Vol. 898 No. 4
52. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if she is satisfied that investigations into allegations made by serving members of An Garda Síochána are being carried out in a way that ensures confidentiality; that all efforts are being made to avoid negative consequences for whistleblowers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [42367/15]
We have raised issues related to the Garda whistleblowers, Mr. Keith Harrison and Mr. Nick Kehoe, in here on a number of occasions. I know they have also written directly to the Minister. Their complaints were made officially for the first time in May 2014. They have been treated abysmally since then. Given that this coincided with the watch of the Garda Commissioner, Ms Nóirín O'Sullivan, and that of the Minister, how in God's name can she stand over how these two men have been treated?
The Deputy's question asks me if I am satisfied that investigations into allegations made by serving gardaí are being carried out in a way that ensures confidentiality and that all efforts are being made to avoid negative consequences for whistleblowers. However, the Deputy has come in here again today, as he has done on three previous occasions, and has given the names of whistleblowers. I am surprised in the first instance at how his concern over confidentiality equates with him mentioning the names of whistleblowers on the floor of the House.
They were in the public domain before now.
It is their confidentiality.
He wants these questions to be dealt with confidentially and yet he comes in here-----
I want them dealt with honestly.
He referred to confidentiality.
Of the process.
Of the process.
The Minister has the floor.
Yes. However, the Deputy has named people here and yet he says he wants these inquiries to be carried out in a confidential and sensitive way.
It is well past that.
Prior to the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 coming into operation, whistleblowing was provided for under the confidential reporting scheme. Each confidential recipient was required to transmit each confidential report to the Garda Commissioner. Only where a confidential report contained an allegation which related to the Garda Commissioner was it transmitted to the Minister. Obviously there were many safeguards in place, as the Deputy knows.
We now have the Protected Disclosures Act 2014. Protection for whistleblowers rightly prioritises the confidentiality of the system and the protection of the whistleblower, which is central to the efficacy of the entire process. I am satisfied that the legislative provisions now in place under the 2014 Act, including the protections afforded for whistleblowers, will prove to be an effective remedy for Garda members who wish to report their concerns regarding alleged wrongdoing.
I would be very concerned if I felt that the whistleblowers who are having their complaints investigated by An Garda Síochána were not being dealt with in the context of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014. It was brought in to ensure proper treatment of whistleblowers. The Deputy will have heard the Garda Commissioner and other members of An Garda Síochána talk about encouraging whistleblowers to come forward, confirming that they will be dealt with properly and their complaints will be assessed in keeping with the legislation as it stands.
That clearly is the intention and if there is information to the contrary, I want to know about it.
The Minister has been told about it.
The Minister has already been told about it. How any Garda whistleblower would dream of coming forward and being a whistleblower again is beyond me. I would be very surprised if one does given how these two men have been treated. Keith Harrison made his report in-----
I presume the Deputy has the permission of the individual.
I am sorry, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
Permission? We do not need permission.
He made his complaint in May 2014. The case has gone on for so long that he is no longer getting any pay from An Garda Síochána. He is on social welfare. After he made his complaint, the Garda initiated proceedings against him, dragged in a domestic, family matter and made dirt of the individual. Will anyone be answerable for how he has been treated? It is a given that this man will be proven correct in the long term. The Minister must realise that. In the meantime, some of the gardaí he complained about are suspended on full pay in Athlone and the midlands area. I understand that is the normal process. However, the whistleblower is getting no money from An Garda Síochána because of how things have been dragged out. It is interesting that a court order demanding the release of documents, which was supposed to be delivered by the Garda Síochána six weeks ago, did not happen. How in God's name could that happen? These two individuals have been put through hell. We have been worried about their mental health. It is just not true that proper protections are in place for these people. There is no protection for them. They have been treated abysmally.
Deputy Wallace has come in and has given details of individual cases on the floor of the Dáil, which I appreciate. He is obviously doing that because he thinks it is the right thing to do. I cannot comment on individual cases but we must be very careful in this House in discussing individual cases of whistleblowing. There is legislation in place, which is very new. An Garda Síochána is committed to implementing the legislation, which gives full protection to whistleblowers. If it emerges that it does not, it might well need to be amended but right now that is the legislation we have in place. The legislation on whistleblowers offers protection. It prioritises the confidentiality of the process, which is central. Deputy Wallace has heard what the Garda has had to say about dealing with complaints and putting robust procedures in place to examine cases. I am assured that is what is happening in relation to any cases being dealt with at present. Deputy Wallace is obviously being given other information. If he wants to supply that to me in any detail-----
I have written to the Minister.
-----other than he has already, I will pass on any relevant information but I do not discuss individual cases.
In one of the cases, the senior investigator from GSOC told his solicitor that the Garda was refusing to co-operate and would not supply documents he was looking for or comply with his requests. I have got the very same reply from the individual who made a complaint in Kilkenny. We have a serious problem. The absence of sanctions for indiscipline among senior gardaí is glaring. It seems that senior gardaí are untouchable in their own divisions and districts. There is no effective system to discipline senior gardaí who misbehave. They are lawless. I do not say the Commissioner is responsible for it all because I would say she does not even know what is going on half the time. There is a serious problem in how the organisation works. It is not the rank and file gardaí who are the culprits; it is senior gardaí who are not being held to account. These two people have been put through hell by senior Garda authorities and pressure is still being applied to them. They are not being treated properly. There are no protections for them. The Minister can talk about legislation until the cows come home. We have building regulations in this country as well that are the envy of the planet but when we do not apply them and we do not investigate building work, they are worth zero. The same applies to the legislation unless the rules and regulations are applied on the ground but that is not happening right now.
For the Deputy to come in here and say An Garda Síochána is lawless-----
Not all of them; some of them.
-----and that the senior management either do not know or care about practices within An Garda Síochána is an extraordinary claim to make. We have new management in An Garda Síochána. We have a Garda Commissioner who was recruited through an independent open process who is setting about the reform of An Garda Síochána, examining-----
It was not independent and open.
That is the management. The Garda Commissioner is the most senior person in An Garda Síochána. The Deputy is saying that An Garda Síochána is not following through on what the legislation tells it to do-----
Exactly.
-----in regard to whistleblowers. That is a most serious charge.
It is true.
My information is that all charges regarding whistleblowing are being dealt with under the protected disclosures legislation and are being-----
The Minister knows that is not true.
Deputy, please. The Minister has the floor.
I do not know that.
The Minister knows that is not true.
What I am telling the Deputy is that management in An Garda Síochána is serious and committed and is intent on reforming it, making it fit for purpose and implementing the legislation that is in place to deal with whistleblowers. That has to be done. If a whistleblower goes to management, the case has to be taken seriously, it has to be investigated and a report has to be made. The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, is in place as well to deal with any such complaints.
53. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Justice and Equality her views on the Private Members' Bill, Sentencing Council Bill 2015. [42456/15]
As the Minister may know, I have published the Sentencing Council Bill 2015. I am seeking for this State to implement a sentencing council, similar to what is in place in England and Wales, where clear sentencing guidelines are issued to the Judiciary based on consultation with the public and key stakeholders to ensure we can have accountability and consistency in the sentences handed out by the Judiciary. Does the Minister support that proposal?
As the Deputy will appreciate, judges are independent in the matter of sentencing, as in other matters concerning the exercise of judicial functions, subject only to the Constitution and the law. In regard to sentencing, the approach of the Oireachtas has generally been to specify in law a maximum penalty for an offence, so that a court, having considered all the circumstances of a case, may impose the appropriate penalty up to that maximum. The court is required to impose a sentence which is proportionate not only to the crime but to the individual offender in that process, identifying where on the sentencing range the particular case should lie and then applying any mitigating factors. An important safeguard rests in the power of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The superior courts have developed a substantial body of case law setting out general principles of sentencing. Sentencing practice is also being developed by a steering committee of the Judiciary which developed the Irish Sentencing Information System website, a pilot initiative designed to gather information about the range of sentences and other penalties across court jurisdictions. That system is being developed as a valuable tool not only for members of the Judiciary but also for lawyers, researchers and those concerned. I very much support that initiative, led by the Judicial Research Office.
The report of the Working Group on the Strategic Review of Penal Policy, which as the Deputy will know I published in July 2014, considered the issue of developing sentencing guidelines. The majority took the view that the primary role of developing sentencing guidelines is the responsibility of the Judiciary and does not lie in bringing forward detailed statutory based guidelines. I recognise that the Deputy has published a Bill on this issue. A sentencing council was not advocated by the Law Reform Commission in its report on mandatory sentencing, which was published in June 2013.
I advise the Deputy about a matter, which is not that well known, namely, that in 2014, the Court of Criminal Appeal issued a number of judgments which addressed the question of sentencing and which acknowledged the many factors that can be considered in individual cases which undermine the usefulness of direct comparisons between one case and another. Nonetheless, every effort to promote consistency should be made and, in that respect, it is appropriate for the courts to consider the provision of guidance on sentencing matters.
That is a remarkable response. The Minister should think about what a sentencing council is. The majority of members on the sentencing council in England and Wales are members of the judiciary and that protects the independence of the judiciary. They consult the public and stakeholders and issue guidelines so that every judge - in this State that would be the District and Circuit Courts up to the Supreme Court but, in particular, the District and Circuit Courts - is clear that he or she is accountable for the decision he or she makes in regard to the category of offence before him or her. We can think about some of the sentences handed out to people guilty of very grievous sexual offences in this State in recent years and of the insult that was to the victims, first and foremost, and to women who were horrified by what had happened.
The Government has not introduced a judicial council Bill or dealt with the issue of the appointment of members of the Judiciary, even though it has promised to do so time and again. The Minister has said that, in the context of a sentencing council model, the Judiciary is independent. It is calling for a judicial council Bill. The Chief Justice, Ms Susan Denham, has called for it, yet the Government will not introduce it. Clearly, during its five-year term the council has been de-prioritised. The Minister has walked away from accountability for the Judiciary and consistency in sentencing. The response drafted by her officials is a massive disappointment.
Work is ongoing on a judicial council Bill and one of the elements will be to provide a statutory basis for the work I have outlined that is being done by the Irish sentencing information system along these lines. We have not walked away from the Bill on which work is ongoing. I take the Deputy's point that it is an important Bill. I do not agree with his comments on my reply which shows how the Judiciary is addressing this issue in a variety of ways. The Deputy will obviously be aware that the range of criteria to be taken into account in considering a particular sentence varies considerably. He has to acknowledge that no group that has examined this issue in recent times, including those with a lay majority or judicial representatives, has suggested the route he says is an option. I refer, in particular, to the reports on penal policy and law reform. I recognise the fact that he has published a Bill in this regard and that there will be opportunities to tease out and discuss these issues further, but no report I have received has stated we need a sentencing council. Ireland is different from the United Kingdom in that we have a constitution.
The Constitution rightly provides for the separation of powers between the Judiciary and the Legislature, but the people are sovereign and their interests are not being served in many of the sentences being handed down in the courts. We need to hold the Judiciary to account. Judges cannot be a law unto themselves; they need to be held to account. In fairness to the Judiciary, the judicial council would be a mechanism to do this. I asked whether the Minister could incorporate a sentencing council into the judicial council, but we do not have even have that Bill before us. It has been another wasted opportunity. We have had another full Government term of almost five years with no reform of the way sentencing is dealt with by the courts or the way judicial appointments are made. Whoever drafted the response talks about the Judiciary being independent. However, judges are also accountable but not according to the Government. We are wrapping up in the House. We have a few more weeks left and will be into an election campaign in the new year. This is a massive failure on the part of the Department and the Government in the past five years. I have put forward a good model that is used in England and Wales and which is democratic, fair and accountable. However, I am being lectured by departmental officials who have utterly failed in their responsibility to reform judicial sentencing and guidelines in the State.
I reiterate that judges are independent. The Deputy has said they must be held accountable, but they are independent; that is the reality. We bring forward legislation that outlines the sentencing we think is appropriate to a variety of crimes. All of the expert information available to me indicates that mandatory sentencing is not the way forward because of that very point. What does consistency in sentencing mean? It is a complex matter and many variables must be taken into account. Where, for example, we, as legislators, believe the appropriate sentence is not in place, it is up to us to legislate. That is what I am doing in the burglaries Bill. I am providing that it will be more difficult to get bail and that consecutive, as opposed to concurrent, sentences should be served. If we do not think the maximum sentence for a crime is appropriate, it is up to us, as legislators, to address that issue. However, it is absolutely clear that the Judiciary is independent.
A judicial council Bill would allow them to deal with complaints effectively and the various elements that will be in it are necessary. We will come to that in due course.
54. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the extent to which An Garda Síochána is adequately equipped to deal with all forms of security threat, including the activities of criminal gangs, and of international terrorists; if she is satisfied with the availability of intelligence and the necessary technology to ensure the ability of An Garda Síochána to deal adequately with any current or emerging threats to the security of the State and to the people; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [42348/15]
This question is on the need to ensure the availability of adequate resources, technical and otherwise, to the Garda Síochána to meet the challenges presented by organised criminal and potential terrorist gangs.
Recent events have brought into focus the potential threats that democratic societies face from international threats. It must be recalled that the primary security threat facing the State is from so-called dissident republican paramilitary groups. These groups are inextricably linked to organised crime in order to fund their activities. At present, over 40 people are before the Special Criminal Court charged in connection with subversive activity. In view of the nature of this activity, I am having the necessary arrangements put in place to set up a second Special Criminal Court to reduce delays in listing trials.
The Garda authorities have the appropriate resources available to them to tackle threats from these sources but given the evolving nature of the security and organised crime threat, the Garda Commissioner is carrying out a review and will let me know of any additional requirements that may arise. I have secured an extra €4 million so that we can be part of the Schengen information system, which is a very important database with real life active information on it about current threats.
The Garda Síochána, which is the security force in this State, will take all possible steps to deal with any threat to this country, combining a strong intelligence base with a well-trained, armed, special intervention and support capacity, and a range of other local and national policing and investigative resources dedicated to countering both security threats and the activities of organised crime gangs, whatever their origins.
A primary response capacity is the Garda's emergency response unit, which is specially trained in counter-terrorism responses and hostage-type incidents. The armed regional support units, the special detective unit, the drugs unit and organised crime unit also have key roles to play in this regard.
The Criminal Assets Bureau has a particularly important role to play in tackling organised crime and has been successful in targeting the assets of those involved. Since its establishment, it has secured a total of €28 million from persons who have been associated with the Provisional IRA in the past.
I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. I congratulate the Garda Síochána for the work it is doing in this area. Pending the internal review to test the adequacy of the potential response in various circumstances, is it possible or advisable to identify within the Garda Síochána areas that might come under pressure in the event of an escalation of criminal activity of one kind or another?
Are the Garda authorities satisfied regarding the rapid deployment and the extent to which it can be carried out in the event of an emergency?
This is a key issue, heightened all the more by recent events in Paris, and was discussed at the meeting of the justice and home affairs Ministers. There will be further meetings this week. It was made clear that international co-operation is key to dealing with this issue. Exchange of intelligence information, identification of the travel routes of suspects, the use of Interpol and Europol databases and the Schengen information database are all very important responses.
Nationally, people also need to be aware that the Garda has a response unit, the emergency response unit, which is specifically trained and is the first line in counter-terrorism. I will say again that its members are specifically trained in counter-terrorism responses and hostage-type incidents. The armed regional support units, the special detective units and the drugs and organised crime units would also be involved in rapid response.
The Defence Forces can be called in as an aid to the Garda and civil authority. They have a range of expertise which they have been using during the years to deal with the type of terrorism seen on this island. As I said, they have much experience of dealing with explosive devices being placed in a variety of locations across the country.
What is the extent to which the Minister and the Garda authorities remain satisfied with the degree to which intelligence levels have been developed, as well as the provision of adequate surveillance and other resources for An Garda Síochána? Is there an early warning system that will detect potential criminal movement in sufficient time to enable the Garda to become alert to a threat? What is the extent to which An Garda Síochána can interface with Interpol and Europol to follow through on issues that may arise both internally and externally?
The Garda is heavily involved with Interpol and Europol in information exchange. Following the Paris attacks on the Friday, I was briefed on the Saturday by the national response unit which was dealing with the information that was coming through. It was already in contact with Interpol and Europol. Interpol had asked for information from Ireland but no specific information emerged on a threat to Ireland or any person here who had been involved in the Paris attacks. The Garda was immediately alerted to this and involved.
The Deputy is correct that enhancing the capacity for developing good intelligence and intelligence-sharing internationally is increasingly important. There is definitely room for greater co-operation in that regard. At the last Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting the point was made that it was extremely important to have a database of radicalised individuals who were returning to Europe from the Middle East and to ensure the authorities were aware of those who presented a danger to European societies. A further point, one that is continually made by international police forces, is that quite a number of terrorist attacks have been prevented because of good intelligence sharing. That is obviously the position we want to reach to prevent attacks, as opposed to dealing with the tragic aftermath of such attacks, as we saw in Paris recently.
55. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the additional resources which will be made available to An Garda Síochána in County Clare under Operation Thor; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [42403/15]
Operation Thor is a multi-strand national operation which builds on previous and current Garda operations to tackle crime, particularly burglaries. It builds on the substantial investment, restarted by the Government, in recruiting new gardaí and vehicles. All of these resources are available to the Garda Commissioner to delegate, as she sees appropriate.
This year the Clare division has been allocated ten newly attested gardaí and extra vehicles. The 2016 budget allocation of €1.5 billion for An Garda Síochána includes over €67 million in additional funding which will allow the recruitment of 600 new gardaí next year, on top of the 550 recruited since the Government reopened the Garda College in 2014. It will also provide additional funding for special operations such as Operation Thor. This builds on the high level of investment of €34 million we have seen already. In this context, the Deputy will appreciate that it is not possible to detail the additional resources available in any one county, although information is available on the extra gardaí locally. Extra gardaí have been allocated to every division following the new recruitment drive. This week another 600 recruit places have been advertised, in which there is already significant interest. This will allow for further operations across the country. Operation Thor involves disrupting mobile gangs across the country and we are already seeing some successes under it. I will have a report shortly on its first month in operation.
It is clear that Operation Thor is nothing but window-dressing.
Nonsense.
In County Clare alone since 2011 there has been a 6% increase in the number of burglaries. From 2011 to the end of June 2015, there was a 90% increase in the numbers of rapes and sexual assaults, with a 10% increase in the number of theft and related offences. It is clear that the Government has taken four years to wake up to the seriousness of the crime wave sweeping across rural areas. Now that it has come to the calling of a general election, the Minister is responding with no real specifics and no recognition of the impact this crime wave has had on rural communities. She needs to have specifics and set out in a clear and concise way how the moneys the Government has set aside will be spent in a way that will ensure people will start to have confidence again in the Garda's capacity to ensure these crimes will not be acceptable. Will she provide appropriate resources for An Garda Síochána?
It was the previous Fianna Fáil Government which stopped investment in An Garda Síochána.
For three years the Government has presided over the closure of Garda stations.
Has the Deputy forgotten already about the previous Fianna Fáil Government?
He has amnesia.
It was because of the economic crisis the Fianna Fáil Government left us that it was not possible to have the investment which should have been happening in the past five years. The Government has, however, started to invest again in recruitment and support vehicles.
The Minister has no specifics and no strategy.
The strategy is clear.
Yes, it is clear - close Garda stations.
It is articulated under Operation Thor which has five strands, all of which are being implemented. It includes additional high visibility patrols which people will have seen in operation across the country.
Yes, while the stations are closed.
There is no correlation between station closures and increases in the numbers of burglaries. Burglary hot spots have been identified. There has been an increased use of checkpoints to tackle the criminal gangs using the national road network.
The lads are using the back roads.
There are the new high powered vehicles. The last year Fianna Fáil was in power it bought 45 Garda vehicles. This year alone 650 vehicles have been invested in.
How many did the Minister buy last year?
How many did Fianna Fáil buy?
The Deputy needs to face up to the fact that his Government stopped investment in An Garda Síochána.
The Minister needs to face up to the fact that she did not decide to reinvest in the force until we were on election footing.
The Government has restarted investment and this is what will keep communities safe. We are doubling the investment in Muintir na Tíre for the text alert scheme.
That will sort it out.
We are recruiting new gardaí with advertisements in the newspapers this week for 600 new places. If one wants to tackle crime and keep communities safe, one has to invest in front-line policing, as the Government is doing.
One has to reopen stations.
One has to give the Garda the resources it needs to deal with mobile gangs. One also has to bring forward strong legislation, which we are doing with the burglary Bill, and to ensure criminals will find it more difficult to get bail and will serve consecutive, rather than concurrent, sentences. These are the initiatives we are taking. The previous Fianna Fáil Government stopped investment
The Minister is letting them out the back door as they are going in the front door of the prison. This is a sham.
