Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 31 Mar 2015

Vol. 873 No. 1

Leaders' Questions

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Taoiseach might often have heard it said that there would be no need for the establishment of statutory inquiries to inquire into issues if we had clear and transparent statements on the floor of Parliament from the Taoiseach or indeed Government Ministers about specific issues. The Taoiseach will recall that on 25 March 2014, he informed the House that the former Garda Commissioner was resigning. He said that announcing his retirement must have been a very difficult decision for the Commissioner to make. The Taoiseach also announced that he was establishing a commission of inquiry into the tape recordings in many Garda stations since the 1980s and the potential impact of the contents of some tapes on cases being heard, cases going through courts, cases to be followed and cases that are yet to be dealt with.

Observing the civil case of Ian Bailey, I did not see the world collapsing in terms of any recordings of phone conversations at Garda stations. I remember that when the Taoiseach asked myself and Deputy Adams in on that date, there was a certain sense of very grave issues around phone recordings that would essentially undermine almost the entire judicial system and could lead to the unravelling of many convictions. When he informed the House of the Garda Commissioner's resignation, the Taoiseach did not mention that he had sent the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality to the Commissioner's house. The entire Cabinet found out about the former Commissioner's resignation through the media despite the fact that the Taoiseach had had some very important meetings at the time with key officials and, in particular, with the Minister for Justice and Equality.

I have a number of questions for the Taoiseach. In the first instance, why has the Taoiseach consistently refused to give a straightforward account to this House of all the circumstances that led to the resignation of the former Garda Commissioner and the reason he sent the Secretary General to the home of the former Garda Commissioner? Second, can the Taoiseach confirm if he was called to appear before the commission a second time, if he believes that in confirming this he would be breaking the law, and what law forbids the Taoiseach confirming whether he gave evidence?

In regard to the module of the Fennelly commission dealing with the resignation of the former Garda Commissioner, will the Taoiseach give a commitment to the House that he will publish the final draft report of that module immediately it is received by him and that there will be no attempt to delay its publication?

The Taoiseach

The Deputy asked a number of questions. The reason for setting up the Fennelly commission of investigation was the recording over many years at Garda stations of citizens' telephone calls without their knowledge. This matter was brought to my attention at that time, with potentially serious consequences. The commission of investigation was set up primarily for that reason. The Deputy has also tabled a parliamentary question to me on this matter.

Subsequent to the Government having made the decision to establish the commission the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality wrote to me and requested that two other matters be included in the terms of reference of the Fennelly commission. These matters were the sequence of events leading to the retirement of the former Garda Commissioner and the matters concerning the issuing by him of a letter in regard to matters raised a number of days previous. I agreed with the Oireachtas committee and included those matters word for word in the terms of reference of the Fennelly investigation. The Deputy's comments today differ slightly from those he made previously about the Fennelly commission. Mr. Justice Fennelly has an exemplary record. It is a matter for him as to how he conducts his investigation. He is not subject to pressure from anyone, including the Deputy or me.

On the question of my contributing to the commission of investigation, I have complied fully with my responsibilities in this matter. Mr. Justice Fennelly wrote to me and I responded to him. I was called before the commission of investigation and I responded to that. The law states clearly that it is offence to make any comment about any evidence given before the commission. I took that view literally. I am satisfied that I have complied with my responsibilities in so far as the commission of investigation is concerned. The Deputy can rest assured that when Mr. Justice Fennelly issues the final report in respect of the commission of investigation, I will publish it.

Deputy Michael Healy-Rae

Maybe that will be after the election.

Deputy Micheál Martin

There should be no big deal about the Taoiseach confirming whether he was called to appear before the commission a second time. I find it difficult to understand the reason he refuses to confirm that. There is no law that says he cannot say whether he has attended the commission. The law under which the commission of investigation was established does not state that. It does state that a person may not go into the content of the evidence given, but no one has asked that the Taoiseach do so. As I understand it, the Taoiseach was only asked if he been recalled by the commission or if he appeared before it a second time. It is clear from comments made by the commission spokesperson, who is a solicitor, and the law itself that there is nothing stopping the Taoiseach confirming whether he was called to appear before the commission a second time. It is important that a Taoiseach does not cite something that is not true. It is not true for the Taoiseach to say it is an offence for him to confirm whether he appeared before the inquiry a second time. The Taoiseach has stated publicly that it would be an offence to do so. It would not. The Taoiseach should withdraw that public assertion. As leader of this country he needs to state clearly what the law actually states and not otherwise.

An Ceann Comhairle

A question, please. Thank you.

Deputy Micheál Martin

I welcome that the Taoiseach has indicated he will publish the module of the Fennelly commission dealing with the resignation of the former Garda Commissioner immediately it is received.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

He was sacked.

Deputy Micheál Martin

I do not believe the motivation for Government including that module was the Oireachtas committee request.

An Ceann Comhairle

Sorry, Deputy, we are over time.

Deputy Micheál Martin

I can only surmise about the choreography that went on behind the scenes. It seems to me that essentially this bought time for the Taoiseach.

An Ceann Comhairle

A question, please. Thank you.

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Taoiseach could have prevented all that if he had answered the simple and straightforward questions which I and others in this House put to him on the floor of this House about what he said to the Secretary General, what the Secretary General said to the former Garda Commissioner and so on.

An Ceann Comhairle

Sorry, Deputy, you are over time.

Deputy Micheál Martin

However, the Taoiseach chose not to do so. Again, parliamentary accountability was the loser in terms of the sequence of events that have unfolded. The reason I put the question regarding the publication of this report is because the progress report was not available on the website, or to the media, until six weeks after it had been received.

The Taoiseach

The Fianna Fáil spokesperson requested that a commission of investigation be established. That is what the Government approved at my request. The commission is independent and not subject to pressure from any quarter. The terms of reference are very clear. They were adopted by the Government and voted on and adopted by this House. They include the two matters referred to by me in response to the Deputy's earlier question. This was part of a series of changes in the judicial system, including the establishment of a policy authority to restore trust and confidence in the work of An Garda Síochána and the justice system in general. The Deputy will be aware of those changes. The Deputy will also be aware that I published Mr. Justice Cooke's report in June 2014 and Mr. Guerin's report in May 2014. As in the case of Mr. Justice Cooke and Mr. Guerin, Mr. Justice Fennelly should be allowed to do his work. I take the view that the law is clear that it is an offence to comment in respect of any evidence given before the commission of investigation. As I said earlier, I am satisfied I have complied fully with my responsibilities in terms of my having responded in writing to Mr. Justice Fennelly and having appeared before the commission. Mr. Justice Fennelly should be allowed to finalise his report.

In terms of the requests I received, both of which were in writing and have been published, the first was in respect of a request for an extension of time, which was granted. I can confirm to the Deputy that whenever Mr. Justice Fennelly submits his report, it will be published. The intention is that it will be published. It is a commission of investigation report that will not be a secret or left lying on a shelf.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I have received representations from families of clients of the Redwood care facility in County Meath. One such client, Eamonn Kennedy, was admitted to Redwood in January 2010. I have his family's permission to raise this case with the Taoiseach. Following several falls in Redwood, Eamonn was hospitalised with a head injury and lacerations. He was hospitalised a second time with further lacerations and bruising to his upper body, arms, abdomen and legs. In 2012, a consultant in emergency medicine noted that several aspects of the bruising were suspicious of non-accidental injury and that there appeared to be no medical explanation for that bruising.

Another citizen, who, prior to moving to Redwood in 2013, was living independently with HSE support, within two days of moving to the facility was given anti-psychotic medication and taken off his gluten and dairy-free diet despite family objections. He suffered nine convulsions and was admitted to hospital a few days later. He subsequently returned to Redwood and remained there for three months on anti-psychotic medication against his family's wishes. He is no longer living at Redwood.

The Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, has said that there is a significant denial of the civil, legal and human rights of citizens at Redwood and that residents there have also been subject to severe deprivations of liberty and freedom of movement, including a locked door policy. It should be remembered that citizens at this facility are there on a voluntary basis and that their care at this private practice is being paid for. Given these disturbing reports and others which have come to light about other care centres, is it not the case this State is failing in its responsibilities towards citizens with intellectual disabilities who are residents of these facilities?

The Taoiseach

I would have appreciated if Deputy Adams had given me some prior notice of a specific case he wished to raise in respect of a nursing home, in this case Redwood. I have said on many previous occasions that the fragile, elderly and vulnerable deserve to have nothing but the best level of care and consideration given to them irrespective of where they are. I am aware that there are regulatory process issues at Redwood and I understand that HIQA is in discussion with it about these matters. When the example of Áras Attracta was brought to the notice of the House, I said that was not an example of care, but an example of control over fragile, vulnerable and in some cases voiceless people.

The HSE is taking a series of actions. The next national meeting of all the care providers takes place on 9 April and I understand that will be the second meeting in as many months. Clearly between this and then, the issue at point between HIQA and the managers in Redwood is one that will obviously be followed through.

As the Deputy is aware, there are also the whistleblowing procedures put in place by the HSE and a confidential recipient in respect of complaints in this matter, Leigh Gath, has been appointed. I am not sure whether the complaint in respect of this particular nursing facility was brought to the attention of the confidential recipient. It is a serious matter and I hope it can be brought to a conclusion where the truth of the matter can be held and that patients not just there, but everywhere else, receive the highest level of care and consideration from those who have responsibility for them in these circumstances.

Deputy Gerry Adams

The issue here goes beyond the two cases I have raised with the Taoiseach. I also raised these in writing with the former Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly. I also sent him photographs that Eamonn Kennedy's sister, Maeve, took of his injuries at that time. The Garda has also investigated the matter.

At the core of this is the concern among people about outsourcing care for citizens with a disability to the private sector. The care of our most vulnerable citizens is not compatible with the profit motive. Redwood is part of the privately-owned Talbot group that is contracted to the HSE to provide services. In December, HIQA reported that in this facility there were recurrent and lengthy durations of physical intervention; there was an incident in which a patient struggled to breathe and turned blue during physical constraint; and medication was administered by injection during episodes of challenging behaviour. HIQA further recommended that no new admissions be allowed until these issues were addressed. As the Taoiseach has said, we will see all of that working its way out in the upcoming period.

An Ceann Comhairle

I thank the Deputy.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Tá mé críochnaithe anois. I believe the Taoiseach when I hear him saying that citizens should have the very best care possible, but that is not happening. Where it is not happening, how are we to know about it? Will it be a drip feed? Is it not now time to have a fully independent root-and-branch inquiry into all care facilities for citizens with disabilities, particularly intellectual disabilities, in the State?

The Taoiseach

The people in the Redwood residential centre are residents as opposed to patients and they deserve the very best level of care and attention. I empathise with the Deputy's comments in respect of the persons whose cases he has mentioned here and is entitled to raise with their permission. How will we know about these things? Clearly, there have been incidents in the past, the last of which was the Áras Attracta case, which brought about a real focus on how exactly people should become aware of lack of care, attention and consideration. That is why the confidential recipient was appointed and that is why HIQA in its independence - it is completely independent in how it carries out its responsibilities and in its authority - is entitled to examine this centre or any other centre and bring its findings to the attention of the HSE, but also to the attention of the proprietors and managers of any facility where this applies.

I do not have the detail of the HIQA analysis to the extent that the Deputy has before him. However, all in the House would share the view that elderly, vulnerable, fragile and voiceless people deserve nothing but the best level of care and attention. That is why we have a confidential recipient. That is why we have a completely independent authority that is able to analyse these things. Where there are criminal activities, they are a matter for the Garda to investigate, as it has done and is doing in a number of cases. In terms of care, consideration, treatment and comfort for elderly people who are residents in locations such as this or patients in nursing homes, we must be seen to be able to uphold the very highest standards. Where that does not apply, the law must apply and appropriate action must be taken.

Deputy Mick Wallace

On 28 January, I asked the Taoiseach to tell the House when he was first personally made aware of serious Garda malpractice in the Athlone area. Given that his memory is normally pretty good, I was surprised that he failed to recall it.

In 2012, a garda went to see the Taoiseach in Castlebar and told him about serious malpractice by a certain superintendent in the Athlone area. He told the Taoiseach, "If you don't do something about him, you will be reading about him in the papers". The Taoiseach expressed shock at that time about what this gentleman told him. However, later that year the Taoiseach gave approval for the promotion of this superintendent to chief superintendent. This same chief superintendent is now the subject of three different investigations.

That same garda contacted the Taoiseach again in November 2014, which is why I was particularly surprised that he did not remember him in January. Even though the garda highlighted more malpractice by the same gentleman, he has since been moved to Phoenix Park to work in the implementation of the Garda Inspectorate report.

What hope is there for reform as long as the old hierarchy remains in place? Surely the Taoiseach must realise this is part of the problem and not the solution. It is more than a year since the Taoiseach got rid of the former Garda Commissioner, Martin Callinan. At this stage I am beginning to wonder why he bothered. The new Garda Commissioner is cut from the very same cloth and we are not looking at much different.

We have been speaking to some new whistleblowers of late, some of whom are trying to raise issues regarding gardaí involved in the drug trade. I will tell the Taoiseach what they are facing: harassment, bullying, intimidation, cover up, denial and delay. In one internal investigation, the garda about whom complaints had been made is being kept informed while those making the allegations are being harassed - all under the watch of the new commissioner. The same internal investigation has been going on for 11 months. It appears as if they are trying to break the man and I think they might.

Why would any garda be a whistleblower if it means being isolated and harassed for doing the right thing while the person about whom he is complaining gets promoted? Is the Taoiseach aware that since the Government did away with the confidential recipient, there has been no place for Garda whistleblowers to go because GSOC is not geared to deal with it? What will the Taoiseach do about it?

The Taoiseach

On the previous occasion the Deputy raised the matter here, I sent him a note asking him to supply the details about which he was talking. He did not respond to that note.

I reject his assertion in respect of the former Garda Commissioner. I reject his assertion in respect of the current Garda Commissioner.

The Government has taken action to introduce the most radical changes to the country's policing system since the foundation of the State. As the Deputy knows, the Government has no function in the proposals to appoint people as chief superintendents, except to have them approved or endorsed by the Garda Commissioner.

Deputy Mick Wallace

Exactly.

The Taoiseach

The situation regarding the appointment of commissioners has changed. It is an independent process. In this case, applications were sought nationally and internationally. The establishment of the policing authority is being followed through by the Minister for Justice and Equality. I expect that to be legislated for and enacted by the middle of May. Also, with regard to the continuation of GSOC and what it will be entitled to do, the appointment of a chairperson of GSOC is under consideration by the Government. That appointment should be made very quickly.

I do not accept what the Deputy says regarding bullying, harassment and the other issues he mentioned. I asked the Deputy for a note in respect of what he raised, but he chose not to respond. I would appreciate it if he would do so later.

Deputy Mick Wallace

That is a load of rubbish, and the Taoiseach knows it. He did not address the issues I raised. I never said the Taoiseach promoted him. I said he approved of it. Why would he approve the promotion of a superintendent to chief superintendent after being made aware of the fact that he was involved in serious Garda malpractice? Why in God's name would he do it? Will the Taoiseach explain that? He talks about the greatest reforms in the history of the State - what a load of baloney. He promised all kinds of reform last summer but it has been so minuscule, it is an embarrassment.

The Guerin report was released last May. The Government only established a commission of investigation nine months later. We probably will not see the full report of the Fennelly commission until after the election. We were due to have the report of the independent review mechanism last September but we still have not received it.

An Ceann Comhairle

A question please, Deputy.

Deputy Mick Wallace

The Garda authority was supposed to be up and running by December and God knows when we will get a watered down version of it. The report of the Garda Inspectorate was not even debated in the House. The latest-----

An Ceann Comhairle

This is Leaders' Questions, Deputy.

Deputy Mick Wallace

-----report on the penalty points was not debated in the House. The Taoiseach talks about things changing, but I have details of one Fine Gael backbencher who has three fixed charges against him.

An Ceann Comhairle

If you have any information, you should provide it.

Deputy Mick Wallace

They were not terminated, but they are kept on a shelf and the summonses were not served.

An Ceann Comhairle

This is Leaders' Questions. Will you ask your question? We are over time.

Deputy Mick Wallace

Will the Taoiseach not admit that bugger all has changed?

An Ceann Comhairle

Do not use bad language either.

Deputy Mick Wallace

The Taoiseach has no appetite for change. He likes the fact that policing is still politicised in Ireland and he will keep it that way. The Garda Commissioner does not wish to change things, and neither does he.

The Taoiseach

I sent Deputy Wallace a note asking him for details about what he raised on the last occasion, but he chose not to answer it.

Deputy Mick Wallace

This man went to the Taoiseach in Castlebar and the Taoiseach ignored him as well.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy chose not to respond to the Minister for Justice and Equality when she invited him to Farmleigh to give his views and proposals in respect of the work that was taking place.

The policing reforms include the establishment of the independent policing authority, the appointment of a chair designate for the new authority and the first ever international competition for the position of Garda Commissioner, which was run by the Public Appointments Service and involved the chair designate of the new authority. A similar open competition is currently under way for the positions of deputy commissioner of An Garda Síochána. There is also the provision of enhanced powers for the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, the passing of new legislation to protect whistleblowers and the reform and extension of freedom of information legislation. I expect that the legislation establishing the policing authority will be passed by the House by the end of May.

These are the most far-reaching reforms in policing in this country since the foundation of the State.