisage the political parties having a vested interest and it may well be that they will legislate for some members of each party to be on the authority. One must guard against politicising policing.

Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy

The Garda Inspectorate is an independent statutory body which is accountable to the Minister for Justice and Equality. Is it advisable that it remain as such or should it come within the remit of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission? It was clear from the presentation given by GSOC that there is a good relationship between the Garda Inspectorate and GSOC? Would it be a good idea to bring them together?

Ms O'Sullivan suggested that Garda internal affairs and the Garda professional standards unit be aligned. At what point would a matter that comes to the attention of either of these entities be referred to GSOC? What mechanism is in place for dealing with such circumstances?

Ms Noirín O'Sullivan

I will address the last question first. Any issue that would be identified by internal affairs or the professional standards unit that involves misbehaviour, misconduct or malpractice on the part of a member of An Garda Síochána would be immediately referred to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. That is how we envisage the process would work.

On disciplinary issues, some of the issues identified in the Guerin report, for example, a lack of file management and matters that may not amount to misconduct but include the types of issues identified by Baroness O'Loan, including apathy or laziness, would be dealt with in the internal disciplinary framework. Appropriate interventions would be taken in terms of training and these would need to be satisfied. If any indication or insinuation of wrongdoing were identified, it would be immediately transferred or referred to GSOC for investigation. That is how we envisage that process working. This approach would allow us to be much more proactive and I envisage that it would work very much with our occupational health department. This will involve looking for issues that require interventions at an early stage and being able to work on the policy, process and systems side with professional standards, and on the people side with internal affairs.

The Deputy asked about the Garda Inspectorate. As I noted in my opening statement, the independent policing authority, in conjunction with the Garda Inspectorate and Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, provide a type of tripartite oversight, which will, I believe, ensure public confidence and enhanced accountability. In respect of some of the questions asked, it is equally important, in terms of reinforcing public confidence, that these bodies are also seen to be demonstrably accountable.

Chairman

I thank all the witnesses for attending what has been a long session. I appreciate that Baroness O'Loan has taken time to travel from Northern Ireland. I also thank Mr. Brady, the Acting Garda Commissioner and her team.

Sitting suspended at 4.20 p.m. and resumed at 5 p.m.