Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 22 Feb 2023

Vol. 1034 No. 1

Policing, Security and Community Safety Bill 2023: Second Stage

Minister of State at the Department of Justice (Deputy James Browne)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

On behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Justice, I am pleased to introduce the Policing, Security and Community Safety Bill 2023 to the House. The Bill gives effect to a programme for Government commitment and forms part of the wider policing reform programme, A Policing Service for our Future, published by the Government in December 2018 to implement the recommendations of the report of the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland. This report was a comprehensive examination of all aspects of policing, including all functions carried out by An Garda Síochána and the totality of the policing oversight arrangements.

This Bill provides a new framework for policing, security and community safety, and, when enacted, will repeal and replace the current legislation, the Garda Síochána Act 2005, in its entirety. The Bill is based on the recommendations of the commission report which itself was informed by extensive consultations across the policing landscape, including with the wider public.

In developing this legislation, my Department also carried out further and extensive consultation with stakeholders, including An Garda Síochána, the policing oversight bodies, the Data Protection Commission and all Departments. The Bill also takes account of the recommendations of the pre-legislative scrutiny report of the Joint Committee on Justice and the submissions of the various contributors to that process, including those bodies I have mentioned previously, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, the Garda associations, relevant staff associations, unions and others.

The Bill has four main objectives. First of all, it aims to make community safety an all-of-government responsibility. This is based on the view that promoting safer communities through preventing crime and harm, particularly to individuals who are vulnerable or at risk, is a shared responsibility involving the Garda and also requiring other Departments and agencies, such as health and social services, local authorities and the wider community to work together.

It is also linked to the key finding of the commission report that the prevention of harm to individuals, particularly those who are vulnerable or at risk, should be an explicit objective of An Garda Síochána as it reflects the reality of day-to-day policing.

The second objective is to strengthen independent external oversight of An Garda Síochána. The Bill introduces a package of measures to ensure that this oversight framework for policing is coherent, supporting clear and effective accountability, and, ultimately, better policing. The Bill does this through the establishment of a new policing oversight body and a reformed system for the handling and investigation of allegations of Garda wrongdoing.

Third, the Bill strengthens internal governance by establishing a new non-executive board of An Garda Síochána. This is a corporate governance standard across the public and private sectors. The Garda Commissioner will be empowered as the CEO of the organisation, with explicit operational independence, and will exercise functions equivalent to the CEO of many State agencies, including in relation to workforce planning, human resources, industrial relations and finance. The Commissioner will be supported by, and will report to, the board.

The Bill also improves the oversight of national security arrangements in the State. It provides for the establishment of an independent examiner of security legislation. This was a key recommendation of the commission’s report, which recognised that responsibility for the security of the State did not rest solely with An Garda Síochána. The independent examiner of security legislation is modelled to a large extent on similar oversight mechanisms internationally.

I will now turn to the main elements of the Bill itself. Part 1 sets out key definitions of the Bill and the policing principles which underpin the provision of policing services in the State. These include a strengthening of references to the need for An Garda Síochána to protect and vindicate human rights when providing policing services.

Part 2 details the functions of An Garda Síochána, the arrangements for its governance, organisation and personnel, and the relationship with the Minister and Government. The Bill expands the objective of An Garda Síochána to expressly include the prevention of harm to individuals who are vulnerable or at risk. This recognises that much of the work of the Garda on a daily basis, as is the case with other police services and recognised by the commission, is concerned with non-crime-related activity. This includes assisting people with mental health and addiction conditions, people who are homeless, children, the elderly and others who are at risk. I commend the essential service that An Garda Síochána provides to Irish society in this regard, as was seen in particular during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Additionally, and having regard to the commission's emphasis on human rights as the foundation and purpose of policing, the objective of An Garda Síochána has been strengthened to include an explicit reference to both protecting and vindicating human rights.

This Part also establishes a non-executive board of An Garda Síochána. The board will have the dual function to support the Commissioner and the organisation in respect of internal governance while also holding the Commissioner to account for the performance of his or her functions. The board’s functions are to oversee the strategic direction of the organisation, including the development of the capacity and capability and optimum use of resources and ensuring arrangements are in place to comply with An Garda Síochána’s public sector duty under human rights and equality legislation. The board will also oversee arrangements for managing the performance of the Garda Commissioner. However, the board’s role will not extend to operational policing or security matters which remain within the remit and functional independence of the Garda Commissioner.

This Part of the Bill also improves the internal capacity of the Garda to manage itself effectively, deliver reform, increase diversity and improve outcomes for communities. It seeks to empower the Garda Commissioner as the true CEO of the organisation. Under the Bill, the Commissioner will exercise functions equivalent to the CEO of many State agencies, including in relation to workforce planning, human resources, industrial relations and finance. As recommended by the commission report, the Garda Commissioner’s operational independence is made explicit in the Bill.

In line with the normal responsibilities of the CEO of any organisation, the Commissioner will, with the approval of the board, appoint persons to the senior ranks of assistant commissioner and chief superintendent following selection competitions undertaken by the Public Appointments Service. The approval of the board will also be required for the appointment of senior Garda civilian staff.

A central tenet of the commission report was that An Garda Síochána should be seen and treated as one organisation, with a single workforce who share a common loyalty and mission. In support of this vision, the Bill provides for the Garda Commissioner to recruit Garda civilian staff directly into the organisation as public servants. This will promote and foster the idea of a Garda career for all Garda personnel, members and civilian staff alike. All new Garda civilian staff recruited post-enactment of this Bill will be recruited by the Garda Commissioner as public servants in accordance with the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointment) Act 2004. The Bill provides that there will be no change to the Civil Service status of existing Garda civilian staff until an order is made by the Minister and the making of such an order is subject to engagement with any trade union or staff association concerned and consideration of any representations made by them. The benefits of integrating civilian staff more effectively into the Garda organisation are highlighted throughout the commission report. Those benefits include ensuring that sworn Garda members can be deployed more consistently to front-line policing roles.

Creation of a single workforce will take time, but it is clear that a more integrated workforce structure, leveraging the different skills and perspectives of Garda members and civilian staff, will make an important contribution to the effectiveness of An Garda Síochána in the longer term and contribute to enhancing the capacity of the organisation to deliver better policing outcomes. I stress that the commencement of the legislation will have no automatic effect on the current position of existing civilian staff. As I said, the Bill requires consultations with the recognised trade unions concerned prior to the making of a ministerial order which would have the effect of designating such civilian staff as Garda staff.

I also note that the increased civilianisation of roles that is likely to follow from enactment of the Bill is likely to result in further career and promotional opportunities for such Garda staff.

Part 3 provides for a framework at national and local level to underpin a whole-of-government approach to promoting safer communities through preventing crime and harm. It is built around: a national strategy for improving community safety, to contain a policy framework and programme of actions to support public service bodies, including Departments of State, and communities working together in a co-ordinated manner for that purpose; a designated Cabinet committee to provide high level political oversight; a national community safety steering group to provide senior leadership and direction for the implementation of the national strategy and to foster interagency collaboration; a national office for community safety sitting under the steering group, headed by a director, which will be the operational executive with responsibility for delivering the national strategy objectives and supporting the local community safety partnerships; and local community safety partnerships, replacing the joint policing committees, to develop and implement local community safety plans and respond to the specific needs of the community.

As Deputies may be aware, three local community safety partnerships pilots have been launched. These are in operation in the Dublin north inner city area, the Waterford City and County Council area and Longford. Membership of these partnerships will include local representatives, service providers and community representatives. These will work in partnership, supported by dedicated staff. They will also provide a forum with regard to local policing priorities.

Statutory obligations will also be placed on Departments of State and other public service bodies to co-operate in the delivery of community safety and to have regard to community safety in the conduct of their own functions and formal linkages between the national and local framework and the new policing and community safety authority are also provided for, having regard to the increased emphasis on the role of that body in overseeing An Garda Síochána’s performance in relation to community safety.

Part 4 provides for the establishment of the new policing and community safety authority. The new body will merge the existing broad-ranging oversight functions of the Policing Authority and the inspection function of the Garda Síochána Inspectorate, building on their good work to date. This authority will oversee and assess, in an independent and transparent manner, the performance of An Garda Síochána in relation to policing with the benefit of an in-house inspection function not available to the Policing Authority at present. For this purpose, it will have an expanded remit in respect of overseeing Garda actions to improve community safety, promoting inter-agency collaboration and community engagement. Most importantly, it will continue to have the power to question Garda management in public. This power, in conjunction with its wider information sources, will ensure that it is well equipped to continue the work of the existing authority in providing robust scrutiny of the performance of An Garda Síochána with regard to policing and to drive continuous improvement.

The new authority will be similar to the existing Policing Authority in structure with its own Vote and explicit statutory independence in the performance of its functions. It will consist of nine members, including a chair, each representing particular areas of experience and expertise. Members will be appointed by the Government following a selection process undertaken by the Public Appointments Service. There is a need to ensure that the important oversight expertise and experience accumulated to date is not lost and so the Bill provides that the staff from the existing bodies will transfer to the new body and form its core, assisting in a smoother transition.

Part 5 provides for the reform and reorganisation of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. The body will continue in being, renamed as the office of the police ombudsman. The three-person commission will be replaced with a single ombudsman and deputy model to ensure that the body has a clearly identifiable head for the first time. The officeholders, the police ombudsman and the deputy policy ombudsman, will be appointed by the President on the nomination of Government and following a selection process undertaken by the Public Appointments Service. To further reinforce the independence of the body, provision is made for it to have its own Vote with the Accounting Officer role assigned to a new chief executive officer. This clear delineation of senior roles will assist in identifying the best possible candidates for each role based on the specific skill sets required. This part also sets out the objectives and functions of the police ombudsman, making it a clear objective to ensure that the ombudsman’s functions are performed in a timely, efficient and effective manner and in accordance with fair procedures.

Part 6 provides for the reformed processes and procedures relating to the handling of complaints and the conduct of investigations into allegations of wrongdoing on the part of Garda personnel. As recommended by the commission report, the Bill expands the remit of the police ombudsman to now include the conduct of Garda civilian staff, subject to the making of a ministerial order, as noted earlier, and to include allegations of wrongdoing even in the absence of public complaints. Central to the reforms in this part of the Bill is a move away from the current investigation process which was described in the commission report as unsatisfactory and in need of urgent overhaul. A streamlined and simplified investigation process is introduced, similar to the standard single investigation processes seen in other regulatory type bodies, which will support more timely and effective resolution of complaints, improve the conduct of investigations and safeguard due process for all concerned. The new process will also involve the designation of a list of categories of complaints by the police ombudsman that do not involve criminal offences and which may be suitable for resolution by An Garda Síochána. The Garda Commissioner is required to put in place arrangements for the resolution of such complaints, for example, through provision of information, explanation, assurance or apology to a complainant or provision of guidance or training to the Garda personnel concerned.

Part 7 provides for the establishment of the office of the independent examiner of security legislation. The establishment of this office represents a significant development with regard to the State’s security infrastructure and delivers on a key recommendation of the commission report which recognised that responsibility for national security did not rest solely with An Garda Síochána.

The Bill provides that the position of the independent examiner will be filled by a senior judge. This is consistent with the commission’s report, which recommended that the independent examiner should have a strong legal background and credibility within the legal profession. A senior judge will have the necessary experience and expertise in the balancing of competing rights and it is considered that a member of the Judiciary is ideally placed to embody the Council of Europe Venice principles of independence, objectivity, transparency, and impartiality. Judicial oversight in this role provides guarantees of independence and impartiality. It will also facilitate assignment to the examiner of responsibility for the existing oversight roles carried out by designated judges, who are currently serving High Court judges, relating to the operation of the current statutory frameworks for data retention, interception of communications and surveillance.

The primary function of the independent examiner will be to keep under review the operation and effectiveness of security legislation to ensure such legislation remains necessary and fit for purpose and contains appropriate safeguards for protecting human rights. The independent examiner will also have a general examination function in relation to the delivery of security services. Those State offices and agencies that have a security remit will be obliged to co-operate with the examiner in the performance of his or her duties. The Bill also provides that the independent examiner will review refusals of information to the policing oversight bodies on grounds of the security of the State and where those bodies wish to appeal that decision. Through his or her annual reports to the Taoiseach, which will be laid before the Oireachtas, the independent examiner will help promote public confidence in national security measures and enhance the national security response.

Part 8 contains regulation-making powers relating to the management of An Garda Síochána and other matters while Part 9 addresses a number of miscellaneous matters including a specific provision to enable the necessary, proportionate and lawful sharing of information, including personal data, between An Garda Síochána, the new policing and community safety authority, the police ombudsman and any other prescribed bodies for the purpose of the exercise of their functions. Part 10 contains consequential amendments to a number of other Acts of the Oireachtas which refer to the role or functions of An Garda Síochána or the other policing bodies referred to in this Bill.

In concluding these opening remarks, it is my hope that Deputies are informed as to the totality of the changes contained in the Bill, which will see the policing and security landscape transformed in the coming years, a new governance and oversight framework for policing, the strengthening of oversight of national security arrangements and structures to drive interagency collaboration and community safety. The Minister, Deputy Harris, and I both look forward to the debate on this Bill and I am pleased to commend it to the House.

Deputy Pa Daly

I will share time with Deputies Ward and Paul Donnelly. Tógfaidh mé deich nóiméad dom féin. I commend the Minister of State's speech, which is excellently written. I will deal with a few things in it. There is reference in it to assisting people with mental health and addiction conditions.

As we know, I believe there were 7,000 call-outs to An Garda Síochána last year to deal with mental health crises. While we welcome the acknowledgement that this is taking place, any changes should happen in conjunction with mental health services. In Kerry, because there has been an outsourcing of mental health services, once an authorising officer has determined that somebody should be taken to a mental health centre, it often happens that no one is available to take them away from the Allied Admissions, and it falls back on An Garda Síochána to deliver the patient to the hospital. This leads to frustration in An Garda Síochána, which tends to be short staffed in the units.

I noticed that throughout the 20 minutes of the Minister of State's speech, not once was An Garda Síochána referred to as "the force", which is a positive step because in this day and age it is the incorrect term for a police service. I commend whoever wrote the speech on leaving that out. It should not be in a 21st century police service.

I also noticed reference to Garda personnel, which is important and could be relevant to the legislation on bodycams we discussed last week, which specifically refers not to members of An Garda Síochána but to Garda personnel. That might need to be teased out at a later stage when discussing who has control of the data, for example. It is a very responsible role and we will have to look at that in further detail.

I also welcome the Minister of State saying he will engage with any trade unions. We had an interesting contribution from the unions on the role of the civilian staff within An Garda Síochána. They had concerns, particularly for existing staff, that the potential to transfer to other Departments was being limited. That will also need to be looked at.

Part 5 deals with the reform and organisation of the ombudsman. In future any State agencies will need to be referred to by the Irish name. I look forward to seeing that the official name as Gaeilge will be Oifig an Ombudsman Póilíneachta. That will be important and I thank the Minister of State for the contribution.

The introduction of this Bill represents a culmination of the hard work of many people. It is appropriate we remember Dr. Vicky Conway, who tragically passed away last year. She was an unwavering voice in favour of police reform and accountability. Her contributions to the 2018 report of the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland were immense and her passing was a massive loss.

I would like to return to that report to ensure we do not lose sight of its recommendations. At the time we made a detailed submission. A lot of time has elapsed since then and much debate took place during pre-legislative scrutiny. For some the Bill does not go far enough with police reform while for many within the wider policing community, such as representative organisations and unions, it may go too far. A balance needs to be struck but that can be done through a human rights focus which, to its credit, the Bill sets out to do for the first time in the State's history.

The right to feel safe, have due process and seek justice for wrongs committed are at the heart of good policing. Many is the time, at joint policing committee, JPC, meetings in Kerry, it was important to emphasise that the role of An Garda Síochána is always to address crime and the causes of crime but also, most important, to address the fear of crime within the community. It is important that message goes out strongly from An Garda Síochána, especially in areas where the level of crime is very low but people still live in fear that their house will be burgled when it is very unlikely to happen. The Garda powers Bill, which is separate from the one at hand, has much to do in that regard.

Section 4 of this Bill explicitly states that policing must take place independently and impartially in a manner that protects and vindicates human rights and in a manner supporting the proper and effective administration of justice. This echoes the first recommendation of the commission's report, namely, that human rights are the foundation and purpose of policing. I wish to examine who exactly is responsible for ensuring those principles are upheld in practice. On the face of it, the Bill addressed this by creating a new board of An Garda Síochána to which the Commissioner is accountable. The commission's report pointed out that any Garda Commissioner is unlikely to have gained a full skill set in running a large organisation throughout a career in policing. The board can provide a crucial function in that respect. I welcome that the Public Appointments Service will be involved in the selection of the board. This can also be teased out further on Committee Stage. The Bill also provides that the Commissioner shall be accountable to the board for the performance of his or her functions while being operationally independent. However, the watering down of the powers of the authority, which is explicitly not part of An Garda Síochána, is a concern.

I will make a few comments on the authority and the inspectorate. The Bill transfers the various functions of the authority to either An Garda Síochána, the Commissioner under the guidance of the board or the Minister, with the policing and community safety authority having a consultative role at most. The inspectorate is also abolished and the policing and community safety authority is created in place of both organisations. It is difficult to see how accountability can now be increased while the work of both, which is very different in this context, is now to be undertaken by one body. While this respects the recommendations of the commission, a crucial aspect is missing.

The report proposes that:

PCSOC should have a remit to oversee the relevant activity of all agencies involved in policing and the prevention of harm, at both national and local level. It should scrutinise policing performance, carry out inspections, promote professional standards and coordinate and support local structures for community engagement with police.

Sinn Féin supports a whole-of-justice-system inspectorate and it is a disappointment to see that the Bill now narrows the authority's remit to only An Garda Síochána. If a future scandal were to arise, it would not be difficult to see the Commissioner asserting that its accountability is solely to the board, which is, in itself, responsible for the interests of An Garda Síochána rather than to the authority. Again, Committee Stage amendments may clear some of this up.

The reform of GSOC, through the creation of the IOPO is a major part of the commission's report, our submission and this Bill. The organisation has long been crippled by an overly complex complaints procedure, understaffing and sometimes a lack of co-operation, support and resources. I pay tribute to the work of Ms Justice Mary Ellen Ring who once sent a diagram of the complaints procedure to it. She has advocated for change and it is arriving in the form of this Bill. Communication about performance management issues, which constitute the majority of complaints, as well as the issues relating to us, as representatives, must be improved. The requirement of the ombudsman to track trends in its work is important in this respect as certain issues must then feed back into performance management within An Garda Síochána.

The powers of search which the ombudsman has were criticised, but they are crucial to ensure proper accountability. This is the heart of the issue with the new policing ombudsman. I quote from the report:

All complaints that go beyond performance management, and involve alleged breaches of human rights or accepted standards of policing, should be investigated by IOPO itself, not by police, and IOPO should be adequately resourced to do so.

I cannot go into details given that it involves cases currently before the courts, but we have seen some pretty extraordinary allegations which have resulted in arrests and charges. The Commissioner's establishment of an anticorruption unit is important but there is also risk if police are investigating themselves. We need lasting structures to ensure the good work lasts.

The Bill also creates a new category of Garda personnel, comprising An Garda Síochána members and civilian staff - currently civilian staff. We are not opposed to civilianisation of police as it frees up gardaí from front-line duties, as the Minister of State mentioned. Government has done some good work in this area even as it has seen the number of sworn members decrease. A number of unions have voiced their concerns about the move and wish to see this system retained to allow staff to transfer into and out of An Garda Síochána, and this must be retained.

Another avenue to avoid accountability was that the Garda was also responsible for national security. The creation of the office of independent examiner is extremely welcome. The Bill does not seem explicitly to require this person to be a judge but provides that a judge may hold the office. This examiner reviews national security and provides requests, and this work should be informed by human rights and accountability.

The community safety partnerships are also welcome, as their powers seem appropriate and can give more practical effect to local input from elected representatives. There is a slight concern that the powers are not clearly defined in primary legislation and a great deal of detail will fall to the Minister through secondary legislation. However, we can examine that matter.

Deputy Mark Ward

While Sinn Féin welcomes the idea of expanding responsibility for community safety beyond An Garda Síochána, it is not clear what the purpose of the group is separate to the role of the Policing Authority. While establishing these committees could be a welcome move forward, the Government must also stick to previous commitments. A task force was to be set up to enable the community of Cherry Orchard to deal with a number of high-profile incidents that resulted in gardaí being attacked or rammed with cars. I spoke with a Deputy for the area, Deputy Ó Snodaigh, who informed me that, to date, no task force had been set up. This week, we have seen more footage of gardaí being attacked as they tried to keep law and order on our streets. This is unacceptable behaviour and must be called out for exactly what it is - thuggish and cowardly behaviour by mobs of young people out of control, with a limited number of gardaí available to respond.

Ballyfermot is my neighbouring constituency and an area I know well. My father is from there and I spent much of my childhood at my grandmother's place. People there are proud of their area. It is a very good community. As such, the recent coverage upsets me because it does not reflect the wider community. There are a number of organisations in the area that would work with the Government if it worked with them. It was not by a turn of fate that I won the by-election I was not meant to win in 2019. I accepted a job as an outreach worker for FamiliBase, and a turn of events saw me enter the Dáil. FamiliBase is an organisation that works with some of the young people we saw in this week's coverage. The Government needs to work with organisations like FamiliBase in Ballyfermot and move towards a positive solution. The people of Ballyfermot have had enough of this.

My colleague, Deputy Daly, spoke about mental health. For too long, the Garda has been the gatekeeper of mental health services in our society. We not only need the appropriate number of authorised officers, but they must be in the right place and working at the right time. This means 24-7 access to authorised officers, as mental health issues can arise at any time and at any place.

I welcome that a pilot crisis de-escalation team will be rolled out in Limerick this year. I worked with the Government on this. If it is successful, I would like to see it being rolled out in other areas across the State, given how vital it would be. I am Sinn Féin's spokesperson on mental health. It hurts when people call me under duress about loved ones' mental health and how they feel their loved ones are a danger to themselves or others, as I have no choice but to advise them to call the Garda. I should not be advising them to do that, but they are left with no other option because there is no 24-7 access to emergency mental healthcare. It is an horrific ordeal for any family to experience. We need cross-departmental work on providing 24-7 access to emergency mental healthcare, ensuring the appropriate number of authorised officers are in the right place, and providing crisis de-escalation teams across the State.

My final point before I allow my colleague to contribute has to do with how the number of gardaí across Dublin has decreased. Since 2009, Dublin has lost 757 gardaí. My area covers Clondalkin and Ballyfermot and has seen a 6% decrease in gardaí in that time. This is despite population growth and an increase in criminal activity. Ballyfermot, which was in the news recently, saw a 25% decrease in the number of gardaí stationed there, dropping from 93 in 2012 to 69 at the end of 2022. That is not sustainable. This situation is reflected in Clondalkin, Lucan, Saggart and Newcastle.

Deputy Paul Donnelly

The Bill is welcome. We need to acknowledge and streamline the difficulties at all levels of the Garda Síochána from the Commissioner down and build on what is going well.

The level of confidence in GSOC presents an issue, with some investigations taking too long. With Deputy Paul Murphy, I raised this matter last week as it related to the ongoing investigation into the death of George Nkencho. It has taken two years, yet a report has still not been produced.

We need to acknowledge the issues with recruitment and retention on the front line. Events in west Dublin this week, which have been already referred to, highlighted the shortage of staff and resources in the Garda. Scenes like that not only give the impression that the Garda is not respected, but also decreases public confidence in the Garda and its ability to do the job. This is primarily down to shortages in staffing and resources, which must be addressed. I have spoken to many rank-and-file gardaí at local JPC meetings and raised the lack of gardaí on the ground, the availability of cars to attend incidents, and response times in general. Every time, it came down to a lack of personnel and resources. When I inquired into why recruitment and retention are problems, it came down to terms and conditions that made the job unattractive to potential recruits. I heard this week that there was to be an investigation into why newly recruited gardaí were leaving. Disappointingly, that investigation has not been initiated yet. It is a standard process in most companies - if someone leaves, he or she goes through a process to find out the reasons for doing so. Such a process must be instituted in the Garda immediately.

Yesterday, Ms Antoinette Cunningham, general secretary of the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors, AGSI, stated that the Government had promised to recruit 800 gardaí last year but had only achieved 120. It had set a target of 1,000. The first cohort of 200 were due to start in Templemore yesterday, but only 136 did. There is no doubt there is a recruitment issue. Coupled with a retention issue, it has the potential to create major problems for our communities and their safety.

Unfortunately, a political failure is putting our communities and hard-working and dedicated gardaí at risk. This is coupled with a lack of stations in areas with growing populations. As the Acting Chair knows, Fingal County Council is putting together its county development plan. We are looking at thousands of new homes, all of which are welcome, and thousands of new jobs. Ballycoolin will go from having 20,000 people working there to 50,000. Following new developments in the Blanchardstown centre, it will have up to 3,300 units. Where is the strategic planning of services like the Garda, though? Where will the gardaí be located and how many are planned for each area? These questions need to be addressed.

Another issue needs to be addressed. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Eamon Ryan, is introducing active travel. I have been raising the issue of scramblers since entering the Dáil. The Department will not provide active travel funding to local authorities if there are kissing gates or security gates along the routes in question. Such gates would have to be removed. The problem is that we still have not addressed the issue of scramblers. There are two parts to it, the first of which is legislation. The second is resourcing and authorising the Garda to set up a specialised scrambler unit. Police in the UK, where there is an equally serious problem, have specialised scrambler units. In west Dublin, we saw 20 to 50 scramblers running amok on a main road. I even saw a video of them doing wheelies on a motorway and driving on the wrong side of the road. The Garda tells us there is nothing it can do to intervene in such circumstances. If so, it is wrong and sends out the wrong message.

I wish to address another matter quickly. Last week, I asked the Minister for Justice about stolen cars. I had not seen stolen cars in Dublin West for the guts of 15 years. In the past three months, though, we have had at least six to eight stolen cars in my area alone. Three of them were burned out. They are Japanese imports that have no security measures - steering locks, alarms or immobilisers - whatsoever.

Something we need to look at in the context of legislation is the fact that any cars being imported into the country must reach a certain minimum standard of security. There are people who are reaping the benefits of cars not having these security measures in place.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

The Minister of State indicated that the Bill provides that there will be no change to the Civil Service status of existing Garda civilian staff until an order is made by the Minister and that the making of such an order will be subject to engagement with any trade union or staff association concerned and consideration of any representations made by them. He went on to state:

I stress that the commencement of the legislation will have no automatic effect on the current position of existing civilian staff. As I said, the Bill requires consultations with the recognised trade unions concerned prior to the making of a ministerial order which would have the effect of designating such civilian staff as Garda staff.

Those words do nothing to give comfort to the 3,200 members of the Fórsa trade union who are going to be affected by the Bill. My understanding is that the Minister of State has met with the Garda Representative Association, GRA, whose members are affected by this Bill, but has not met with Fórsa. If the Minister of State wants co-operation from the Labour Party in respect of the Bill, that must be sorted out quickly because. Comments such as those to which I refer do not give any comfort to those who want to engage constructively and want to bring their members through a process whereby they engage positively with the changes being proposed. The change involved is not a small one; potentially, it could be significant. Those to whom I refer need to know their terms and conditions are going to be protected. In the absence of such engagement, good faith is being lost from the off. When the Minister of State engages with the GRA but not with the representatives of the 3,200 other workers, it is clear that there is a problem. If the Minister of State takes nothing else from my contribution, I urge him to take from it the fact that the Labour Party will not co-operate with the passage of this Bill until it is satisfied that he and the Department have met, in an even-handed way, with all of the staff associations and trade unions that represent those who will be affected by these changes.

It is important to identify the core changes to existing structures that are proposed in the Bill. As I see it, these include additional powers and functions for the Garda Commissioner, a new non-executive board of An Garda Síochána to hold the Garda Commissioner and senior Garda management accountable, a new policing and community safety authority in place of the Policing Authority and the Garda Síochána Inspectorate, GSI, and the transfer of many of the Policing Authority's functions to the Garda Commissioner, the board or the Minister. We have no objection to legislative reforms that would empower the Garda Commissioner to lead his service as a true chief executive. One concern is with the downgrading of the Policing Authority and the new lines of accountability. My party has called for decades for an external Garda oversight agency. We were determined to break the secretive and damaging relationship between that force and the Department of Justice. This relationship, as my colleague, Deputy Sherlock, pointed out, was vividly demonstrated in the disclosures tribunal report by the flurry of phone calls at senior level between the Phoenix Park and St. Stephen’s Green at times of crisis. These were calls which no one could later remember making or receiving, and their content was forgotten as soon as the line went dead.

My party has been and remains determined to secure effective Garda accountability and oversight to an independent external body. We achieved most of what we wanted when the Policing Authority was finally established. That body, under chairs Josephine Feehily and Bob Collins, lived up to most of our expectations. That is why we are concerned to see recommendations that would divest the Policing Authority of its functions as an external body securing oversight and replace it instead with a new board of management. A Garda management board may well become ingrained with a Garda policing mentality. If we have learned anything over the years, it is that the Garda Síochána need much less, not more, of an in-house policing mentality. Gardaí must be required to demonstrate, fully and in public, that they live up to the same basic standards of fairness, decency and common sense that bind the rest of us or, as Mr. Justice Charleton put it on page 294 of his report:

Central to those issues is a mentality problem. Where a problem occurs, strongly self-identifying organisations can have a self-protective tendency. That, regrettably, also describes An Garda Síochána. It is beyond a pity that it took independent inquiries to identify obvious problems with what Maurice McCabe was reporting.

This Bill is seeking perhaps to distinguish between internal governance and external oversight. Our concerns about the new architecture with a new Garda board revolve around the removal of functions from the Policing Authority in relation to the policing priorities, policing plan and Garda strategy statement, the removal of Policing Authority involvement in appointments and the new multiple lines of accountability for the Garda Commissioner. There have been many expressions of concern that these structural changes will cause confusion for the Garda Commissioner by rendering him accountable to multiple bodies with potentially overlapping remits.

What is the explanation for this something-for-everyone-in-the-audience approach whereby the board will have responsibility for the strategic plan, annual service plan, capital plan, annual report and governance framework, the authority will have responsibility for determining policing priorities and the Minister will have responsibility for security priorities and performance targets? An Garda Síochána needs better management structures, and the number of bodies and agencies that surround it may need to be rationalised. That must not be at the expense of the important principle, which, again, Mr. Justice Charleton has taught us to the effect that policing demands accountability. As he puts it:

A police force is an aspect of the entitlement of a sovereign nation to control its citizens through the rule of law. It exercises primary law enforcement. It is entitled to use force and may be armed. Where respect for the truth fades within such an organisation, where structures of command and accountability break down, and where the police do not offer a complete day of work in exchange for being remunerated by the taxpayer, an essential component of a modern country ceases to function properly. Police action may become fitful, inefficient or even dishonest. This helps no one.

This tribunal has been about calling that police force to account. The Morris tribunal was about the same thing. The commission of investigation conducted by Mr. Kevin O’Higgins, which reported to the Minister for Justice and Equality on 25 April 2016, was about the same thing. Central to these inquiries has been the truth.

This is not the time to consider abolishing anybody whose function is to demand openness, accountability and the truth. In that context, we ask why, most notably, the authority’s role in appointments to senior offices and ranks has been diluted, as has its role in standard-setting for the provision of policing services and oversight of strategic planning and corporate governance arrangements.

It is important to remember that two members of the Commission on the Future of Policing, Dr. Vicky Conway and Dr. Eddie Molloy, opposed recommendations to set up a new Garda board. They stated:

Against a background of decades of antipathy in Ireland towards external oversight and accountability for policing, we believe the inclusion of this board as an additional element in the oversight and governance architecture, and the consequential dilution of the role of the external oversight body (until now the Policing Authority), does not offer the best prospects of achieving the goal of unambiguous, independent, empowered, transparent accountability. While exchanges between the Policing Authority and An Garda Síochána may have appeared fractious, it is still early days in the development of an effective system of governance. Our proposal would be simply to build on the progress made to date by the Policing Authority, which in our view has been both supportive and necessarily challenging in its engagement with An Garda Síochána. We believe that the solution should be to adequately empower the Policing Authority while encouraging maturation of the culture of An Garda Síochána concerning external accountability.

That minority voice is important. It stresses external oversight and accountability as core features more important than avoiding fractious exchanges. It also stresses that Garda culture concerning external accountability must mature. The minority voice has not been heard by the Government.

At present, it is the Policing Authority that oversees the provision of policing services. It approves the three-year strategy statement and the annual policing plan. It sets annual policing priorities and performance targets and has responsibilities and functions concerning selection, appointment, suspension and removal at senior levels. What exactly does the Minister of State say is not working or not working well in these arrangements? We know that the Policing Authority opposed losing these functions.

It stated, "The impression, apparently held and conveyed by the Commission on the Future of Policing, that the existence and functioning of the Authority under the provisions of the 2015 Act served to limit the capacity of the Commissioner to direct and manage the Garda Síochána was unfounded and not supported by any clear evidence". What is the Minister’s view of this clear difference of opinion? What is his evidence? Incidentally, what possible basis in law is there for the assertion in the explanatory memorandum that establishing a Garda board "will facilitate the Minister’s Department in pulling back from involvement in day-to-day management of An Garda Síochána"? The Department has no mandate whatsoever to be involved in day-to-day management. If this change is being made simply to stop the Department from doing what it should not be doing in the first place, that is a poor reason for it.

Apart from the structural issues a Bill this size throws up, a host of smaller questions that will need to be teased out. I will mention just two as examples. Under section 3, one of the security service functions of the Garda will be "to identify foreign capabilities, intentions or activities within or relating to the State that have an impact on the international well-being or economic well-being of the State". Safeguarding the economic well-being of the United Kingdom is a function of the British security services. On foot of this, surveillance by, for example, GCHQ takes place. Competing bids from different countries to attract major foreign direct investment projects are monitored in that country in the interests of industrial development policy. Does anyone seriously suggest that the Garda should do the same thing here? Why is this enabling function included in the Bill?

Section 32 appears to vest in a judge conducting an inquiry into a Garda Commissioner or deputy commissioner the same powers as the High Court to enforce the attendance of witnesses and compel the production of records. This seems, on the face of it, to be unconstitutional. The enforcement powers of the High Court boil down to the power to commit a person for contempt of court if they do not comply. It is not possible to confer that power on a person acting outside the court system. These and other issues will be dealt with on Committee Stage, but we need to hear now a convincing outline as to why the Policing Authority is the chief target of this Bill and why we should believe the new arrangements will be better.

Deputy Joe Flaherty

I welcome the Bill and commend the Minister of State on his work on it to date. It is a key plank in the programme for Government.

For the public looking on, one key point that jumps out is that the Bill embeds a key principle from the commission's report. This is that preventing crime and harm and making our communities safe does not rest with An Garda Síochána and the Department of Justice alone. It must be most effectively achieved through a whole-of-government response with Departments and agencies such as health, social services, education authorities, local authorities, the Garda and the wider community all working together to prioritise and support the overall objective of safer communities. This is commendable and laudable.

Everybody in the House is equally frustrated when we table parliamentary questions on Garda matters and we get the standard stock response that the Department has no role or input into Garda operational policy and that it is a matter for the Garda Commissioner. It might be optimistic to think that something such as this would change in the context of the Bill. If we are clear about the transparency of what we are trying to achieve in a modern approach to policing we need much better interaction and engagement from the Garda Commissioner and Garda authorities. We also need to see a more holistic and inclusive approach from them in terms of their management.

Everybody in the House will use this debate as a backdrop to point to the chronic situation regarding morale in the Garda throughout the country. It is no different in County Longford, where gardaí are struggling with a spate of inter-family feuds. They are doing their absolute best but they are dealing with this in the face of a societal breakdown, rampant drug abuse and public acceptance of drug taking. It is a real struggle. I have never heard so many gardaí say that they want to exit the force. Anecdotally, I hear from gardaí who say that they and their colleagues are looking to take up jobs in the Prison Service. That is unprecedented.

I welcome the fact that two new gardaí have been appointed in Longford. This is to be welcomed. We have also seen the drugs unit replenished in recent weeks. We were down to two members, a sergeant and a garda, but this has been boosted to five. All of this is welcome. Fundamentally, we must acknowledge that there is a problem in the Garda at present. Morale is on the floor. As laudable and commendable as the Bill is, we need to do something not only for the gardaí but for our soldiers and many of our other front-line workers who have felt the pain and strain of recent years. They have very much taken it in the face. They have taken a lot of public anger and disquiet. In many cases, there has been societal breakdown. We need to respond to this and stand shoulder to shoulder with these stellar servants of the State.

Deputy Cathal Crowe

I wish to speak in support of this very important Bill. I hope it progresses through the Houses without too much ado.

There are a number of policing issues I wish to raise in the context of the Bill. An issue I keep coming back to is that of gardaí who have been suspended. At present, 87 members of An Garda Síochána stand suspended. I have raised this repeatedly in the Dáil. I do not have the power to determine whether they are guilty or innocent. I do not think the Minister has that power, and the Commissioner certainly does not have it. Some of these cases have been before the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation for up to three years. It is wrong that they have been there for so long.

Many of these people have been suspended because of the controversy relating to the squaring of road traffic offences. If they committed a common law crime by assaulting someone on Grafton Street, they would have been through the court system by now and natural justice would have ensued. What is happening is wrong. Even if we want to look through the metric of the cost of this to the State, if we take the low salary base of the Garda and everyone involved was on the entry level on the salary scale, it would be costing the State €3 million per annum to have 87 members suspended and sitting at home while drawing their salaries. If they are guilty, get them out of the force. If they are not guilty, then get them back on the streets. It is destroying the morale of the suspended gardaí and their families. Let us move matters on. There can be no more excuses. The National Bureau of Criminal Investigation and the Commissioner have dithered on this matter. I make no apology for raising it for the fifth or sixth time in the Dáil. This matter needs to be addressed.

I also want to raise the issue of the child protection laws. As the Minister of State knows, I was a schoolteacher before becoming a Deputy. The laws are there to protect the children of Ireland, and rightly so. They are a good set of laws. What I have seen of late is that in many instances they stifle the ability of rank-and-file gardaí to carry out their functions and duties. I know of one case where a youngster who was causing a huge amount of criminal trouble was brought home in a squad car only for the gardaí to be abused at the front door and told how dare they bring the child back in a car. We need to look at criminal law versus child protection law. Child protection law belongs in a certain realm. They are there to protect children. If they are competing with the need to keep our streets safe and putting people aged 16 or 17 years old through the rigors of the law and dropping them back home to their parents at night, where they should be, we need to have a good look at things.

There is an ongoing feud in Ennis. Videos are circulating online, which the Minister of State may have seen, of guns being discharged, a chainsaw being brought into a building and petrol being doused all over a caravan before it is set on fire. It has been described by a local solicitor as "not being very Fáilte Ireland-looking". I would say it is far worse than this and the people of Ennis are fearful. These feuds start out over something stupid. One of them a couple of years ago began over an argument in a chipper. There has been a lot of trouble ever since. It becomes like something out of "The Godfather". Many people fear that in trying to get an eye for an eye an innocent bystander will be caught up in this. We need forces from beyond the county to come down and support us.

At a joint policing committee meeting in Clare on Monday, I asked officials from the Garda Síochána and the council whether certain crimes are notifiable. When someone applies for a council house, their application goes to the Garda vetting unit. Over a six- or seven-week period, the officers in the unit check out who people are and what their background is. Generally, it is understood that this is to ascertain whether they are from a drug-dealing background because, obviously and naturally, nobody wants a drug dealer going into a social housing development and allowing it to spread.

I asked a question to which I could not get a substantial answer. I hope the Minister of State or someone in the Department might respond to me on this. Are sex crimes notifiable? Is the Garda Síochána able to notify a housing authority if someone is a convicted rapist or paedophile? Is it possible for people in social authority housing to know with good faith that whatever else happens in the estate, and things are not always perfect, that the council and the Garda Síochána have their backs and will not allocate housing units to people who have been convicted of the most heinous sex crimes?

It is a basic thing to know. We know that drugs are notifiable so surely sex crimes should be even more notifiable. I would love to get an answer on it once and for all. It would be reassuring for people if we could find that out.

Deputy Thomas Gould

I want to discuss the issue of community policing and keeping our community safe while at the same time keeping the members of the Garda Síochána safe. What we are seeing at the moment, not just in Dublin but across the country - the last speaker described the problems in his constituency - is that there is now a crisis in policing, especially community policing. I believe that if we were to properly resource and support community policing, it could be transformative.

The gap between communities and the Garda Síochána has widened. The reason for that goes back to the austerity cuts of 2010, 2011 and 2012, when Templemore was closed, education was cut and all of the funding to community groups and youth clubs was cut. We are here today and we want to know why there is a crisis in policing and why there are so many problems with attacks and gangs. It all comes down to previous Governments slashing, cutting and burning during the austerity.

It can work, however, and I want to give an example. There was a superintendent in Gurranabraher in Cork, Mick O’Loughlin. As a superintendent, he came up to my club, St. Vincent's, and once a week he would train the Féile football team. What Mick O’Loughlin did was to build up a connection with the young people of Knocknaheeny, Gurranabraher and Blarney Street and, at the same time, he got to know the young people and they got to know him. It was the embodiment of the way community policing should be run. As a result of that, he gained their trust and their respect. That is gone. Mick O'Loughlin has retired and we do not have that kind of community policing. Local gardaí on the ground tell me that the first thing to be cut when they are under pressure is community policing.

I will give an example. On Monday night, I was contacted because there was joyriding of scramblers by gangs of 40, 50 or 60 teenagers. It ended up with one person having an accident and an ambulance had to be called and gardaí had to be brought in. It went on so long because gardaí were not available. I know of people from a sporting club, including boys and girls of seven to ten years of age, who could not get home and their parents could not bring them home because they were so worried about the joyriders and the gangs. What some gardaí told me on Monday night is that they cannot cope because they do not have the staff, the gardaí on the ground or the resources. This is the second time in two weeks that a main road in Cork was blocked by gangs.

What are we supposed to do? Are we to have people who cannot bring their kids to training or who cannot go to sport because the Garda does not have the numbers? This Government has failed gardaí. Not alone is the Garda understaffed and under-resourced, but it is under-appreciated by this Government. The wages for new gardaí are so low that they cannot find anywhere to rent and they cannot get a mortgage. Something needs to be done.

Deputy Gary Gannon

The Bill is largely welcome. The Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland did incredible work in outlining the steps which are necessary to bring about essential policing reform, thereby enhancing public support and confidence in the Garda in the process. The Bill goes a long way to giving effect to some of the recommendations the commission made concerning governance, oversight and accountability mechanisms for the Garda. However, in several ways, it falls significantly short of the mark. This is incredibly important legislation, reforming the entire civilian oversight structure for the Garda and national security, and it is essential that we do this right and do not rush it. I was somewhat surprised to see the Bill come through this early in the term as I was under the impression that the Department was waiting for the high-level group on the role of the Garda Síochána in the public prosecution system to submit its final report, and the Minister of State might outline in his response when that will be.

The commission was very clear in its recommendation that prosecutorial powers should be removed from gardaí. International best practice is for more distance to be placed between police and the courts for both ethics and human rights standards to be protected and met. This is an essential reform which is completely absent from the Bill whereas it is a reform the Government has agreed to in principle and the Garda itself has agreed to. Gardaí who are put into the District Court to prosecute cases are not trained to the level of defence lawyers and this also ties up gardaí in court when they are sorely needed for actual police work, as we all see in our constituencies daily, certainly in my constituency of Dublin Central. The last update I saw from the Minister, Deputy McEntee, was that the high-level group was expected to submit its final report on prosecutorial powers last summer and, obviously, that never materialised. Can the Minister of State outline when he expects that work to be completed, if the Government is committed to introducing this vital reform and, if so, why this Bill is proceeding without such an important aspect?

It is not just policy that needs to be fully thrashed out if the Government is committed to this reform, but there also needs to be a big expansion of the Director of Public Prosecutions in terms of funding, staffing and expertise. The Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland was very clear in its recommendations on the various policing oversight bodies in that there was too much confusion, too much overlap and not enough independence. Under this Bill, the oversight structure will change significantly with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, expanding to become the office of the police ombudsman, the Policing Authority and the Garda Inspectorate merging into the policing and community safety authority, and the introduction of a new independent examiner for national security legislation.

Broadly, these reforms are welcome and there is significant progress being made on a number of fronts, but there are improvements which need to be made in order to really ensure the independence of these bodies. Independence is the foundation for any sort of oversight body, especially an ombudsman, but when that independence is weakened, the whole organisation fails. The Bill, as currently drafted, falls short of independence. GSOC has raised significant concerns about the lack of institutional independence for the new office of the police ombudsman. In several areas of its functioning, the Bill imposes a level of involvement from the Minister for Justice and the Garda Commissioner which is completely inconsistent with the Venice principles and the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland. Requiring ministerial consent for operational matters flies in the face of the autonomy of the ombudsman, the Minister should not need to be told anything, and to have the ombudsman needing to ask the Garda Commissioner for advance permission to search a Garda premises is a farce. The Garda Commissioner is not independent. He is the effective CEO of the Garda Síochána and the ombudsman should not need permission from the body it is overseeing to do its job.

Many concerns were raised on this during pre-legislative scrutiny in regard to how these processes for asking permission will interfere with the speed and efficiency of the ombudsman, as well as compromising the integrity of investigations. After pre-legislative scrutiny, the Government added an obligation for the ombudsman to get a warrant from the District Court in order to search a police premises, in addition to the requirement to consult the Commissioner. The requirement to get a warrant from the District Court should be sufficient on its own and the obligation to consult the Commissioner needs to be removed from the Bill, a point I would argue strongly.

The Bill also adds a statutory obligation for the new ombudsman to complete business in a timely manner. It is essential that people see justice done and progress made on any complaints they bring forward. The time taken to process GSOC complaints has been the subject of a lot of debate over the last few years but I think this section of the Bill misses the core issue at hand. By putting the statutory obligation to be timely on only one party, the ombudsman, it is very much framing the issue as if it is GSOC which has been dragging its heels on purpose with regard to investigations. It is often down to lack of resourcing, a lack of compliance from complainants and, unfortunately, the Garda failing to comply with investigations in a timely manner. If there is going to be a statutory duty on the ombudsman to process complaints in a timely fashion, there must be a corresponding duty for the Garda to co-operate in a timely manner. GSOC has been very clear that the proposed expansion of its functions will require a significant increase in resources, personnel and expertise. I hope the Government will be forthcoming in providing GSOC, the Policing Authority and the Garda Inspectorate with all the resources they need to ensure the transition into new bodies goes smoothly.

In the time I have left, I want to talk about some other aspects.

An Ceann Comhairle

I apologise to the Deputy, but the time has elapsed. He has 14 and a half minutes remaining.

Debate adjourned.