asked the Minister for Justice how many unarmed gardaí are deployed on the beat throughout the country at any point in time.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Garda Síochána.
18.
(Limerick East): The number of gardaí on beat duty varies from time to time. It is determined in each area by local Garda officers and is dependent on such factors as the level of available resources, local circumstances and the time of day or night. All beat duty is performed by unarmed uniformed members.
Has the Minister any idea of the numbers that would be involved on beat duty at specific times, for instance, in the middle of the night or during the day or in any particular area?
(Limerick East): The number of gardaí assigned to foot patrol duty in any area is not constant but relates to the variable factors outlined in the answer.
19.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will make available to the House the report prepared by Stokes, Kennedy, Crowley & Co. on the management and organisation of the Garda Síochána or if he will give the House a summary of its main findings.
(Limerick East): I have to say again in relation to this matter what has already been stated a number of times by previous Ministers for Justice. This report is a confidential document which was commissioned for the benefit and advice of those responsible for the management and guidance of the Garda Síochána. Much of what it contains is based on information provided by many individuals on the clear understanding that the resulting report would not be published. It is not proposed now, nor was it ever intended, to publish this report. Apart from the basic obligation to live up to the commitments in regard to confidentiality that were given, the decision not to publish is in full accord with the practice that has obtained in relation to such reports not only in the public sector but in the semi-State and private sectors as well.
Apart from the question of honouring confidentiality undertakings, which is of paramount importance, the publication of anything in the nature of a summary of findings presents major difficulties. The report is a very long and detailed one, dealing with a wide spectrum of Garda organisational, administrative and other matters and contains a great deal of factual material, analysis and comment in addition to actual findings. The publication of findings out of context of the material and considerations which led to them could not be an adequate representation of what the report contains and could indeed be seriously misleading. This would almost certainly lead to calls for further elaboration and in turn to further demands that the complete report be published. I am satisfied that this is a situation that is best avoided and that the proper stance to adopt is the one that has been maintained all along — the report is a totally confidential document, commissioned by and written only for those with responsibility for Garda management, and it should remain so.
It is wrong to infer, as some people do, that the non-publication of this report means that nothing has been done in relation to it. Regularly the accusation is made that this report has been rejected or ignored or, to quote the popular phrase, "left to gather dust on a shelf in the Department of Justice". This is not the case. The nature of the document is such that it is not appropriate to talk in terms of accepting or rejecting it. Its contents have been and continue to be a source of advice and assistance to management in arriving at decisions relating to the general management and organisation of the Force.
In fact the findings of the report have been fully taken into account in connection with the introduction in recent years of wide-ranging improvements in the management and organisation of the Force. In this connection I can mention the provision of the Garda College, the strengthening of the senior management structure by the establishment of additional assistant commissioner posts, the introduction of a new Garda promotion scheme, and the extension of the policy of civilianisation. The new rural policing scheme which is being tried out in a number of pilot areas is also broadly based on recommendations in this report. I should like to think that what I have said on this matter will finally put an end to calls for publication of this report and to speculation that the decision not to publish it deprives the Garda Síochána of some advantage or is based on some ulterior motive.
Is the Minister aware that in their report, the Conroy Commission indicated that there was a need for a very serious reorganisation of the Garda and urged that an examination be undertaken by appropriately qualified people into the role, organisation and personnel policy of the Force with particular reference to the relationship of the Force with the Department of Justice on the basis that there was evidence of an unclear definition of roles as between the Department and the Garda? Since the study in question was undertaken following the publication of the Conroy Commission report, would the Minister not consider that the public are entitled to have some indication of the direction the Department are going in that respect especially since the Garda Representative Association said recently they are awaiting some action in relation to the report and that they consider that disappointment at the lack of delegation has permeated the Force? They claim that they have not noticed any change since the commission identified the problems. In these circumstances, would the Minister not consider it important that a fundamental reorganisation be undertaken?
(Limerick East): The report of the management consultants, Messrs. Stokes, Kennedy, Crowley and Company was commissioned in April 1975 and was for the purpose of carrying out a consultancy project for the Garda. The report was finalised by August 1978 at which time the party of which the Deputy is a member were in power. They had plenty of opportunity to publish the report should they have so wished but for the very reasons I have outlined they took exactly the same attitude as I have taken. This was only proper since people who gave evidence to those compiling the report did so on the basis that it would not be published. However, that is not to say that the advice outlined in the report has not been taken into account. As I mentioned at the end of my reply, the advice has been taken into account in a number of major policy areas.
I will allow Deputy Woods a final supplementary.
We have only had one.
But it was a very long supplementary.
I will try to put the matter in context and get something more than a yes or no answer from the Minister.
(Limerick East): I have given an answer extending over three pages.
The point is that the Garda Representative Association do not seem to be in accord with the Minister on this matter. They are of the opinion that action has not been taken, that there has not been any change. What are we on this side of the House to say to the public now about this? The Minister should be in a position to tell the House what plans he has to implement the findings of the report or to make changes that would improve matters.
(Limerick East): The Deputy asked whether a summary of the main findings of the report would be made available to the House, in other words, if the report would be published. I have pointed out that the report was available from 1978 and that the Deputy's party were in a position to publish it at any time up to 1981 and again during a period in 1982 when they were in Government but that they took the same attitude as I am taking in that regard.
But the Minister is in office now.
(Limerick East): As to the recommendations that have been implemented, there has been an extension of the policy of civilianisation, the introduction of the new Garda promotion scheme, a change of structure in senior management and the establishment of additional assistant-commissioner posts as well as the setting up of the Garda College and the pilot schemes in relation to rural policing. All these matters have derived from advice contained in the report. The question of non-publication is simply one of confidentiality and is in line with what has been the practice in relation to such reports not only in the public sector but in the semi-State and private sectors also. This is on the basis that when these reports are formulated there is the understanding of confidentiality in order to allow for the provision of the maximum possible accurate information.
I thank the Minister for that summary because from what had been fed to the media I was under the impression that the Government Press Office were responsible for the promotion scheme. At least we are clear about that.
20.
asked the Minister for Justice if he will state, in view of his statement in the course of the recent Dáil debate on security on 24 January 1984 that Garda expenditure has been very carefully scrutinised in the past year, the findings of this scrutiny.
(Limerick East): As a result of the monitoring of expenditure on the Garda Síochána in 1983, it was possible to identify headings under which savings were likely to arise and to ensure that these funds were reallocated to other services provided for in the Garda Síochána Vote, thereby making the best possible use of the available resources. At the same time it was possible to ensure that overall expenditure did not exceed the provision in the Garda Vote. In the event, total expenditure amounted to £203.99 million and was thus right on target, being within less than 1 per cent of the voted provision of £205.41 million.
Can the Minister tell us the headings under which these savings have been identified and the approximate size of the savings planned?
(Limerick East): I have indicated the two figures: £203.99 million as against £205.41 million which is less than 1 per cent of the voted provision which is very near in terms of estimates and is within the normal parameters in Departments. The savings were in the pay subhead. Some of the money saved was used subsequently for transport and for radio equipment.