Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2006

Vol. 628 No. 4

Garda Reform: Statements.

On a point of order I apologise to the Members present as my script is being photocopied for them at the moment.

As long as it is not gathering dust.

The profoundly disturbing events which are dealt with in the reports we are about to discuss have been, as they must, the subject matter of strong action on the part of the Government. The Garda Síochána Act 2005, the most profound piece of legislation relating to the Garda Síochána in the history of the State, is the vehicle which has put in place many of the changes which have drawn inspiration from the fallout from the events in Donegal.

That Act has become the catalyst for the most fundamental reform and transformation of the force into a modern police service in which we can all take pride. It goes to the very core of policing, recasting in statute form the formal relationship between the Executive, the Minister, the Oireachtas and the Garda Síochána as well as the force's relationship with local government. It imposes a clear statutory duty on every member of the force, when required to do so by a member of higher rank, to account for his or her action or inaction while on duty. Failure to do so is sufficient to ground disciplinary action which may lead to dismissal. It must be recognised that the Garda Síochána has changed greatly in the intervening years since the events of years ago. We are in the midst of a new era of reform which will continue to impact on the way the force conducts itself and serves the community.

The Government has acted firmly and radically to ensure the culture and organisation of the Garda Síochána is fully fit for purpose. It is my firm belief that, among other steps, the establishment of the ombudsman commission, which is gearing up to commence operations in the new year, the establishment of the Garda inspectorate and the appointment of chief inspector Kathleen O'Toole and her two fellow inspectors, the appointment of the four-person civilian expert group chaired by Senator Maurice Hayes to advise the Commissioner on the development of management and leadership skills for senior officers, including the promotion of a culture of performance management and accountability, the development of human resource management and succession planning and the development of specialist skills and enhanced training for members and staff of the Garda Síochána, the establishment of a Garda reserve, the establishment of local policing committees, the creation of a Deputy Garda Commissioner position to lead a dedicated change management team, the enactment of the provisions of the Garda Síochána Act for greater accountability of members of the service, the new discipline regulations, the new promotion regulations and a whistleblowers' charter signify unprecedented reform and a new era in policing. I am determined to see these measures through and to do my utmost to ensure we never have a repeat of the appalling scenario which arose in the past and had the potential to do lasting damage to the confidence in and trust of the Garda Síochána that all our citizens deserve.

There have been calls by some Members of the House for the establishment of a police authority. Dáil Éireann is Ireland's police authority and accountability through the Minister and the Commissioner is the most appropriate mechanism for democratic oversight of a modern police and security service.

Accountability would be a good idea.

It is my intention to consult the Opposition parties on the establishment of a security and policing committee. If the measures in the Garda Síochána Act are to have full effect, the Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, which has a number of functions and is overloaded with other matters, is not the appropriate forum for having direct Oireachtas accountability from the Garda.

I am glad the Minister has listened to me.

Reports from eminent persons which are critical of the Garda Síochána are not to be taken lightly. What I have said and, more important, done clearly illustrates that they have not been taken lightly. The programme of reform undertaken was recognition, even before the publication of the critical reports, that fundamental issues affecting the Garda Síochána had to be urgently addressed.

The State depends on the Garda Síochána for the protection of its citizens and its security against those who would threaten its existence. We are indebted to the vast majority of those upstanding, diligent and courageous members of the Garda who since the foundation of the State have served the Irish people with honour and distinction. We continue to condemn in the strongest possible terms the horrendous and reprehensible events of almost a decade ago. As we take radical steps to ensure such events never recur, we should not condemn and vilify the Garda Síochána as a whole but support the organisation in its radical transformation, under Commissioner Conroy and his team, into a modern, fully accountable and transparent professional police service. I am confident that this sentiment prevails among members of the public and the Garda Síochána and that there is support for the force as it continues its unprecedented expansion through a major recruitment drive for trainee and reserve gardaí.

I and members of the public still retain full confidence in the Garda Síochána as an organisation. Its members are in the front line in the fight against crime and deserve our full support. During my term in office and that of my predecessor, we have continually increased the financial and human resources made available to the force. Unlike our critics in the Opposition parties who oversaw a decrease in the size of the Garda Síochána when last in office, we have increased the size of the force. I have honoured the Government commitment and overseen the recruitment of a further 2,000 Garda trainees. The force is more than 20% larger in size than it was in 1997. Similarly, the Garda budget is more than €1.3 billion, 85% greater than in 1997. I have assured the Garda Commissioner that he will not lack resources to fight crime.

I turn now to those inquiries which have examined allegations of wrongdoing by members of the Garda Síochána. The House has an opportunity to address the issues raised in six of these reports, namely, the reports of Mr. Justice Frederick Morris on the Ardara, silver bullet and Burnfoot modules of his tribunal's work, Mr. Justice Robert Barr concerning his tribunal's inquiry into the fatal shooting of Mr. John Carthy, Mr. George Birmingham SC regarding his commission of investigation into the Dean Lyons case and Mr. Dermot Nally, Mr. Joseph Brosnan and Mr. Eamon Barnes in relation to the report submitted to the Minister for Foreign Affairs by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland raising concerns about the alleged activity of certain Garda officers during 1998. On behalf of the Government, I look forward to a vigorous, balanced and responsible examination of their reports over the next two days.

I do not want to avail of the time afforded to me simply to reprise all the reports' findings. The findings of Mr. Justice Morris's reports on the Ardara, Burnfoot and silver bullet modules have been in the public domain since late August. The Government took the unusual step last May of issuing a statement on the contents of the reports, even though publication was not permitted by the High Court at that stage owing to an impending criminal trial. That step was taken because of the serious implications of the reports' conclusions for the force.

Detective Sergeant John White is a central figure in all three reports, notwithstanding that they all deal with separate incidents. He is also the focus of the Nally report to which I shall return later. The silver bullet module report concluded that Detective Sergeant White, with the co-operation of Garda John Nicholson, induced a member of the public, Mr. Bernard Conlon, for the promise of reward, to be "found on" Mr. Frank McBrearty's licensed premises after hours. In this context, Mr. Conlon was paid expenses from public funds to which he was not entitled.

The Ardara report concludes that the self same Detective Sergeant White was responsible for placing an explosive device on a telecommunications mast at Ardara in Donegal so that persons suspected of arson at the site could be falsely arrested under section 30 of the Offences against the State Acts. Perhaps the most damning report of all is the Burnfoot report, which concludes that Detective Sergeant White and Detective Garda Thomas Kilcoyne deliberately planted a weapon at a campsite of the Traveller community on Friday, 22 May 1998. This was done, it is alleged, with a view to ensuring that a search which was then planned and in respect of which warrants were issued under section 29 of the Offences against the State Act 1939 for the following day, would be successful. This, in turn, would facilitate an arrest under section 30 of that Act. Further, the tribunal concluded that Detective Sergeant Conaty, Garda Mulligan and Garda Leonard entered into a conspiracy, a primary motivation being to help Detective Sergeant White to escape a criminal charge.

Two of the foregoing members, Garda Mulligan and Garda Leonard, have since been dismissed. A further member, Sergeant Conaty, is retired and Detective Sergeant White is the subject of an ongoing disciplinary process under section 14 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005.

A common theme in both the Ardara and Burnfoot reports was a shocking abuse of process by members of the Garda Síochána to make the provisions of the Offences against the State Acts available to them when making arrests. The Burnfoot report indicates that the tribunal was disturbed by the manner in which search warrants under section 29 of the Offences Against the State Act are issued by Garda superintendents. The tribunal recommended that urgent consideration be given to vesting the power to issue warrants, under section 29 of the Offences against the State Act, in judges of the District Court and Circuit Court, rather than in officers of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of superintendent, as at present. The tribunal recognised that there are very limited occasions upon which time would be so pressing as to make it impossible to follow such a procedure and that, in any event, a residual power for such eventuality could still be vested in a senior officer of the Garda Síochána to be used in exceptional circumstances.

I share fully the tribunal's concerns about the abuse of warrants and accept the recommendation of the tribunal to the effect that statutory provisions in this regard should be considered. In light of the findings of the tribunal I did not proceed with proposals in the Criminal Justice Act, based on recommendations by an expert group on the criminal law, to extend the search warrant powers available to the Garda pending consideration of the issues raised by the tribunal. I propose to address this issue by way of amending legislation. My intention is to propose provisions which will replace section 29 so as to define as closely as possible the exceptional circumstances in which warrants may be issued by members of the Garda Síochána. I also intend to designate a rank higher than superintendent to perform this function, place strict timescales on such warrants and introduce an effective element of oversight independent of the Garda Síochána on the operation of such warrants.

I will return to the wider implications of these Morris reports but first I will say a word about the Nally report. As I stated, there is a link between the subject matter of the Morris reports and the subject matter of the Nally report, namely, Detective Sergeant John White. On 22 March 2002, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Mrs. Nuala O'Loan, an officer from outside the jurisdiction to whom Detective Sergeant White chose to make certain allegations, presented a report to the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the allegations in question. My predecessor then established a group under the former Secretary to the Government, Mr. Dermot Nally, including Mr. Joe Brosnan, former Secretary of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and Mr. Eamon Barnes, former Director of Public Prosecutions, to examine matters arising from that report. The group's report came to hand in mid-2003.

This report has already been the subject of some debate in this House on two previous occasions, once in December 2003 and again in February 2004. On the latter occasion, I made a commitment to produce an edited version of the report once criminal proceedings against Detective Sergeant John White were disposed of. This commitment was given not on the basis that any public interest would be served in disseminating allegations which had been found to be baseless but in deference to the wishes of the families of the victims of the Omagh atrocity, an atrocity that marked one of the darkest days in the history of this island.

That commitment, however, was subject to the understanding that, even with the criminal proceedings being disposed of, I could not publish the report in full because of the security sensitivity of some of the information it contained. I indicated at that time that I would publish an edited version of the report in due course. The reason for this is that the subject matter of the report, to use the words of the group that prepared it,

deals with highly sensitive matters involving the security of the State and possible risk to the lives of individuals. It also describes Garda operational procedures and methods, public disclosure of which could adversely affect future operations.

I believe that I have given effect to my commitment by placing copies of a heavily edited version of the report in the Oireachtas Library and making copies available to all Deputies and Senators in advance of this debate. I also gave copies in confidence to the leaders of the two main Opposition parties. My inability to give a fuller account did not sit easily with me given the gravity of the allegations made. Consequently, I hope that this edited version will be seen as a legitimate balance between the public interest in full accountability and the exigencies of the security requirements of the State.

The main allegations made by Detective Sergeant John White against senior members of the Garda Síochána are a matter of public record, as are the principal findings of the Nally group. In essence, the Nally group concluded "that there is no foundation for the allegations made .... and that those allegations were a direct consequence of and were motivated solely by concerns arising from the difficulties in which he [Detective Sergeant White] found himself with his superiors in the Garda Síochána and with the criminal law".

In the House previously, I outlined the categories under which the Nally group characterised the allegations made but, in so far as Omagh is concerned, the main suggestion in the public domain was to the effect that the Garda failed to pass on to the RUC information which could have prevented the Omagh bombing. However, as can be seen from the edited version of the Nally report, no such allegation was ever made to the group. Rather, the core allegations about events preceding the Omagh bombing were that a senior Garda officer would have been prepared, if a vehicle had in fact been stolen, to allow it to go through to protect an informant and that no intelligence was passed to the RUC about information, alleged to have been received on the eve of Omagh that the Real IRA, which had been trying to steal a vehicle in the Dublin area, had obtained one elsewhere, with place, vehicle type and destination unspecified.

These allegations, although very serious, are quite different from allegations claiming that the Garda could actually have prevented the Omagh bombing. As I have already mentioned, the Nally group found that there is simply no basis whatsoever for these allegations and that they were motivated solely by base reasons, involving the dishonourable abuse of the grief of the Omagh victims' families.

In producing an edited version, I am conscious that there will be those who will question the transparency of the editing process and the validity of the product of such editing. I am, as I have indicated, in a difficult position in trying to respond to such concerns, as the only way to put them beyond doubt would be to detail what was edited out, which defeats the whole purpose of editing in the first place. Nevertheless, in an effort to allay any such concerns, my Department consulted all three members of the Nally group prior to placing the edited version in the Oireachtas Library. All three members of the group consider the edited version to be a fair account of both the allegations relating to the Omagh bombing and their findings on those allegations. As I have stated, I made copies available to the leaders of the Opposition parties.

The Barr report comprises 741 pages. It represents the fruits of approximately three and a half years of evidence-gathering and analysis, dealing at times with decisions that had to be made in seconds. In dealing with its findings, I urge Deputies to ensure that its conclusions are contextualised by reference to general circumstances of the so-called Abbeylara siege. The events at Abbeylara in April 2000 were grave and unique in the Irish police experience, difficult to contend with and a far cry from the crises for which the emergency response unit and the Garda Síochána were trained. These are not my words but those of Mr Justice Barr. Those words and that context were not well canvassed in public discourse on the matter and did a disservice to many of those who were involved. It is only fair to canvass them now in the context of this debate.

It is not our purpose here to second-guess Mr. Justice Barr's findings or the weight he chose to give to particular evidence and the analysis which led to his conclusions, some of which I have some difficulty with. Whatever one's views on the report, however, no Member of this House would wish to understate the difficulties faced by the Garda Síochána in dealing with situations such as these. While lessons must be learnt and changes have been made, we have to recognise that the Garda Síochána, in dealing with people using or threatening to use firearms, must not hesitate in taking whatever action is necessary to protect the lives of its members and those of innocent people.

Mr. Justice Barr criticised Garda performance in the Abbeylara siege, particularly with regard to command structures and training in siege situations where a person armed with a gun may be affected by mental illness. He also identified a need for the availability of additional specialised personnel at the scene of such incidents and asked that consideration be given to the use of non-lethal options. He favoured consideration of the need for ongoing training for local area superintendents, all Garda negotiators and, indeed, Garda recruits. Central to that training should be basic instruction on mental illness and how a person so afflicted should be dealt with.

The Garda Commissioner appointed a high level group to look into the issues raised by the Barr report. The group has extracted from the report the matters outlined in the tribunal's report which impact on the policing or operational areas. Each issue identified has been considered and commented upon. Where further action has been identified as being required, recommendations are made on how the group considers the matter may best be progressed.

Since the tragic events of 20 April 2000, significant developments have taken place within the Garda Síochána in the context of the management of critical events. Most significant of these was the issuance of the on-scene commander manual of guidance. It is also fair to say that the handling of the similar type occurrence in recent times by the Garda Síochána has shown that the force has learnt lessons from Abbeylara and is putting some of those into practice.

I have, in accordance with the provisions of the Garda Síochána Act 2005, forwarded a copy of the report to the chief inspector of the Garda inspectorate so that Garda procedures and practices for dealing with incidents of the type which unfolded at Abbeylara might be reviewed. I understand from the Garda inspectorate that work on a report in this regard is well advanced.

Chapter 13 of the report deals with gun licensing law and related matters and suggests consideration of proposed improvements to our laws. The Criminal Justice Act 2006, which was signed into law on 16 July 2006, provides for significant amendments to the Firearms Acts 1925 to 2000. The vast majority of the recommendations proposed for gun licensing have been legislated for in the Criminal Justice Act 2006. Certain provisions of the Act require a ministerial order before commencement. For example, my Department and the Garda Síochána are working together in the drawing up of new application forms for firearm certificates and authorisations, as well as appropriate guidelines. It is anticipated that all provisions will be commenced by mid-2007. The gun lobby wants a uniform approach across the country and many senior members of that lobby are dissatisfied with the patchy and inconsistent implementation of the law at present.

I will return later to issues of management arising from the Barr report which have something in common with those arising from the Morris report.

The Birmingham report offers a thorough independent analysis of the facts surrounding the false confession made by Dean Lyons based on the evidence of all relevant witnesses. It is the first report to be completed under the mechanism provided for under the Commission of Investigation Act 2004. Deputies will recall that mechanism was introduced by me on the grounds that the public and sometimes adversarial nature of tribunals of inquiry does not lend itself easily to timely and cost effective investigations. The commission of investigation mechanism contained several new features that were intended to achieve that goal without compromising or encroaching upon the proper conduct of an investigation. Mr. Birmingham's inquiry was completed in six months and cost approximately €1 million. These facts speak for themselves and without any implied criticism, the contrast between the cost and the length of the Birmingham inquiry with the Barr inquiry deserves reflection in this House. One took a long time and a lot of money and they were subjects of comparable complexity.

He came from a good stable of course. It shows what we can do when we are put to the test.

He was well chosen. George Birmingham concludes that no deliberate attempt was made to undermine the rights of Dean Lyons. His view is that inappropriate leading questions were inadvertently asked of him by interviewing gardaí, a failure which in turn equipped him with the information to maintain a credible albeit false confession. He gives reasons for this conclusion, one of which is his further conclusion that one of the main Garda conduits to Dean Lyons of the ultimately damning information was the loudest voice in his defence at case conferences.

Another factor unearthed by the commission which helps illustrate the complexity of Dean Lyons's vulnerable personality was the fact that his guilty plea was not a fleeting admission made in an oppressive interview room in a weak moment that was retracted almost immediately. It is the case that he maintained his own guilt before the impugned confessional material came about and long afterwards, not only to gardaí but also to a wide variety of other persons, including his legal advisers and family members.

With the benefit of independent experts, the report concludes that Dean Lyons's confessions were attributable to prior existing vulnerability within his personality that were compounded by his heroin addiction. His most elaborate and extensive admissions were made after he had taken the methadone which had been prescribed for him. Furthermore his vulnerability was disguised by his relatively high verbal skill — in other words his difficulties would not have been immediately obvious to a stranger. The report criticises the failure to notify the DPP about the doubts that existed within the investigation team — doubts which the report concludes were raised at case conferences despite the denials of members of the management team.

The decision of the original investigation team, three months after its original recommendation to the DPP that the existing charge of murder against Dean Lyons should nonetheless proceed and that an additional charge should be laid in respect of the second fatality is described by the commission as difficult to understand and even harder to justify. This comment was made in light of the fact that at the time Assistant Commissioner James McHugh was in the process of conducting an analysis of the various admissions on behalf of the Commissioner — an analysis which ultimately contributed to the DPP's decision to drop the charges.

To date, no one has been brought to trial in respect of these brutal murders. This is a heavy burden for the families and friends of the deceased two ladies to bear and a matter of great regret to me.

It is my firm view that the three reports, the Morris reports, the Barr report and the Birmingham report, demand an analysis that transcends their own individual circumstances if full value is to be gained from them. It requires us to move from the particular to the more general and to distil the various criticisms into manageable and coherent themes. What do they tell us about the performance of the Garda Síochána in general? I believe they tell us quite a lot about what is wrong and about what needs to be done if the performance of the force is to be improved in a way that is needed.

It is fair to say that one theme in particular is a feature of three of the four reports — the Nally report being the exception — and this is the weakness of management at senior level in the Garda Síochána in not giving full leadership and actively managing in a manner that utilises the resources available to the Garda Síochána to best advantage. A recurring theme in the Morris reports is a need to ensure that management of the force is modernised and revamped in line with best international practice.

The Barr report identifies similar failures, albeit in a more specific context. It highlights the absence of a structured mechanism for managing scenes like Abbeylara, although it states that the performance of particular officers must be considered in light of what Mr. Justice Barr describes as inhibiting factors, the main inhibiting factor being the lack of specific training for those who had leadership roles in Abbeylara and an absence of knowledge on their part in dealing with violent conduct motivated by mental illness.

While the terms of reference of a commission of investigation do not involve making recommendations for the future, it is clear from any reading of the Birmingham report that there are serious differences of opinion between senior gardaí and their more junior colleagues. The report criticises senior gardaí for failing to convey to the DPP the doubts of their more junior colleagues. In the commission's view, the Garda written records of some of the interviews with Dean Lyons were incomplete, potentially misleading and could have led to a miscarriage of justice. The decision of the original investigation team, three months after their original recommendation, to recommend to the DPP that the existing charge of murder against Dean Lyons should proceed and that an additional charge should be laid in respect of the second fatality, is described by the commission as difficult to understand and even harder to justify. This is a clear criticism of management.

These leadership failures are matters of the most profound seriousness. The fact that they are manifest in different ways in each of the reports must indicate something. As Mr. Justice Morris stated in his Ardara report:

the Tribunal feels that it is necessary to point out that no one should serve as a superintendent without having the training, the expertise, the commitment to duty and the front line experience that will enable them to make real judgments on matters relating to criminal investigation. Men and women who are chosen for the rank of superintendent should, under no circumstances, be overawed by the experience or connections of any detective, sergeant or inspector serving under them.

In order to maximise levels of performance in a sustainable way, it is evident that the brightest and best must operate at the senior levels within the force. The first and most obvious issue that arises is the issue of selection — or more particularly the question of promotion practices within the force.

New promotion regulations have now been agreed by Government. The new regulations will bring about significant modernisation of the system for promotion within the force. They formalise the requirement for promotion to be based on merit and for all competitions to be held in a manner which is: fair, impartial and objective; in line with best practice; consistent throughout, and; open, accountable and transparent. These principles, combined with the introduction of additional external expertise in selecting candidates for promotion within the Garda Síochána will result in a system which reflects current best practice.

In January of this year I announced that the Government had approved the establishment of a professional standards unit in the Garda Síochána. This unit will have responsibilities for addressing performance, effectiveness and efficiency across all levels of policing activity. The establishment of this unit will enable the Garda Síochána to ensure that organisational efforts and initiatives are driven strategically and that value for money and international best practice in professional, ethical and human rights standards are maintained.

I recently established a four person advisory group to advise the Garda Commissioner on the issues of management and leadership development in the force and Senator Maurice Hayes has agreed to be its chairman. At the same time the newly established Garda Síochána Inspectorate, in keeping with its statutory role of providing independent advice on matters of policing, addressed in its first report the issue of the appropriate management structures at senior level. Both groups have set about their tasks with diligence and have produced reports that deal with the management and structures needed to facilitate optimum performance in the Garda organisation. These reports are seminal and timely documents at this juncture in the redevelopment of the Garda Síochána. There is an acceptance on the part of the Commissioner and senior officers of the need for change and the Garda Síochána Act reforms being implemented across the whole Garda organisation.

The Government and I accept the recommendations in these reports. It is crucial that the appropriate structures and systems are put in place at senior level to carry the changes through. The enactment of the Garda Síochána Act, with valuable contributions from all sides of the House for which I pay thanks, has put the necessary framework in place to give effect to the recommendations in these reports. I fully agree that changes should have been made years ago, but they were not. They are happening now and it is my intention to make further changes.

The report of the Garda inspectorate focuses on the question of the appropriate management structure in order "to provide an immediate and necessary platform to support further change". In the text I have circulated I have laid out a number of measures that are currently being implemented in the force. The appetite for change is strong in the force. I pay tribute to Commissioner Conroy who is a traditional member of the Garda Síochána, for his courage and determination in driving the process of reform. I pay tribute to all the senior Garda management for accepting the need for reform and for agreeing to facilitate it and to assist in this modernisation. I thank the representative association for its part in urging and participating in reform.

On the question of discipline within the force, Mr. Justice Morris laid very heavy emphasis on the need to restore a proper system of discipline which is workable. He made the frightening point that even minor infractions of discipline attracted all the incidence of a criminal trial for murder. This has been changed. New draft regulations have been drawn up, in consultation with the Garda Commissioner, to implement the recommendations of the Morris tribunal and I hope to have them in operation very soon.

The draft regulations to govern the reporting of corruption and malpractice, the whistleblowers' charter, have been published and are now in the public domain and I hope to implement them very soon, having heard the feedback. Civilianisation is proceeding apace or even accelerating——

It is proceeding at a slow pace.

Although time is limited today, I draw to the attention of the House that a veritable transformation is taking place in the Garda Síochána. It is not the same old force; it is a changing force in a changing Ireland. All the things that are happening are for the better. It is challenging to people who are loyal to an institution to see it changing under their eyes but I wish to thank each and every member of the force for their continued commitment.

I draw to the attention of the House that more than 7,000 people applied to join the Garda Reserve and more than 10,000 people recently applied to join the force. It must remain as a force in a good place in the hearts and minds of the people. The majority of gardaí do their work honestly and conscientiously and with a great spirit of public service. Like me, they are taken aback and shocked by some of the events that emerged in the Morris reports and by what happened at the time of the events dealt with in the Nally report. There has to be an end to wrongdoing and to any culture of cover-up and any culture of collusion which created a context for some of these activities. There has to be a different way for the Garda Síochána to carry out its functions in the future. No longer will misplaced and ill-judged loyalty to corrupt bullies be allowed to supplant the loyalty that all gardaí and all citizens owe to the Constitution and the law, to the people and to the Garda Síochána itself.

We are here to discuss the findings and conclusions of a number of important reports. I pay tribute to all those associated with the production of the Morris, Barr, Birmingham and Nally reports. Those who worked in producing those excellent reports have been of service to the State. While one might not agree with every expression or recommendation in the reports, those involved made an honest effort in their work for which I am thankful.

It is important to bear in mind that these were high profile reports into high profile issues. When we speak about what must follow on from the reports, we must also bear in mind that there were individual cases where issues were not properly dealt with. Another one has been uncovered. It arises from the tragic death of a young County Offaly man, Shane Tuohey, five years ago which has been the subject of investigation by Philip Boucher-Hayes of RTE. We cannot forget that such individual cases need to be considered and brought to a conclusion that can give closure to the families involved. I have tabled a question to the Minister which will seek information on the Garda investigation into that case. It will be interesting to establish whether the Minister finds it necessary to have some form of independent investigation. That is just one example of many instances in the past. Let us hope that in future we will have in place a process and institutional arrangements to ensure such questions will not have to be addressed again.

I strongly believe Ireland has benefited greatly from the Garda Síochána. It has been staffed by dedicated men and women and has a proud tradition going back to the foundation of the State. Ireland is rare in having an unarmed police force and we must be grateful to W.T. Cosgrave, Kevin O'Higgins and the other founders of the State for this.

Despite the focus on the problems that have emerged around the country and in different parts of the force, we must bear in mind that through the teething of the Free State and more recently during the Troubles, gardaí have acted valiantly to secure our State and protect its citizens. Unfortunately, there have been a number of incidents in recent years arising from the deplorable actions of a number of individuals. These have been well publicised and the good name of the force has been brought into considerable disrepute. Even more troubling was the evidence of indiscipline and elements of cover up of such indiscipline. This gave an indication of the development of a culture which was removed from the core mission of the Garda Síochána which is to serve the State and its citizens. Everyone in this House will want to see a refocusing and redirection arising from these reports which will ensure the core mission is established at the centre of the Garda's approach.

The revelations made by the Morris tribunal, and to some extent the other reports, have severely damaged the Garda Síochána and deeply affected public confidence in the organisation. Unfortunately, the alarming circumstance now exists where some members of the public second guess the motivation of Garda decisions, doubt the bona fides of individual members and question the honesty of the force. The revelations of Garda behaviour, particularly in Donegal, were shocking in the extreme. Many of us could not believe there were gardaí who had the audacity to undermine the rule of law so subversively and to deliberately deprive innocent citizens of their rights to liberty, fair process and the presumption of innocence. However, others had seen some of that at first hand and were not too surprised. As it turned out, some individuals within the Garda Síochána were, in no uncertain terms, corrupt, unscrupulous and ruthless.

It is incumbent on us as legislators and on the Government to confront this decline in confidence, to address the root causes of it, and to implement changes and reforms that will truly turn around the Garda. This must be done not just in terms of public perception, but also the efficacy of the organisation as a force for law and order.

The Garda Síochána must be equipped to deal with the 21st century problems it now faces, such as international crime, drug trafficking, gun crime, gang warfare, anti-social behaviour, juvenile delinquency and violent crime. The Garda must prepare for the challenges it faces through reform. Refusal to reform, along with the failure of systems to prevent corruption, mismanagement, rising crime and falling detection rates, have been responsible for the decline in confidence in the Garda.

I am not convinced the current Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform acknowledges the extent of this problem. He sees criticisms from the Opposition as a reflection on his ministerial record. He repeatedly tells us about more investment in the Garda. Everyone knows the Government can spend money, but the outcome arising from expenditure is the basis on which we must evaluate its performance. The Minister has enacted many Bills and claims that things are really not as bad as Fine Gael has been saying, alleging that we are manipulating the figures. The figures are independently available to the Minister and everybody else. I do not accept the Minister's approach on these issues. I do not accept that investment equals results. I do not accept that law equals order. I simply do not have confidence that the Government has the political will to deliver the kind of change the Garda Síochána must see.

Contrary to what the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been saying, Fine Gael has not been cooking the numbers or making statements that cannot be backed up with evidence. When we make criticisms on law and order, we use figures published by the Central Statistics Office, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and the Garda itself. The Minister is probably frustrated that these statistics belie the claims he makes about improved law and order. One does not even need to ask the Department for figures. A cursory discussion with any member of the public will reveal that things are worse than they ever have been. People do not feel safe in their homes and they feel the gardaí are no longer in control.

Fine Gael wants to see the Garda Síochána as the best police force in the world. We do not want it to be just good, nor adequate, but excellent and widely referred to as such around the globe. We would expect optimum results in the prevention and detection of crime from such a force.

What will Fine Gael do differently? What will the next Fine Gael-Labour Government do to remedy the problems with policing? We believe we need to implement change at two different levels. We see the need for change at the organisational level, specifically institutional change to an outdated structure to bring it into line with best international practice, thereby returning accountability and transparency to a force desperately in need of it. We also see the need for change at community level, where communities need to be policed by real, dedicated gardaí whose only concern is the welfare and safety of that community. This is the only way to restore full public confidence in our police force and to get the best from the Garda in the future.

The Minister made a rather inflammatory remark when he spoke of calls for the establishment of a police authority. Through the accountability of the office he holds and that of the Garda Commissioner, he sees Dáil Éireann as Ireland's police authority. He sees that as the most appropriate mechanism for the democratic oversight for a modern police force and security service. I have long advocated the establishment of effective parliamentary oversight through a security and policing committee, which would be an advantage. As somebody who has been a Member of this House for a long time and who is a member of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, I know it is not possible, under present procedures, to have Oireachtas oversight.

Fine Gael believes the time is right to establish an independent Garda authority. We have listened to the views for and against and at this stage, the time is right for the establishment of such an independent Garda authority that would incorporate——

An excellent move.

I am glad we have the support of our future partners in government and I acknowledge Deputy Howlin's interest in this issue for quite some time.

Such an independent Garda authority would incorporate the existing Garda inspectorate. Its function would be to drive the agenda for reform and ensure measures are implemented rather than put on the long finger. Obviously, any such body would have to have a clear remit and inject professionalism and modernism into a force that has served the country well but which now needs to be updated.

Clearly, there is a need for an overarching body to take responsibility for implementing best international practice. This country is no different from other ones. We have seen the policing authority in Northern Ireland and those in other countries. I am convinced this is the way forward.

An organisation with 12,762 members which I hope is growing — it certainly will be under the next Government — is a large one. Taking the analogy of the corporate sector, apart from an executive board, one will see the need for executive and non-executive directors. The Garda Síochána could borrow extensively from the corporate and private sectors. In fact, all major corporate bodies in Ireland operate under systems such as that.

How would the structure differ from the Health Service Executive?

We would change it too and make it accountable.

That is the point.

The authority would be accountable to the House through the Minister. The same would apply to the Minister for Health and Children under the next Government because what has happened there is a travesty of democracy. That would not be an impediment to the establishment of an independent Garda authority.

It is not to avoid accountability.

It can be provided for and will be provided for.

Like the private sector, such a body could monitor trends among competitors, modernise and even keep ahead of the pace. These ideas should govern the thinking of top Garda management. We need to constantly look at other police organisations comparing and contrasting and taking the good and benefiting from the experiences of similar jurisdictions around the world. That is why the authority would comprise civilians with extensive experience of change management and strategy in both public and private sector positions.

I see the independent Garda authority driving the agenda for root and branch reform in a number of areas. Garda rostering wastes a considerable amount of Garda resources each year. A reasonable question put to us is, why do most crimes take place when most gardaí are off duty? These are the types of questions ordinary citizens ask us and to which we do not seem to be able to give reasoned answers.

Fine Gael believes the authority will have to demand best international practice in all areas of management, including taking responsibility for recommending senior Garda appointments to Government and opening Garda recruitment to external candidates. People like Kathleen O'Toole, to whom I give credit for her work to date, have shown there is a wealth of international policing experience. Irish private sector experience could be brought to bear on the problems and issues that face our police force. That issue needs to be looked at.

We also need to look at what happens in other countries and at the benefits produced. I will not go back over the simplistic, silly zero tolerance approach of the Minister's predecessor who sold a pup and a slogan to the public. However, I went to the trouble of looking at what happened in New York from the point of view of achieving reduction in crime. Commstat, which was introduced there, is genuinely worth looking at. That approach involved comparing and contrasting the performance of different precincts in New York city. That is the type of idea which should be looked at by a Garda authority and discussed with the Commissioner and top management to establish whether it, or a variation of it, could be used here. Let us not try to reinvent the wheel from the point of view of some of the reforms at which we are looking. Let us see what has worked elsewhere.

In that regard, there are undoubtedly huge discrepancies in Garda regional successes. On a number of occasions, we have highlighted the huge differences in detection rates throughout the country. In many ways, there should not be any great difference between the Garda divisions. A person robbed in Bantry should expect the thieves to be caught as much as the person robbed in Ballsbridge, Ballyjamesduff, Ballyhaunis or Belleek.

The authority would also have a role in regard to the Garda annual budget, would report to the Minister on progress on given policy areas, ensure inter-agency co-operation, maintain close ties with the Northern Ireland Policing Board, look at issues such as the retirement age for senior gardaí and make recommendations to Government on the numerical strength of the force rather than rely on ministerial pronouncements and false promises at election time. There would also need to be arrangements for accountability to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, to keep him or her informed of the authority's meetings and decisions and, as has been mentioned, arrangements to ensure the Minister continues to be accountable to the Oireachtas.

The most important changes a new Garda authority would make would be to the organisational structure of the Garda Síochána. In this regard, the recent report of the Garda inspectorate was very useful. We will have to seriously address the fact that management of the Garda is top heavy with a large number of senior personnel responsible for top level implementation of policy and change management. An authority such as that I describe has a major role in producing the type of modern streamlining necessary.

Such an authority would have a huge role from the point of view of civilianisation which has been talked about for years but not delivered. There are two aspects to civilianisation, including the release into the front line of gardaí currently locked behind their desks. They would be replaced by civilians. There is also the point raised again recently by Kathleen O'Toole, the inspector, in regard to additional support for the Garda Síochána so it can do its job more effectively in the future with further civilian support. I see no great provision for the adoption of that approach by the Minister and the Government. Given that this Government has been in power for so long, one must question why civilianisation has not been implemented so far.

I have highlighted ridiculous situations but the one which really caught my fancy was the Garda press office which comprises 14 gardaí and one clerical civilian. From the point of view of press and public relations, it would not strike me that training in Templemore was an absolutely necessary ingredient.

The other issue about which the public always wants to talk is more contact between gardaí and the public not only at checkpoints but in their communities and on the streets in our villages and throughout our cities. This leads on to the issue of community policing on which there have been many reports. However, they have not been implemented to any great degree. One of the relevant issues is the need for contact between people and the Garda. This contact would have significant benefit from the point of view of intelligence and information being made available to gardaí.

Another issue is the importance of Garda courtesy when dealing with the public. Yesterday morning as I was coming into the House a young female garda greeted me brightly and cheerfully with a "Good morning Jim, lovely day". This is the kind of approach we would like to see from force members. We like to see they are prepared to make contact with people in a vital and friendly way and that they do not treat everybody as a possible suspect for a crime. Obviously, gardaí must deal with tough eggs from time to time and that particular approach might not always be appropriate.

Courtesy is particularly relevant at checkpoints. I am all for checkpoints, the enforcement of the law and random breath tests etc., but there must be interaction with people. The approach used should always be to treat people in as courteous a way as possible. In general, we want to see the Garda Síochána relate more to people in the community. We want to see real community and neighbourhood policing where gardaí meet the people and do not just cruise around in police cars. I understand the need to use modern technology and equipment, including cars, but as a wise man once said to me, he never made a friend through the window of a car.

The core of policing is solid and continued training and this is an issue of significant concern to me. The continued training of gardaí has not been adequately resourced. I have highlighted various issues from time to time, such as driving, the use of firearms etc. We must obviously develop the Garda college in Templemore to its maximum extent, but we must also provide improved Garda training through additional facilities throughout the country. Templemore will remain the base of Garda training operations, but new and innovative centres should also be established to train gardaí in specific areas such as urban crowd control, traffic management, human rights, sexual offences, firearms training, legal training and specialised training in other areas.

Third level education is another issue that should be considered. Army and Naval Service cadets attend third level colleges and we should look at the idea of young gardaí mixing with other young people in an academic environment.

Approximately 54% of garda recruits have a third level qualification on entry to Templemore.

They are the new recruits and I applaud that. However, the majority of gardaí did not have that opportunity. They should have the kind of opportunity that is made available to officers in other services. We should also consider modules of shared training with the PSNI. We must be open to innovative ideas for the future.

I welcome the publication last week of draft regulations for a whistleblowers' charter, which is one step along the road of Garda reform.

That is six years after the Government voted down our Bill on that matter.

Better late than never.

I was not here then.

The Minister was somewhere.

One of the problems I have with the Minister is that we face an appalling delay in getting anything done. He mentioned the establishment of the ombudsman commission in his opening remarks. Last February members of the ombudsman commission were formally appointed by the President, but where is it and what is it doing?

Next year.

Nothing is happening. It will all happen in the future.

They are all fighting about getting money for their staff.

The issue is about getting something done. Making ministerial announcements that certain things will happen does not mean they will happen. They are not happening and the ombudsman commission is a prime example.

We talk about what the Garda Síochána can do and about what we expect from them. My approach is simple — provide the best, expect the best and there is a fair chance we will get the best. The Garda is entitled to expect something in return from the political side. The least it should expect is an honest approach from the Government. The Government, and this Minister in particular, has been less than honest in the way he has dealt with issues relating to the Garda, for example, the issue of numbers in the Garda. There is an effort to conjure up bodies where they do not exist and to suggest that promises made before the last election by both Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats and in the programme for Government four years ago have been met.

The current Garda Review landed on my desk yesterday and its leading article states bluntly that the Garda disputes the Government assertion that its commitment in An Agreed Programme for Government to recruit an additional 2,000 members of the Garda Síochána has been met. It goes on to say the Government has failed to deliver this promise and will be unable to honour its pledge before the next general election.

They have been recruited.

We are not talking about recruits. The promise was to produce gardaí, but that has not been done.

It was to recruit them. The Deputy should read the text again.

The Garda Síochána is entitled to an honest reaction from the Minister. We have a ludicrous situation where the Taoiseach is now talking about even more numbers. We do not even have 13,000 gardaí, not to mind 14,000. I know there is an election round the corner and he will try the same old game and con the people again on the matter.

That is what the Deputy is getting ready to do also.

The same expectation of an honest approach arises with regard to equipment. Every time I raise the matter with the Minister, the response is always about the significant billions of euro being spent. However, one wonders what is the reality. For example, driver training for gardaí is increasingly important as they put their lives on the line and must also have regard for the general public. However, we have a situation where thousands of gardaí are expected to drive garda vehicles without having done the official driving course. What is worse, in response to a parliamentary question in February I discovered the number who had received training was 2,013, but by last week when I received a reply to a follow-on question, the number had only increased to 2,281. We are falling behind in this regard.

The same arises in other areas. We expect some gardaí to carry firearms on our behalf. Thank God, we have an unarmed force, but we require an armed back-up. Upwards of 3,500 members of the Garda are expected to hold firearms certificates and to be able to use those firearms on our behalf, yet there is no specialist, dedicated training range available to them as the two that were available are out of commission. It is not fair to the Garda that it should be left in a situation where promises of increased numbers, equipment or training facilities are not delivered. There is no point talking about what will happen in 2008. What is important is what happens now. Let us all learn from these reports. Let us encourage the changes that need to take place in the Garda Síochána but let us stand four square behind gardaí and give them the numbers, facilities, equipment and training to ensure the Garda is the best police force in the world and one of which we can all be proud.

I am glad to have the opportunity yet again to debate these matters, if "debate" is the appropriate word. It is not a debate but rather, as the Order Paper states, "Statements on the implications for governance, accountability, discipline and training within An Garda Síochána arising from the findings and conclusions contained in a number of reports and the actions taken by the Government in response to these matters of serious public concern". That is an understatement with regard to matters of profound importance for the basic nature of the State and how it is policed, which is one of the most important civic functions that is entrusted to us, as the people's assembly, to organise.

The reports are not listed on the Order Paper for the record, although they are listed in the Minister's speech. They cover a wide area of separate and very different issues and matters of concern, and certainly could not be responded to in any detailed or individual way in the time available or given the nature of the debate. Nor could a coherent analysis of each be provided in a mere 30 minutes and I do not intend to attempt to do so. Any one of the reports would take hours of analysis given that each has taken, at a minimum, months and in some cases years to compile. I will, however, mention these ground-breaking and profoundly important public documents which require a concerted and ongoing response from this House and the Executive.

We often have regard if a clamour about a matter grips public consciousness. First, there is an inquiry, which is followed by the result. We then have a three-day wonder at the consequences of the result of the inquiry but then business moves on to the next issue. That cannot be the result in these matters.

My involvement in the Donegal investigations is in the public domain. I welcome the ongoing investigations of Mr. Justice Morris and the impact his reports to date have had and continue to have on public policy. It has been a long time coming, but at last some measures of relief and vindication are being given to citizens of this State who were subjected to unimaginable anguish and distress, and, more than that, were abused by the State and its agent, the Garda Síochána. The scale of the abuse of power outlined by Mr. Justice Morris beggars belief. It is frightening and shocking that it could have continued over such a protracted period of time and that so many individual gardaí of all ranks could have been involved or immersed in it. We must consider profoundly how that happened and ensure not only that it cannot happen again but that it is not happening again now.

I said on the last occasion that Morris reports were debated here in Dáil Éireann, the people's assembly, that we owe it to all the good, decent people of Donegal who were caught up in this horror story to listen carefully and respectfully to the story of their ordeal, but we must also respond appropriately. Half measures or incremental responses will not wash. As I set out six years ago, we must consider the path-finding work of the Patten Commission in Northern Ireland to find how we can operate better. The core issue remains the establishment of a new, accountable management authority for the Garda Síochána. I welcome the remarks of my colleague, the Fine Gael spokesman, on that matter earlier in the debate. As with virtually everything else in the two policy documents and two Bills produced by me and Deputy Rabbitte six years ago, my Garda Síochána Authority Bill and his Whistleblowers Protection Bill — at that stage we asked for a Garda ombudsman, a Garda authority and local policing committees — all the reforms that were rejected out of hand six months ago are by increment being implemented now and are being wrapped around the current Administration as if they were its idea.

Somebody described the Good Friday Agreement as Sunningdale for slow learners. I welcome the recognition that fundamental reforms are required but the core issue remains the establishment of a new accountable management authority for the Garda Síochána. This authority must be independent of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, must approve an agreed policing plan for the country and must agree with senior Garda management on the level of resources needed to implement this agreed work plan.

Two weeks after the publication of the three most recent Morris reports, the Garda Commissioner made a preliminary response. He stated that discipline in the force was working well and that the problems outlined in regard to Garda management had been addressed. The problem with this response is that it runs counter to the clear and profoundly worrying conclusion of Mr. Justice Morris that the gardaí serving in Donegal cannot be said to be "unrepresentative or an aberration from the generality".

Some have talked about a few rotten apples in the barrel or a few letting down the many. The inescapable reality is of a monumental failure in control and authority in one of the most important institutions in the State. We — the Minister and Members of the House — must ensure that no citizen is ever again subjected to an abuse of power on the scale set out in the reports currently before this House.

Where are we now? Can this House agree with Garda Commissioner Conroy that discipline in the force is working well and that the problems outlined in regard to Garda management have been addressed? This morning on RTE radio, Philip Boucher-Hayes raised a disturbing case, which concerns the death of Mr. Shane Tuohey of Rahan, County Offaly, on 2 February 2002. The circumstances surrounding the investigation of this man's death by the Garda Síochána raise serious questions. Shane was a 23 year old man, described by a spokesperson for the Garda Commissioner as "a person of outstanding character and highly thought of in his area".

Several Members of this House were contacted by Shane's father, Mr. Eamon Tuohey, and tabled parliamentary questions in regard to the investigation into his son's death. The most recent parliamentary question was tabled by me on 12 October 2006. I received the following reply from the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform:

I am informed by the Garda authorities that the death of the person referred to is under review by a senior Garda officer. It is expected that the investigation file will be completed shortly. As the Deputies will appreciate it would be inappropriate for me to comment further before completion of the review.

In a written reply to RTE, a spokesman for the Garda Commissioner said that a superintendent from outside the Garda district had been appointed to carry out a second investigation on 3 November 2005. A summary of the conclusions of the second investigation was set out in the spokesman's letter to RTE. The letter in question was dated——

It was dated 22 November.

——22 November. It is clear that the second investigation was concluded and the details had been given to the Garda Commissioner, at least. However, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform told me three weeks ago that the investigation was ongoing.

The Deputy has the dates wrong, 27 November is the date on which the result is announced.

The date on which the letter was written to RTE by the spokesman for the Commissioner was 22 November.

When the Deputy asked me about it in October, I said it was about to be completed fairly soon.

I want to know when the result of the investigation was made known to the Minister. Does he have it now?

When did the Minister intend to inform the House of that?

I got it in the past couple of days.

I ask the Minister to tell me when the investigation was concluded. Will he put the report into the public domain? The reply that paraphrased the findings of the second investigation was issued to RTE, rather than to any Member of this House who had tabled a parliamentary question — so much for the parliamentary oversight facility that the Minister had such regard for in his earlier contribution. It is clear that an investigative journalist has much more access to information than a mere Member of this House. It does not seem that the Minister has a policy of contacting interested Deputies as soon as relevant information comes to hand. We do not receive letters telling us that "subsequent to your parliamentary question, that investigation has been concluded and as soon as it has been considered it will be made available to you". It seems that an investigative journalist has much more oversight capacity than a Member of this House. That has to change if the Minister's words about parliamentary oversight are to have any meaning.

The second investigation found that no evidence was available to substantiate the allegation that Shane Tuohey was assaulted immediately prior to his death. It apparently concluded that there was no evidence to substantiate the allegation that the Garda investigated the death of Shane Tuohey in such a manner as not to establish the full facts. It also found there was no evidence to justify the arrest of anybody in relation to Shane Tuohey's death. The Commissioner's spokesman accepted that some aspects of the first investigation could have been dealt with more efficiently. It is accepted, in essence, that the searches were not carried out in accordance with normal procedures and guidelines. The scene was not preserved from the time the body was removed from the river, even though it was obvious at the time that Shane Tuohey did not enter the water at that point. The scene should have been preserved in accordance with standard procedures until the findings of the post mortem had been established.

In the first investigation, no reference was made to the fact that a number of CCTV cameras were in operation in Clara during the night and morning of the disappearance of Shane Tuohey. The second investigation established that there was at least one sighting of Shane Tuohey before his disappearance. However, the recollection of the gardaí involved in the first investigation, who were familiar with the CCTV system in operation at the time, was that no information of evidential value was available. A more professional investigation would have referred to the CCTV footage, which should have been available even if it did not have any evidential value. I understand that nine CCTV cameras were in operation on the night in question. The investigative reporter I mentioned has found that at least one of them has gone missing.

No response has been made in respect of some important and disquieting matters. I refer, for example, to the handling of the witness statements of the three men who were present at the time of the alleged assault on Shane Tuohey, which appear to contradict one another. Concerns have also been expressed about the circumstances surrounding the taking and use of a statement from a person identified as "Geraldine". This unsigned statement purports to detail a relationship between Geraldine and Shane Tuohey. It claims to describe Shane's mental health and physical condition on the night of his death. At Shane's inquest, Geraldine refuted everything in the statement — she said she was not sober when the statement was taken. Mr. Boucher-Hayes spoke to members of Geraldine's family, who accept, as she does, that she is a chronic alcoholic.

A third issue is the manner in which the Garda treated Shane's disappearance as a case of suspected suicide from early in the investigation, despite hearing allegations of assault against him. When an alleged assailant was identified to the Garda, a statement was not taken from him until six months after the recovery of Shane Tuohey's body. Other matters which also need careful examination include the availability of CCTV footage.

It is simply not acceptable that an internal review by the Garda Síochána is currently the only mechanism that is available to provide for oversight of these matters. We cannot remain in limbo until the Garda ombudsman commission is brought into operation and starts to receive complaints on some date next year. The Minister has been telling the House for a year or more that the Garda ombudsman commission will come on stream soon, but we need something to address the matters which are agitating the public now. I refer to good, decent and law-abiding citizens who want their questions answered — they simply want the full truth to be laid before them. The House has finally accepted that it cannot be done by means of internal inquiry, which is why it established the Garda ombudsman commission in the first instance. I want the Minister to tell the House whether an interim solution can be made available. We may need to examine the possibility of acceptance by the Garda ombudsman commission of cases from now, even if they cannot be investigated subsequently. I have asked for that to happen.

Many other cases could be raised in this House, but I want to mention just one more case. Three weeks ago, on 7 November 2006, parliamentary questions were tabled by Deputies Broughan and Sargent about the status of two members of the Garda who had been acquitted in Dublin Circuit Court on 23 October 2006 of charges of perjury and forging documents. Certain papers had been deemed inadmissible during their trial. The main reason for the declaration of inadmissibility seems to have been that there was a break in the chain of evidence. The matters in question centred on the trial of Mr. Colm Murphy for his alleged role in the Omagh bombings. During Mr. Murphy's trial, Mr. Justice Barr, who was the presiding judge in the three-judge court, described two Garda witnesses as "discredited". He said that their conduct was "outrageous" and that they had been involved in "persistent lying under oath". Mr. Murphy's subsequent appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal relied strongly on the argument that the Special Criminal Court did not take proper account of the fact that one of the teams of interviewing gardaí had fabricated notes and lied in the witness box.

The Court of Criminal Appeal quashed the conviction and ordered a retrial. Members of this House wanted to know what was happening to those individual gardaí who were the subject of unprecedented damning commentary in court by a senior judge. The gardaí were acquitted by virtue of the fact that the chain of evidence was broken. In his Dáil reply on 7 November 2006, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform quoted regulation 38 of the Garda Síochána (Discipline) Regulations 1989 in his statement:

Regulation 39 of these regulations provides that where a member of the Garda Síochána has either been convicted or acquitted of an offence, then proceedings under the discipline regulations for an alleged breach of discipline shall not be commenced or, if already commenced, shall not be continued if the breach of discipline is in substance the same as the offence for which he has been convicted or acquitted. In respect of one of the persons referred to, who is still a serving member of the Garda Síochána, as the alleged breach of discipline and the criminal charges of which he was acquitted were in substance the same, I am informed by the Garda authorities that disciplinary proceedings were discontinued in accordance with regulation 38 of the disciplinary regulations. I am further informed that the second person acquitted last month of the charges preferred against him was medically discharged from the Garda Síochána on 18 September 2006. As this person is no longer a member of the Garda Síochána, disciplinary proceedings were discontinued.

Can this be satisfactory?

That is why I am changing the regulations.

One of the main findings of the early reports of the Morris tribunal is that disciplinary action within the Garda Síochána takes on the character of a criminal trial with a criminal level of proof required. This is hopelessly inadequate. If the normal code of work practice is breached in any other working environment, then the offender can be disciplined or turfed out.

The Minister said in reply that there are ongoing discussions with the Garda Conciliation Council concerning new regulations. When will these ongoing discussions come to a conclusion? When can we have regulations that are appropriate to today? It is a long time since the original Morris tribunal was established. It is a long time since its first report. However, changing things seems worse than trying to turn a tanker, so the status quo continues today. We are now in a hopelessly inadequate situation, where proper disciplinary procedures that would be available in any normal circumstances are not available for the Garda Síochána, pending the termination of discussions with the Garda Conciliation Council.

The Deputy should check the Garda Síochána Act 2005. I am obliged to consult the council.

The Minister is obliged to consult the council, but he is also obliged to have an outcome to the process. If he thinks that the outcome of these matters is satisfactory, we will draw our own conclusions.

That is why I am changing the regulations which the Deputy never changed when he was in government.

I was never Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

No, but the Deputy was in Cabinet and he had collective responsibility.

The truth is that the Minister cannot take any criticism at all.

He did nothing when he was in government. This is gross hypocrisy.

The Minister would not talk at all this morning.

In my contribution today, I deliberately decided not to go through the gross negligence of the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and his Attorney General on the foundation of these matters. I want to look to the future and not to the past, but I also want to look at today. I expect that a Minister who wallows in his own self-importance would accept what I am saying as valid, that he might say when he wants to bring these matters to a conclusion, and that he have seizure of the importance of the matters that I am raising, rather than say in a childish way that we did nothing ten years ago. His party and Fianna Fáil have been in power for nearly ten years. He should take responsibility and understand the disquiet of the public about the failures in proper accountability within the Garda Síochána.

We are bringing about reform and it is coming painfully slowly. We have another degree of reform to achieve, notably the establishment——

The Deputy wanted to delay parts of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 until these reports——

Interruptions are not in order.

The Deputy demanded that I delay passing those Acts until these reports——

Interruptions are not in order.

I am to be shouted down by a man who does not seek to make an intervention using the procedures of the House, which I would willingly accept.

The Deputy is not being shouted down, he is being corrected.

I want him to answer the questions that I posed, but I want to engage constructively in this debate, as I have done from this side of the House. I did not drag up his failings on these matters, which are many and varied, because I want to build a transparent and accountable future for policing. That is the desire of the vast bulk of citizens in this State, as well as the bulk of decent, honourable, hard working members of the Garda Síochána who are dedicated to serving the State. They deserve better than a self-serving Minister whose ego is so fragile that he cannot bear a moment's criticism in this House.

When this debate began, we dragged a reluctant Government to accept the establishment of the Morris tribunal. It was voted down by one vote the first time it was put before the House, when the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform quoted the advice of then Attorney General. We now need to measure up to the requirements of the Morris and Barr reports and all the other reports before us, to ensure that we have a first class police service worthy of the people of Ireland. All of us, whether in government or in opposition, have to play our part as best we can. The people of Ireland demand and require nothing less.

I propose to share time with Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Cuffe.

The Garda Síochána is about to experience the most radical change since the formation of the force. The Garda unions recently accepted the most recent national wage agreement, Towards 2016, with 69% of its members in favour. That sounds very positive and most people would be happy with that level of acceptance. No matter what is put in front of some people, they will always vote against it because they feel more can be obtained. It would be great if the majority actually voted on this agreement, but these figures mask the fact that only 31.2% of the 10,000 members of the Garda Síochána cast their ballots. Almost 7,000 gardaí did not think it worthwhile to cast their vote on a national wage agreement. We have to ask why that is the case. Of the 3,000 who voted, 1,000 rejected the deal. I suggest there is quite a large number of unhappy campers in the Garda force at present, about 8,000. This dark fact is the most eloquent statement as regards the demoralisation that pervades the force and must give the Minister serious cause for thought. There are serious issues here that must be dealt with. This fact did not just impinge on me in terms of their acceptance of this particular agreement.

I have no doubt a slumbering giant lurks beneath the surface here in terms of what would appear to be a routine acceptance of Towards 2016. I believe the Minister will disturb this at his peril. A minority of gardaí signed up to the agreement a week ago in the name of the entire force. Why would they not? They have a cost of living increase to which they are well entitled. Neither the Minister nor I had to sign up for anything like this. We did not have to sign up to a longer working term or whatever. That was not put in front of us in this House, yet it was for the gardaí. They were, in effect, blackmailed into accepting what they agreed to. It was made clear to the gardaí that a number of conditions and demands were attaching. One of these was total acceptance and compliance with the Garda Síochána Act, with which the rank and file gardaí have absolutely no difficulty. Gardaí believe the Minister has had his victory in relation to the Garda Reserve and that their noses have been rubbed in that regard. It was made clear to the force that gardaí must accept the newly introduced Garda reserve as one of the ingredients for benchmarking. In other words the Minister is buying the co-operation of gardaí by including this condition in the benchmarking process. This was on the basis that the Garda Reserve cannot possibly work without the co-operation of the full-time force.

The Minister was also buying the goodwill of gardaí as regards taking the novice force on board, helping to train the new members and looking after and encouraging them. This is a very poor start and relations have got off on a bad foot. This is a poor way to negotiate, to put a price on the head of the Garda Reserve. If an argument cannot stand on its own merits it should not be included. It was linked into a pay deal and that is the wrong way to go forward if the Minister wants the Garda Reserve to be accepted. It is not the way to do business. There is an element of bribery involved and the gardaí had no option. It will leave a bitter taste in the mouths of gardaí for quite a long time. There will be bitterness between the Garda Reserve and the full-time force. Why did only 31% of these people think it worth their while to vote? Why did a further 33% of those who voted reject the deal? There is a good deal of discontent and it will show its face somewhere along the line.

The whole idea of a reserve force has been rubbished by one of America's top police officers, the Dublin-born Mr. John Timoney, the former New York police commissioner. Perhaps he is getting it wrong, too. Mr. Timoney, who turned crime around in New York in the mid-1990s, said a reserve force would not work, because the Garda could not rely on volunteers. This is a man who has been there, done that and has a successful track record. This man should be listened to. I would listen to what he has to say. He says Ireland needs full-time gardaí, rather than part-timers, and pointed to the example of New York, with its population of 8 million, having 40,000 full-time police officers and 10,000 full-time civilian workers. On the other hand, all of Ireland, with half the population of New York has a mere 12,000 full-time gardaí. The figures speak for themselves.

Meanwhile our under-funded, numerically challenged and poorly equipped full-time gardaí are performing exceptionally well within their limited resources. Gardaí have been promised new equipment and patrol cars for several years. In fairness the equipment is beginning to materialise, but very slowly. The force's transport fleet manager, Mr. Noel Hanlon, the former ambulance manufacturer, is reputed to have received a tranche of money to purchase new cars, but is said to have returned it, unspent. I want to know whether he returned the money and if he is on a bonus for purchasing particular equipment. Garda stations should not be forced to wait for new cars while crime continues to rise, which just leads to demoralisation within the force. There appears to be plenty of money for capital projects such as buildings but there seems to be a problem once planning permission has been obtained. The force is still awaiting equipment after ten years of promises. They have been promised stab-proof vests, and the long-awaited TETRA radio digitalised system. This has been a major issue for gardaí for a very long time. We have all heard that criminals know as much about what is happening within the Garda Síochána as the gardaí. Gardaí have been reduced to using their own mobile phones if they want to contact their stations. These are issues which should be dealt with and are causing a great deal of demoralisation within the force.

All these items have been sought for years as part of the Garda modernisation programme. Chief Inspector Kathleen O'Toole has been talking about the civilianisation of the force — recruiting civilians for positions in finance, human resources and IT. Ordinary gardaí want the civilianisation of the force. Instead of the man or woman in the street who has worked their way up through the system to end up in finance or human resources, they want civilians to do this type of white collar work, and will co-operate in this regard. There is a willingness within the Garda that should be tapped into. The issue of co-operation with the new Garda Reserve was very badly handled and was pushed on gardaí, with no room for negotiation. If something is pushed on people they will be defeated. It was a David and Goliath-type exercise and David obviously won in this instance. It would be much better for the Minister to listen to gardaí and try to offer them something other than a threat of taking away a wage increase to which he, I and everyone else are entitled. Basically, the proposal states that civilians could perform non-police duties. Such a suggestion would receive widespread acceptance among gardaí. The recruitment of civilians to full-time important management and support positions alongside sworn officers would be welcomed. This change was also suggested by the Garda inspectorate and by the advisory group on Garda management and leadership development, chaired by Senator Maurice Hayes. It proposed one of the most radical changes to the Garda Síochána since its foundation in 1922, with civilians in key senior positions including the senior command staff.

Civilian staffing currently stands at about 12% whereas in similar modern forces the norm is around 25%. That is the way forward. We need to be in a position where gardaí are not behind desks or doing tasks for which they are ill-suited. Their role is to police the community and that is where they want to be. I hope the Minister will take some of my comments on board.

Ireland's police force, the Garda Síochána, was established on the foundation of the Irish Free State in 1922 as the guardians of the peace. The force has proudly served the people for the best part of a century. In recent years, however, An Garda Síochána has experienced a number of extremely damaging incidents, including the corrupt and dishonest policing in County Donegal, the shooting of John Carthy at Abbeylara and the handling of the "Reclaim the Streets" demonstration in 2004. In order for the police force to do its job to the best of its ability it must enjoy the full confidence of the people it serves. Currently this cannot be said of An Garda Síochána, and this debate is long overdue.

The important findings of the Morris and Barr tribunals have never been debated in this House, despite the fact the first report of the Morris tribunal was published almost two and a half years ago. It is extremely telling that the majority of the Morris tribunal's findings and those of the Barr tribunal were published during Dáil recesses.

It is important to remind ourselves that for every corrupt garda, every Sergeant John White, there are many gardaí who uphold the honour and dignity upon which the Garda Síochána was founded.

When meeting gardaí who are appalled at the behaviour of some of their colleagues and who do not wish to be associated with such appalling and corrupt behaviour, one gets a flavour of the decent, honest to goodness gardaí that exist. However, to afford such gardaí the opportunity to go about their work in a fair and transparent manner, it is vital to implement a most thorough reform of the force without delay.

I wish to discuss the Morris tribunal briefly. Mr. Justice Frederick Morris stated:

The Tribunal has been staggered by the amount of indiscipline and insubordination it has found in the Garda force. There is a small, but disproportionately influential, core of mischief-making members who will not obey orders, who will not follow procedures, who will not tell the truth and who have no respect for their officers.

This is a staggering statement from a judge in this State. These revelations of widespread corruption, flagrant abuse of powers, intimidation of witnesses and the framing of entirely innocent people in County Donegal have shocked all Members to the core and have caused the most serious damage to the name and reputation of the Garda Síochána.

One of the most disturbing aspects of Mr. Justice Morris's findings is that this corruption and misconduct is not exclusive to the Donegal area. To regain its position as a respected and trusted protector of the peace, the Garda Síochána must root out the small but disproportionately influential core of mischief-making members who have damaged the reputation of the force to such detrimental effect.

It is important to note the work of the Morris tribunal is far from complete and that evidence is still being heard regarding the interrogation of suspects in Garda custody and the shocking revelations continue to flow on a drip-feed basis. The first report of the Morris tribunal was published in the summer of 2004. Despite its damning content, previously the Government has not found it necessary to bring its findings before the House. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform anticipated the outcry that would accompany the third, fourth and fifth reports of the Morris tribunal, as well as the Government's absolute failure to act on the previous reports' recommendations and took the opportunity to announce a number of reforming actions regarding Garda discipline when these reports were being published.

While some aspects of these measures are welcome, the Green Party believes they do not go far enough. For instance, I refer to the need for a Garda authority. One of the key concerns voiced by Mr. Justice Morris pertained to the issue of effective communication between the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Garda headquarters. While the Garda Síochána Act 2005 made the Garda Commissioner directly accountable to the Minister, the new arrangement risks over-centralising and politicising the Garda. Ultimately, this will undermine its independence. To date, one of the most glaring omissions from the Minister's raft of reforms concerns the establishment of an independent Garda authority. I understand the Minister has stated that he considers both himself and the Government to be acting as a Garda authority. However, this does not go far enough.

I wish to turn to the Barr tribunal. Following the tragic events at Abbeylara in 2000, the Barr tribunal found that the lead negotiator made 14 mistakes during the siege and that he failed to make real efforts to achieve resolution during the armed stand-off. However, the Barr tribunal report also stated that the lead negotiator was hampered and limited by a lack of experience and resources. The recommendations made by Mr. Justice Barr must be carried through immediately. This would mean an urgent review of Garda command structures, the equipping of the emergency response unit with stun guns and other less lethal options and the establishment of a formal working relationship between the Garda and State psychologists. Members were reminded of this matter by another recent siege.

In the context of the use of the emergency response unit in sieges, Garda training must be improved, particularly to deal with situations in which mental illness may be a factor. Local Garda superintendents must also take up refresher courses — as scene commanders — for at least one week per year, to give them the specific expertise required for such volatile and difficult situations. However, Members have not yet seen enough real action taken by either the Minister or the Garda Commissioner on foot of these recommendations. I am concerned the tragedy of John Carthy's death could be easily repeated.

On a more fundamental level, human rights must be placed at the heart of policing in Ireland, as the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, ICCL, has clearly stated. The Green Party sees great merit in the action points put forward by the ICCL in response to the Morris tribunal's conclusions. The reforms simply do not go far enough to address the inadequacies identified in the five Morris reports and the ICCL has identified six action points for change arising from that tribunal's findings. I refer to Garda management and human rights-proofing, civic oversight, the need for a Garda authority and Garda accountability, a fresh approach to Garda recruitment and training, the legal power of superintendents to issue a search warrant and the handling of Garda informants and covert policing. The Green Party believes these action points provide a useful blueprint with which to place human rights at the heart of policing in Ireland.

It is interesting to examine the inclusion of human rights issues in Garda training in Templemore and to consider the results of surveys undertaken there. The surveys indicated that new recruits are open to the theme of human rights providing the backbone for education in the policing sphere. However, they also discovered — as one went further up the ranks — a certain unwillingness to take on board the central issue of putting human rights at the core of Garda training. This is a matter for concern and promotion methods within the Garda Síochána must be reviewed.

It is telling that the senior cohort of Garda officers are from a specific demographic and seniority appears to be based more on years within the force than is the case in other police forces. Senior police officers from the United Kingdom or the United States who appear on television seem to be at least ten years younger than their Irish counterparts. While I do not wish to be ageist in this regard, promotion should be emphasised more on the basis of merit than on years served in the force. This fundamental issue must be addressed carefully and without delay. Moreover, the best and brightest must be brought in from outside the force. The obstacles to recruiting externally should be carefully considered, particularly at a senior level within the force. I wish to see the Minister make greater efforts to bring in senior officers from New York, Boston or London. As Ireland becomes a more multicultural State, people from minorities must be included and must be placed at the heart of policing in order that they can identify problems before they arise in such areas.

This debate is useful and the Minister has begun to acknowledge that radical reforms are necessary. However, I do not believe they are moving fast enough. A much faster pace of reform is required, which learns from the best practices in other jurisdictions.

While I am glad to have an opportunity to speak in this debate, I have a problem in that Members should have dealt separately with each Morris report, as well as the other reports. The House should have taken the necessary time to deal with the reports, rather than doing so in a squashed-up fashion over a few hours. The reports are sufficiently important for a full debate or a full examination. I hope this will not be the end of the matter.

In the past, the Minister has shown his willingness to take on board some of Mr. Justice Morris's observations. I hope, in the near future, Members will see more of the recommendations made by Mr. Justice Morris and others in respect of the Garda Síochána, being taken on board. When we read the reports laid before us, and the media reports of further grave abuses, and we objectively consider how much has changed in terms of accountability, discipline and training, one matter is certain, that both the Garda Síochána and the Minister have not been responding quickly enough to the concerns raised, not only by Mr. Justice Morris but over many decades, about abuse of power by members of the Garda Síochána. If the legacy of the exposed corruption and the abuse were to be investigated thoroughly, independently and honestly, it could ultimately restore confidence in the Garda and provide a solid foundation for future progress. I commend Mr. Justice Morris and Mr. Justice Barr for their work to date and I hope other investigations will be as thorough as theirs.

Many gardaí are dedicated to their job and joined the police force to ensure the safety of society. They have been rightly appalled by the revelations, but they could not have been blind to what has been going on in their Garda stations and divisions. Many more within the Garda Síochána joined just to do a job which is fair enough, but some of them have been involved in cutting corners. Others are corrupt. A combination of those who are corrupt and those who are cutting corners to get results is what has brought the Garda Síochána to the point where its reputation is in tatters and it has lost the confidence of the public. In some people's eyes the Garda Síochána is akin to a corrupt police force in a banana republic or the Ceaucescu regime. One of the clearest proposals from the Morris report was to ensure that those who are appalled or who are aware of wrongdoing within the Garda Síochána have the opportunity to expose it without fear of being sidelined, bullied or harassed. That is one of the key recommendations so that in future no Garda can turn around and say he or she could not say anything or that he or she could not uphold the law and deal with this. Mr. Justice Morris's recommendation was that a body be set up within Garda headquarters to which on a confidential basis difficulties and possible irregularities could be reported. He was being pleasant in his wording. The ICCL had it down as the drawing up of a whistleblower's charter and something along that line needs to be done quickly to ensure the restoration of confidence in the Garda Síochána is begun.

Mr. Justice Morris was clear when reporting his findings that corruption and abuse is not just a problem of a few bad apples in Donegal — the fact that we are dealing with a number of reports shows that is so. Rather, he said, it arises from systematic failures throughout the force and throughout the State. Logically, those shown to be have been corrupt and abusive in Donegal learnt the tricks of their self-interested and abusive trade in previous postings among other corrupt officers, and after operating in Donegal they went on to practise elsewhere. There is a need for a trawl of the cases of these officers who have been found wanting, abusive and corrupt. This needs to be looked at again because not everybody who was wrongfully convicted or abused is as strong as the McBreartys and accepted their lot. Some people have managed to have the strength to continually fight to expose what was done to them. Not everybody is as strong as them and often there has been continued harassment and intimidation of those who have had the gall to raise questions about the Garda Síochána and its members.

Given that all top ranking positions are dependent on the Minister's favour, it is no wonder the Garda Síochána has refused to recognise and rectify the scale of abuse. The Minister has not dealt with that aspect of a trawl and the fact that many of those who have been exposed by the Morris report have been promoted within the Garda Síochána. We all have been dismayed at the absence of successful criminal prosecutions thus far on foot of the Morris reports, not to mention the lack of clear disciplinary messages being sent in the form of dismissal.

How does the Garda Síochána restore confidence after the Morris report? We need to look, for instance, at yesterday's revelations that a senior garda at Letterkenny Garda station who was responsible for the investigation into Mr. Richie Barron's death in 1996 was appointed to the Garda Reserve interview board. That beggars belief. The garda in question is former superintendent John Fitzgerald. Mr. Justice Morris found that "the investigation was corrupt in its leadership" and that a number of named officers, Fitzgerald included, "share in various degrees the burden of fault for this matter", and yet he was appointed to pass on his tricks to a voluntary group, the Garda Reserve. A question that needs to be answered is whether we are to continue in future the damage former superintendent Fitzgerald has caused.

There are many more recent incidents adding to this legacy of corruption, cover-up and abuse, including suspicious deaths in custody, the planting and disappearance of evidence and cases of failure to act on information. All of this requires independent investigation to ensure all the gardaí involved are held to account and from which real disciplinary and criminal proceedings must follow. I will give a few examples, some of which have been covered in magazines and newspapers in recent months and some of which go back further and have not had the same type of coverage they deserved.

Brian Rossiter's case has been rehearsed here on a number of occasions. A 14 year old child, he was arrested and taken into custody in Clonmel. The following morning he was found unconscious. He died three days later having never regained consciousness. Two significant witnesses claim to have witnessed serious Garda violence against Brian.

Deputy McDowell was the Minister at the time, yet there were no inquiries into the death of the child. Under much duress the Minister finally assented to establish an inquiry into the death of Brian for whom the Garda had responsibility almost two years after an inquiry was first rightly demanded of him. However, the promised consultation on the terms of reference for the inquiry did not occur. Its terms of reference precluded the examination of the failure of the Minister or the Garda authority to properly investigate the death initially. The inquiry was established under the Dublin Police Act 1924 rather than the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004. The inquiry has no powers to compel witnesses, including the gardaí on duty the night young Brian was killed, to give evidence. Where is the accountability in this?

Terence Wheelock, aged 21, died as a result of injuries sustained in Garda custody in June 2005. The gardaí allege he hung himself in his cell. This is strongly contested by the family. Suspiciously, the cell in which he died was immediately renovated and the gardaí refused to allow the family's solicitor access to Terence's clothes. The family is still awaiting justice in this case. Where is the accountability in this?

The Deputy should conclude.

On the question of discipline, there is a long established practice whereby gardaí engage in serious harassment of people who have been brave enough to raise questions and Terence Wheelock's family has suffered quite a period of intimidation and harassment when they mobilised on this.

There are quite a number of other cases. I could continue for another half-hour and more. There are Garda stations in Dublin which are known for the brutality they mete out to those who are arrested and they need to be looked at.

We have put much faith in the new Garda Inspectorate and Garda ombudsman commission. I hope those two bodies will produce results of which we can be proud but if they are anything like the Garda Complaints Board, we will be left wanting. We need to continuously review and ensure the Garda is accountable to this House.

If Deputy Ó Snodaigh did continue for another half an hour, he probably would not get to mention some of the vast waste of Garda resources expended on investigating subversive organisations along the Border, including smuggling and money laundering.

If the State had dealt with its own cases it might have got the courage to deal with the outstanding matter of occupation.

I have no personal malice towards Deputy Ó Snodaigh, but one cannot help remarking on the towering hypocrisy of that kind of contribution——

There is no hypocrisy involved at all.

——that does not touch for one minute on the kind of waste of resources that some of his associates have visited upon the Garda Síochána.

If this State had the courage to deal with the national territory, then one might not have needed the Garda Síochána to deal with it.

They are now trying to get out of prison having murdered members of the Garda Síochána.

Members of the Garda Síochána murdered other people in this State.

I would love to hear the rest of the 30-minute speech in which Deputy Ó Snodaigh was going to mention all these other cases of injustice.

I can keep going if the Deputy wishes.

I do not think it is within the Deputy's gift to do that.

I will do it on another occasion.

I feel it is important to make those points.

I wish to take this opportunity to reflect on the various reports that have been published. The Government's response to the reports, which is essentially what we are here to discuss, has been proportionate and timely. While mismanagement is the core issue, there are other issues involved. To a certain extent, some of the problems have been exaggerated for political reasons, which is unfortunate. In many respects, there is a tendency to exaggerate, for political ends, the failures of public bodies and public servants. In so far as that happens, it is regrettable.

The first question is whether the kind of corrupt behaviour that Mr. Justice Morris identified in Donegal is endemic in the Garda Síochána. In my view it is not endemic in the force. So far, I have heard five Opposition speakers but not one of them has mentioned any of the positive matters to which Mr. Justice Morris referred. He referred to the bravery of some witnesses who came before the tribunal to give evidence which is clearly damaging to them — from ordinary rank and file gardaí to Chief Superintendent Peter Fitzgerald, whose bravery Judge Morris picked out.

It is worth remembering there were several factors in Donegal that distinguished that area from other parts of the country. This is worth reflecting on when we pose the question of whether we think the problem is endemic, greater than what is being portrayed and if it goes to the core of the Garda Síochána. There are historical issues regarding Donegal, which include its closeness to the Border and the problems of dealing with subversives and explosives. Those issues may have caused the Donegal Garda division to develop in a different manner to other parts of the country. We should bear that in mind.

It was the same excuse for Louth, Monaghan, Cavan and Sligo, but they did not have it.

If the Deputy was listening to the beginning of my contribution, one of the points to which I referred was Donegal's isolation from the rest of the Twenty-Six Counties. We should recall exactly what Mr. Justice Morris said about complicity in the upper ranks. He found there was "gross negligence falling short of actual complicity". That is the phrase he used. This goes back to my original point that we are talking about major problems of mismanagement. In all the reams of evidence from 450 days of hearings, Mr. Justice Morris did not find evidence of actual complicity in the Donegal division's senior management.

Other issues concerned informants who seem to have been kept as the personal property of certain individuals who used them as launch-pads for their own careers. Much has been done about that. The establishment of the Garda ombudsman commission is a proportionate response to the issues of Garda discipline and inquiries into misconduct in the force. I do not wish to go into the methods of investigation but suffice it to say they will be appropriate for different levels of behaviour. They will also try to address the over-legalistic approach that has characterised most investigations within the Garda Síochána in recent times.

A report by Mr. Barry Vaughan of the Institute of Public Administration made a cogent argument about the Garda Complaints Board, comparing the board's results with those of the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland. Mr. Vaughan pointed out that 11% of complaints made to the Garda Complaints Board in 2004 were substantiated. In 2005, 10% of matters referred to the DPP by the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland led to a prosecution. This pattern can be found in many police forces around the world. We are therefore looking for an ombudsman commission on the basis of an unsound assumption — that an external body will be more effective in bringing prosecutions. According to those statistics, it would seem the Garda Complaints Board was doing a good job in certain circumstances. We must deal with that reality when we are dealing with the problems identified by Mr. Justice Morris.

I also wish to refer to the issue of promotion. I have spoken to many gardaí about the duality within the force between plain-clothes and uniformed members. A major morale problem is created within the force when it becomes obvious that plain-clothes gardaí are more inclined to be promoted than their uniformed colleagues. Obviously, an old-boys' club existed for much too long, so the Government's response in establishing a promotions board is proportionate and well thought out. There will be two civilians on the board who will bring balance and will break up what has been an unfortunate pattern over the last few years. I hope the policy principle behind the promotions board will be one of merit as well as reflecting public policy as set out by the Government and this House.

We want better community policing and we want people working in that sector to be promoted and have a specific career path. At every residents' meeting I have attended, the constant refrain is "We want to know who our community police person is. We want to see them on the street". I hope such sentiments will be reflected in the type of promotions that are made. I will cite one example of the problem as I see it. In one station, which I will not name, the member in charge sought other members to become involved in community policing. Over a number of weeks, however, he failed to find one applicant. The problem seems to be that so many gardaí — let us call them the blue light brigade — want to go around in a squad car and be involved in detection work. Maybe they watch too many detective programmes on television, but they do not want to get involved in the nitty-gritty or nuts and bolts of community policing, which everyone is seeking.

I have already heard criticism of the Nally report. Naturally, the fact it has been edited down is unfortunate but there seems to be very little we can do about it. Some of the criticism is based on the fact the individuals who carried out the investigation turned a blind eye to some of the alleged facts. To suggest these people are incapable of an independent inquiry, however, demeans them. They have served Government Ministers of every political hue over the years and have been promoted within their own organisations on the basis of their independence. I reject that criticism and strongly support the content of that report. It is a good day for the victims of the Omagh bombing who will be pleased to see this report being published.

The Morris report recommended that section 29 of the Offences Against the State Act be changed so a Garda superintendent could not issue a search warrant under that section to a member of the force. It is recommended that it should be approved by a judge of the District or Circuit Court. This is sensible and the right solution to that problem. Clearly this area was abused in the case of Donegal. The power should be retained by a superintendent in exceptional circumstances where it can be shown that it was not physically possible, for whatever reason of urgency, to prepare paperwork for a grounding application to a judge.

Duty to account is an interesting issue and there are already practical differences in Garda stations throughout the country. The 2005 Act at section 39 imposes a clear duty on every member of the force, when required to do so by a member of higher rank, to account for his or her action or inaction while on duty. I have spoken to higher ranking gardaí in my area to discuss how this is practically implemented and there is no doubt it is making a difference in Garda stations throughout the country. It helps avoid the problems seen in Donegal around revealing a truth adverse to a colleague that Mr. Justice Morris identified in his investigation. This is a crucial development and a proportionate response by the Government to the problems identified.

Many have argued in this House today and elsewhere that there should be a police authority or policing board similar to that in Northern Ireland but I have never heard a strong argument in support of such a proposal. I strongly believe in the authority of this House and I do not believe its powers should be emasculated. It was suggested that at some stage in the future the Minister might be a corrupt individual and that it would be more appropriate for the commissioner to report to a policing board which is less likely to be corrupt. This argument would denude all Ministers of all powers for fear that some later occupant of that office might have corrupt leanings.

Too many powers are being removed from this House causing too many occasions when a Minister can answer that he or she cannot respond to a query and must refer the questioner to some agency or executive. I reject the idea of a policing board and suggest we keep power in this House and stand up for the democratic institution we put so much effort into gaining entry to. To remove powers makes no sense.

The next module of the Morris report will be interesting, especially regarding the higher ranks of the Garda Síochána. One of the issues that will arise is bugging in interview rooms and I will quote from the testimony of Detective Sergeant White in this regard:

Officers and members, including myself, believed that we were entitled to use covert recording equipment in the struggle against crimes of murder and other very serious crimes. It was not a case of being entitled to do so by law but on the assumption that the equipment would not harm any innocent person and that the persons being listened to were either persons who had committed a very serious criminal act or were murderers. It was quite clear this system could not have operated for so many years without the knowledge and approval of the most senior authority within An Garda Síochána. This system of covert recording was being used as a tool by detectives in an effort to solve crime and, while it could not be regarded by any member of An Garda Síochána as being lawful, it was not regarded by those aware of its existence as being morally wrong.

This quotation contains the nub of the wrong mindedness that existed for too long in Donegal.

This is a corruption of the procedural basis of criminal justice in Ireland, it is a denial of a person's right to silence, a denial of due process, a denial of solicitor-client confidentiality in some cases and it leads to corrupt convictions in many ways. Detective Sergeant White would have convinced himself that what he was doing was morally correct at all times but outside the law. Once a guardian of the peace becomes judge and jury the system will, inevitably, collapse.

We tend to forget in this debate that our police force is unarmed and we must bear in mind the dangerous characters that live in society. These people are not only subversives but also function in drugs gangs and will willingly discharge weapons as an occupational hazard. Even the louts out drinking and taking drugs will use knives against members of the force. Our uniformed police put themselves in harms way as a matter of duty.

The Garda is uniquely based on the principle of morale and we, as politicians, have a duty to morale as much as possible while holding the Garda to account for the misdeeds of individual members. We should remember this throughout this debate.

I wish to share time with Deputy Tom Hayes. I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue. The revelations of recent years, culminating in the Morris report, struck horror in the hearts of people who had great respect for the Garda through the years and who had been well served by the Garda. The Garda is, after all, what stands between us and anarchy and it is frightening for people to see such a systems failure, along with corruption, at the heart of what we regarded as a force above corruption.

A complete change is needed to deal with the issues that have been highlighted and to equip the Garda to address the changing face of Ireland, the type of crime evident today, rising crime levels and the nature of crime. Mindless crime still exists but very sophisticated crime has grown. Cold, calculated crime and violent, brutish behaviour are incomprehensible to people and a different kind of force is needed to deal with them.

I want to talk about traffic management.

The Deputy is a long way from that issue.

I am, but not as long as some people have been. Traffic management relates to the role of the Garda, the number of gardaí on the streets and the demands made on them in all areas. The Minister will be aware of the drain on Garda crime fighting resources caused by traffic management.

I am raising this issue in the context of what was seen in Bray last week, our first experience of total gridlock. It has been forecast some time and we may have thought we had experienced gridlock until we saw what occurred last Wednesday and realised it is something that takes hours to undo. This kind of incident will occur with increasing frequency in coming years. Huge investment is being made in public transport, which will make a significant difference, but the payback for such investment is seven to ten years away. Meanwhile traffic volumes will grow if the economy continues to grow, which I hope it does.

Not only will traffic grow but the big dig on the M50 will cause huge disruption as it has just commenced and will continue for at least five years. Metros are being announced by the day along with various Luas lines. When all of these projects are under way, or when even one of them is under way, phenomenal disruption will be caused and it will be essential that the very best quality and volume of traffic management is available to us.

Last week's incident was caused by a broken pipe but even smaller factors, such as a broken traffic light, a puncture or a traffic cone that falls into a traffic lane, can cause chaos. There can be a ripple effect across the city bringing an entire section to a halt. It takes hours to undo this. This problem will persist. To cut a long story short, an Operation Freeflow type regime is necessary throughout the year. Perhaps this is too much to ask of the Garda Síochána because it has much more important work to do. Nevertheless, a mobile, rapid reaction force on constant patrol is needed to regulate and control traffic while the "big dig", as it is known, takes place.

The Minister indicated the traffic corps has approximately 700 gardaí but only one fifth of this number are on duty at any time. In addition, there are only 48 mobile gardaí on motorbikes. I do not know how many of the 160 recent recruits are on duty in Dublin at any one time. It will become increasingly clear that even this investment will be insufficient as the big dig progresses.

I ask the Minister to examine a number of ideas. While I do not propose to be prescriptive, I will outline some ideas in the hope of generating discussion on how we will manage traffic in years ahead. Is it possible to provide support for the traffic corps which would enable it to provide high visibility patrols on motorways and key junctions and, crucially, in the vicinity of major works? In this context, will the Minister consider establishing an elite corps within the Garda Reserve that would receive special training in traffic management which would allow its members to become involved in regulating and directing traffic? I am conscious that not everyone has the specific skills required to manage traffic and that errors can cause monumental problems.

Will the Minister consider allowing security officers to undertake certain traffic regulation functions? As he will be aware, security staff are being licensed and must receive special training in a range of FETAC validated modules. Could this training include a module on traffic management? I do not suggest that security staff be allowed to direct traffic willy-nilly. Could those who are employed by shopping centres, hospitals, industrial estates and other private facilities to manage car parks and direct traffic on site be allowed to direct traffic on public roads in the vicinity of their workplace? Many of those who have been tempted to do so, having seen traffic from their facility causing a problem on a public road, have been warned by traffic management gardaí that they will be charged with causing an obstruction if they direct traffic on a public highway. It is regrettable the private sector is not allowed to solve this problem.

I live near Dundrum town centre, which is constantly on the knife edge of chaos. This is particularly the case as Christmas approaches. Given that the centre employs highly qualified staff to manage its 3,500 car park spaces and five entrances, why are five gardaí being deployed to the centre to manage traffic under Operation Freeflow when they may be required elsewhere? The shopping centre is prepared to pay for its staff to do this job under the direction of gardaí. The Garda needs all the help it can get because crime is increasing and gardaí are required on the streets to detect crime, control the drugs problem, deal with crime gangs and carry out the many other functions for which they receive specific and expensive training, much of which is not necessary for the performance of traffic duties. The Garda Síochána will require assistance to continue its vital work. As the Minister will be aware, traffic management places a significant drain on Garda resources.

In recent years, I have sounded like a broken record in predicting traffic mayhem in Dublin because we have been on the cusp of mayhem for many years. No one living in the commuter belt would accuse me of exaggerating the problem because while traffic in the city centre is managed relatively well, those living on either side of the M50 are experiencing hell. The city will also experience hell when the dig for the metro commences and the Garda will require significant assistance to manage the problem.

To give an example, in the first month of the works on the M50——

The Deputy has five minutes left.

I will conclude with a story because it is instructive.

The wait will have been worth it.

The M50 upgrade started in August during good weather when many people were on holidays and the level of commuting was much reduced. In the first month of the works, 100 road traffic accidents occurred on the stretch of road between the N4 and Ballymount. Every one of these accidents caused a major traffic jam because the cars involved could not be moved to the hard shoulder and insufficient resources were available to the Garda Síochána to allow additional gardaí to be deployed.

The normal traffic patrol on the M50 cannot cope with the volume of traffic on the road. If a patrol is located at an interchange at the N7 and a disaster takes place at Ballymount, it cannot get to the scene. In addition, gardaí do not have towing equipment. The problem deteriorated as the weather worsened and nights grew longer. The upgrade commenced only recently and the problem will get even worse. I ask the Minister to consider the examine the issues I have raised.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to say a few words on an important subject. Since the foundation of the State, the body of men and women known as the Garda Síochána has protected the State and its citizens through difficult times. The force has undergone a major transition since it was established by W. T. Cosgrave and his Government following the foundation of the State. Since then, it has had to contend with the Troubles and more recent changes. Almost every day, members of the force must investigate horrific murders, often committed in the most terrible circumstances. I admire gardaí for pursuing those involved and bringing cases to a conclusion in circumstances that are frequently difficult for all involved.

The changing face of Ireland is also bringing the drugs problem to the fore. While I know little about drugs, they are one of the greatest scourges affecting urban areas and small towns and villages. No one has grasped the nettle and addressed the problem. In the smallest villages in my constituency I listen to teachers, publicans, gardaí and others relate tales about drugs. It is frightening to hear what young people at college are mixing and drinking when they go out at night.

The Garda Síochána must be given the additional resources required to tackle the drugs problem. Additional funding, preferably in the budget, will be a good investment in future generations.

During the recent debate on drink driving the Minister replied to a question I asked about introducing drug tests for drivers. Some countries, notably Australia, have introduced such tests. Driving on country roads in my constituency I often see people driving cars at high speeds. A test is needed to determine whether such drivers have taken drugs. I wanted to mention the development of the Garda training college in Templemore in the northern part of my constituency but I am pressed for time.

Public trust in the Garda must be built upon. When I was young, we respected the gardaí who advised us and told us what to do. There are good people in the Garda Síochána in stations across the country protecting and advising people in their communities. There is trust but a certain section of the Garda Síochána does not have that great a relationship with the public. The Department, the public and the Garda must work to build trust. The public and the Garda must feel they are all together on crime, road safety and burglaries.

Rural Garda stations once housed a garda who knew everyone in the community. Just as the local politician knew everyone's politics, the garda knew who the real rogues were. Government policy should be to preserve those rural stations because a Garda presence in the community helps to build up the trust between the Garda Síochána and the people.

I am delighted to have the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. Earlier, I was caught in gridlock in Bray and I was wondering if the Dáil was gridlocked on something other than police discipline and management. I was delighted, however, to hear there will be a large investment in public transport and that we will get a good payback in seven to ten years. It is a long-term process.

I listened to the Tánaiste, in his capacity as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, speak about the desirability of a policing and security committee separate from the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. As he said this, I looked at the pile of reports on my desk that included two years of accounts and reports from the Garda, two strategy statements from the force, a report on the Garda ombudsman commission and a report on the Garda Inspectorate. Over the past year, as Chairman of the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, I have been saying to myself that I was neglecting my duty by not bringing these reports to the committee for discussion to hear the advice of the likes of Deputy Jim O'Keeffe. We would also like to hear from the Commissioner and other senior gardaí about what is happening. Time constraints, however, mean we have been unable to do the job we should be doing. The Tánaiste stated that the Dáil is the police authority of this State. We must find a way to do the job a policing authority should do by bringing the Garda in to account for future strategy, past actions and present structures. That way we can ensure we are happy with the force. The establishment of a separate policing and security committee would be a good idea and I would like to see it established sooner rather than later.

Much of the thinking on accountability and a police authority comes from Northern Ireland, which has a different system to ours. The Garda is universally accepted and looks after not just policing matters but the security of the State. There are many areas where State security cannot be compromised by an open approach and these areas must remain confidential. Having gone through a number of the reports of Mr. Justice Barron, however, I believe the crime and security branch has a legacy of secrecy and information does not come out of it. There is probably a need to examine that section of the Garda Síochána to bring it into line with best practice.

Policing should be based on the consent of the public to being policed by their peers. People who live in our communities go into Templemore to accept the onerous task of being a garda knowing that they enjoy the backing of the community to perform their duties and uphold the law. That is important. Different communities, however, give differing amounts of consent. In communities affected by poverty, deprivation and crime, there is less respect for gardaí. The easiest way to address that is by getting rid of the crime and improving the standards of living of those in such areas. In my constituency, however, there are young people who feel they are being harassed by the gardaí. The new management system and changes in disciplinary procedures will improve this situation and the co-operation between these young people and the police will get better and things will change.

I always think of a Garda station as being like a school, where the principal of the school sets the ethos. The other teachers take their lead from the principal and the pupils behave in a disciplined and respectful way if the proper ethos exists. The same applies to Garda stations. There are a number of Garda stations in my area: Terenure, Crumlin, Sundrive Road, Kilmainham, Kevin Street and Ballyfermot. I am aware of some disquieting stories about some Garda stations where a young fellow up from Templemore is met by the old hands who tell him to forget everything he has learned in Templemore. I had hoped this culture was a thing of the past but it will take time to have the management and people in place who can bring modern human resource methods to the management of personnel.

Like any employees, gardaí must be managed, controlled and motivated. They must be encouraged and thanked for doing a good job. They must have the respect of the people they serve and those who are above them. There is a need from a micro-management point of view for each Garda station to be a good example of a great Garda station and one which would earn four stars in comparison to some other station.

I congratulate the Minister for introducing the Garda Reserve in a way that has gained the confidence of all gardaí. Some questions are still outstanding but I am confident they are small questions compared to those posed when the Garda Reserve was first mooted. I hope the Garda Representative Association will come on board with respect to the Garda Reserve. Those who have applied and have been successfully inducted into the reserve are our own people from the communities they serve. They are not weirdos or Hitlerites but just ordinary people who want to contribute to the public good and who want to serve the people in a meaningful way which will improve life for all. I refer to the communities of the elderly in my constituency and in all other constituencies, rural and urban. People want to see gardaí on the roads. The Garda Reserve is as strong a force as any other part of the Garda Síochána for providing security to those people. The Minister has grabbed this issue by the scruff of the neck and it is operating very well. It will help improve the overall management of individual Garda units.

The reports of the Morris tribunal make for awful reading. The Barr report highlighted weaknesses in Garda management and George Birmingham investigated the Dean Lyons case. The publication of these reports does not enhance the Garda Síochána except that it will allow for the acknowledgement that improvements are needed and can be made. Many of these improvements have already been set in train by the Minister, particularly the recommendations of Mr. Justice Morris concerning Garda discipline and accountability. The Minister has put in law the need for gardaí to account for their actions.

It is hoped to upgrade the Garda standard to make the force comparable to a similar sized commercial enterprise such as IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland or the Bank of Ireland. Leading edge management techniques must be applied in the Garda Síochána. The civilianisation of the force to include top notch management people who are competent and able and who have at heart the good of the country and a wish to do a good job, is very important. The action being taken by the Tánaiste with regard to management, the inspectorate and the Garda ombudsman commission, will bring about a different Garda force which will be more effective. It will be a force of which we can be even prouder in the future.

I wish to share time with Deputy Perry.

I compliment the Acting Chairman, Deputy Penrose, on the production of his award-winning book which I hope is in the best sellers' list. He is the most substantial Acting Chairman we have had in the Chair for some time.

My contribution to this debate will be brief. Every man and woman who puts on the uniform of the Garda Síochána must understand they serve their country and the public to the highest levels of integrity, commitment and public service. I know the Minister shares that view and he speaks to young recruits and trainees in that fashion.

In a discussion of the Nally report and related matters, it must be remembered that the families of the 31 victims of the Omagh bomb in August 1998 must be central to all our thoughts. We can never forget the trauma and desperation of these innocent families and they are entitled to know the truths about the events that led to the brutal murder of their loved ones.

I have spoken on a previous occasion in this House about the Nally report to which I was given brief access by the Minister in 2004. While I fully recognise the competence and integrity of the members of the Nally group, I expressed some reservations previously about the nature of the task they were asked to undertake. The House will recall that the Nally investigation and report had its origins in a report which was prepared for the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Ms Nuala O'Loan, into various allegations made by Detective Sergeant John White. Some time later, I met with Ms O'Loan to discuss this matter and she informed me that she regarded those allegations so seriously that she travelled down to Dublin on the train to inform the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donoghue. The Nally group was then asked to examine the subject matter of her report. While the report deals in some detail with that aspect of the original allegations, I am concerned that numbers of individuals who should have been interviewed by the group as part of their inquiry, were not contacted. For example, the investigators in the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland's office were never contacted by the Nally group nor were the PSNI investigators into the Omagh bombing. Given the high level of co-operation that exists and existed then between the RUC-PSNI and the Garda Síochána, such contacts should have been made as these people might have been able to help with the inquiry.

Of far more concern to me and I have referred to it obliquely in the House before, is the failure of the group to interview the Garda informant, Mr. Paddy Dixon, who was a central figure in the allegations made. Mr. Dixon was part of the Garda operation aimed at infiltrating the Real IRA. Despite the fact he was protected by the Government and under the witness protection programme at the time the Nally group was conducting its inquiries, the group never interviewed him based on legal advice. I found it incredible that a person being protected by the State at a high cost to the taxpayer could not have been contacted and given sufficient assurances that he could co-operate with the work of an inquiry into allegations to which he was centrally connected.

Mr. Dixon made contact with me more than a year ago. I met him on a dark street and had to ask him if he was armed. He replied he was not. I spoke to him at some length about his life and his involvement in certain activities. He made it perfectly clear he wished to have his story told. He wanted to have his side of life fully expressed in terms of his innocence and the work he was involved in. Subsequent to that meeting I informed a member of the Nally group that Mr. Dixon had contacted me and I had met him. I also contacted the Taoiseach privately on this matter.

I do not know whether the Nally group or the Government have made contact with Mr. Dixon since, or whether he has made contact with them. If I was in a position to speak to a central witness in this important matter concerning the Omagh bombing and its surrounds, I would have thought the Government would have been able to do so too. It is critical for the families of the Omagh victims, the Garda and others who were the subject of John White's allegations to reach a point where we can be absolutely sure the allegations have been thoroughly, conclusively and comprehensively examined. Ensuring such co-operation from everyone might bring final closure to an inquiry which is of such fundamental importance to the way we do our business in this State, to the persons working for the State, and ultimately in respect of the families of those who were so tragically and unfortunately bereaved at that time.

I am delighted to speak on this important issue. Kathleen O'Toole recommends sweeping changes to Garda structures. The Garda inspectorate will investigate how the force is structured and will make recommendations to the Government. The executive committee, chaired by the Garda Commissioner, will include two sworn officers, deputy commissioners, a civilian deputy commissioner and a civilian legal adviser. A newly created team of existing assistant commissioners shall be given more operational power.

Two reports have recommended the civilianisation and reform of the Garda and that is to be welcomed. The Government has been in office for nine and a half years, and despite the recent inquiries which have adversely impacted on the perception of the Garda, it is important we take Kathleen O'Toole's report on board. Her report was beneficial and she felt she had to introduce an internal report. I have no doubt her recommendations will have a huge impact, but they need to be acted upon.

One of the recommendations is to put more gardaí on the beat. When one considers the anti-social behaviour that is taking pace in every city and town, it is clear we need more gardaí on the beat. The Garda's shift system is split in three. Arising from this, there can be instances where there are very few gardaí on the ground. There has been a lack of investment in Garda resources by the State, ranging from Garda patrol cars to e-mail access and mobile phones. The PULSE system has failed to deliver. It is a disappointing return when one considers the €8 billion budget that has been put into the force.

We must address the lack of gardaí on the ground. I have often felt that gardaí who retire represent a huge loss of talent. Many of them have a lot of experience and could have continued to work on a renewed contract. Garda sergeants must retire at 57 and that is a huge loss too. We are now introducing gardaí on a voluntary basis, but it is a shame when one sees the talented gardaí in their 50s who are being lost to the force. I have spoken to gardaí who, while wishing to avail of their redundancy payments, could be re-employed on a day shift basis. The uptake on that could be significant, and those gardaí would work during the day and not on the typical Garda shift system. We see contracts in the public service being extended to 65, and up to 70 in certain cases. It is a shame Garda sergeant contracts could not be extended too.

I compliment Senator Maurice Hayes on the fine report he produced. Kathleen O'Toole has also come up with clear recommendations within a short period of time. Her recommendations are in the area of subsidiarity where power is given to assistant commissioners who will have responsibilities in their own region and be empowered to act decisively. When one looks at the massive increase in the population, regrettably the huge expectation of quality of service is not being delivered. People are disillusioned with detection rates.

Businesses are making huge investments to install basic security systems. They are investing thousands of euro in security but there is no capital write-off on such equipment. We have seen in recent weeks that crime is now affecting businesses in small towns and villages. Businesses with high cash flows, be they petrol stations or supermarkets, are being targeted.

I sincerely hope the implementation of these recommendations will lead to more gardaí on the ground. This is not currently in evidence. There is no facility for Garda overtime which is needed in certain cases. We all have to deal with anti-social behaviour and the incidence of theft. Many rural Garda stations have been closed, although I noticed that some of these are now being reactivated in Sligo. I attended a meeting last week involving Sligo Corporation and the chief superintendent. While I must commend the effectiveness of the Garda's explanations, they have difficulties in terms of back up and funding. The provision of security cameras for Sligo was announced by two Ministers for Justice, Equality and Law Reform but it has not yet been delivered.

The RAPID programme was introduced by the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and cameras are very much needed in estates. There has been a lack of funding and the deficit which will have to be paid by the corporation is huge. We talk about embracing new technology but this has not happened. We should look at the type of technology private companies install in their businesses, including closed circuit television cameras.

There are large numbers of people on the busy thoroughfares of Sligo city at 2 a.m. A commitment was given to provide the technology to monitor them but nothing has happened. I hope there will be a positive response given it has been announced on numerous occasions.

I refer to the new Garda station for Sligo. The facilities for over 100 gardaí are totally inadequate. The new Garda station has been put on the long finger by the Tánaiste. Commitments can be made and we can talk about all these reports but are there more gardaí on the streets and is there greater detection of crime?

There is a regional Garda station in my home town of Ballymote. It is so bad that no prisoner can be detained in it. It is a 19th century building operating in the 21st century. This regional Garda station covers the best part of south Sligo. The facilities are totally inadequate. A new site has been bought and I sincerely hope the contract will be signed and that work will commence on this much needed facility.

The civilianisation and reform of the Garda Síochána would be very welcome. However, actions speak louder than words. We call for the immediate allocation of funding for these much needed developments.

I wish to be associated with the remarks of Deputy Kenny. The Chairman of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs is well known. I am a big fan of Deputy Penrose's work and I wish him well with his publication. I might get him to sign a copy for me.

I speak not only as a Dublin based Deputy but as a member of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. I was at the launch of the final report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Bombing of Kay's Tavern in Dundalk this evening. Those of us who were at it were really struck by the achievement of the sub-committee. It made some very profound recommendations over which I will not go now because we will have an opportunity to do so during another debate. I take the opportunity to congratulate my colleagues, under the chairmanship of Deputy Ardagh, on that report. Every Member of the Oireachtas will want to read the report and I suspect they will be hugely affected by and concerned about it.

I listened very carefully to the Tánaiste's fine speech on this issue. It is very important we support him. Members are entitled to make political points with which I have no problem. I am glad Deputy Perry mentioned every street in Sligo so if I mention Tallaght a few times, I will not get into trouble.

I was wondering how long it would take before Deputy O'Connor mentioned it.

I often say I come from a bygone era when we had a different view of the gardaí. Thank God I was never in trouble with the gardaí, although I can never understand why. I used to see the local garda on the street on his bicycle threatening to stop us playing football or whatever. I fully agree with what was said about the need for the public to trust and have confidence in gardaí and to see them as often as possible. I often say young people should not just see a garda when they are in trouble because then it is too late. It is important we understand the Garda Síochána upholds the law and, generally speaking, does much great work which we should applaud. However, we should also understand there are problems.

Last night when going home to Tallaght, funnily enough, I was stopped by a road block at which gardaí from the traffic corps were carrying out mandatory breath-testing. I mention it because I was never breathalysed before. The garda told me there was not even a hint of alcohol in my system which sort of sums up my sad life. It was a cold winter's night and those gardaí were doing their job in a very effective and friendly way. That is what the public needs to see. However, when there is trouble, we expect the gardaí to respond. Members of the public, particularly those who will not be in trouble with the Garda or break the law, want gardaí to carry out that type of service. The perception must be of an honest, hardworking and effective Garda force which does its job. We should applaud that work where we can.

I refer to one aspect of the Tánaiste's speech and I will be parochial. The Tánaiste spoke about the commission of investigation into the Dean Lyons case. The late Dean Lyons was a constituent of mine and I met him on a number of occasions. I know his family very well and I spoke to his mother recently. The case caused much upset not only in my constituency and in Tallaght where he lived but in many communities throughout the country. We should remind ourselves that a horrendous crime remains unsolved. There are many rumours as to who carried it out and there is much talk and speculation about charges being brought and so on. However, it remains on the record as an unsolved case.

Like many colleagues, when I get involved in cases such as that of the late Dean Lyons, one is affected by them. We do our job without fear or favour but when events such as the Dean Lyons case occur, one is affected by them. I think about the late Dean Lyons and I believe all of us who came in contact with him ask whether we could have done anything else, spoken to him more or met him more often. There are still many unanswered questions in regard to his case and the investigation.

The Tánaiste was very honest in his approach today. It is an unsolved case and there are many questions. I do not know how the Tánaiste can create a situation where closure will be achieved. I speak for many in my community when I say this case still upsets and affects people. I have no doubt the families of those two ladies in Grangegorman are also deeply affected by it. Each time we discuss the case and raise it in the public domain, I am sure it causes even more hurt and upset. The Tánaiste would have much support if he could find a mechanism to resolve some of these issues.

This is an important debate and many of us will have different views. As I said, we will all have political points to make to which I will contribute. I look forward to the debate tomorrow.

Barr
Roinn