Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

6. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality in view of the renewed concerns and requests of Afri and Archbishop Desmond Tutu regarding policing issues in Corrib and the wider examination of police accountability issues here, if he will now order an independent inquiry in this regard in view of the fact that he has already refused in December 2013 to exercise his ministerial power to order a practice, policies and procedures GSOC review under section 106 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005. [19268/14]

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The last time I raised this issue in the House in December 2013, the Minister denigrated citizens exercising their legal and constitutional right to protest at the Corrib gas project as tourist protestors intent on sabotaging jobs. Archbishop Desmond Tutu does not share the Minister’s opinion in this regard. He, along with the former UN assistant secretary general Denis Halliday and Afri, have recently called again for an urgent and comprehensive independent inquiry into the policing of the Corrib gas project. Will the Minister finally bow to political public pressure and order an independent GSOC inquiry under section 106 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 or will he wait until the matter escalates into another full-blown wholesale fiasco as he did with the penalty points and other issues?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy can never resist the opportunity to be personal.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have never been personal yet, unlike the Minister himself.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Significant protest activity over a number of years has occurred in the north Mayo area connected with the development of an important natural resource. This has necessitated the temporary redeployment of large numbers of gardaí, including specially trained personnel, from throughout the western region into the Belmullet district. It is deeply regrettable that so much Garda resources have to be tied up in the policing of protest activity at this location. However, this is absolutely necessary in view of the actions of some of the protestors, many of whom, as I have said previously, are not from the area and engage in acts of public disorder, as well as damage to property. Indeed between 2011 and 2013, 38 defendants were brought before the courts for public order offences, criminal damage and assault on gardaí. Such actions cannot be tolerated. The aim of the policing measures in place is to prevent public order offences and to ensure people can go about their lawful business.

Regarding my powers under section 106 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005, I must point out that GSOC has investigated 124 complaints against members of the force arising from policing at this location and that other matters remain under investigation by it. The Deputy may wish to note, however, that in excess of 100 of these complaints have either been found by GSOC to be inadmissible or not to have disclosed breaches of discipline on the part of the members complained of. Those that did indicate a breach of discipline on the part of the Garda member concerned related to the behaviour of the individual member rather than practices, policies or procedures within An Garda Síochána. Given these circumstances, I do not see a necessity for an independent inquiry into the policing operation in north County Mayo.

The total cost of policing these protests has now reached in excess of €16 million. This does not include the significant cost of the basic salaries of the members of An Garda Síochána who have performed duties at the Corrib gas project as these arise in the normal course. Such expenditure comes at a time of economic difficulty for the State and when such resources could be put to far better use elsewhere.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can talk about the cost of it - we would all prefer if there were no costs - but that is a separate issue. GSOC is currently involved in a section 98 investigation into the delivery of alcohol to Belmullet Garda station in 2007. Section 106 was drafted to address the precise type of systemic policing issues relating to practices, policies and procedures that have arisen in Corrib. Rank and file gardaí would get due process and fair procedures under a section 106 investigation. Individual gardaí would not run the risk of being scapegoated for implementing the aggressive and targeted policing policy that is being pursued in Corrib. The policy to which I refer was decided on at a much more senior level within the Garda and the political structure. A section 106 investigation is the only type of investigation that has the potential to get to the bottom of this issue at all levels of the force. There is no point in hanging the foot soldiers. The decision makers who sent decent gardaí to behave in a poor and aggressive manner need to be held to account. Only a section 106 investigation will do that.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It seems the Deputy is generally in favour of hanging everyone who does not share his opinions on various issues. The Garda Síochána Act 2005 sets out the various mechanisms that are available to examine or inquire into malpractice in the Garda. As the Deputy knows, GSOC can initiate an investigation of a general nature if it considers it appropriate to do so. As I have indicated to the Deputy previously, the Garda has passed the allegations relating to alcohol to GSOC, which is entirely independent in the context of investigating these matters. It is not for me to express a view on the various public comments that have been made about policing in this area. All I can say to the Deputy, who dismissively said that money does not matter, is that Garda expenditure of €16 million on overtime matters considerably.

Deputy Mac Lochlainn spoke earlier about Garda resources. In the three years prior to my appointment as Minister, the outgoing Government contributed €5 million towards the purchase of Garda vehicles. During the three years I have spent as Minister, we have made €18 million available for the purchase of Garda vehicles. We could purchase twice as many vehicles for the Garda Síochána if it were not necessary to maintain a continuing Garda security operation at this location.

The Deputy mentioned complaints that have been made about misbehaviour or alleged misconduct by members of the Garda force. As the Deputy knows from the information I have given, a substantial number of complaints have been considered by GSOC. A great many of them have not been upheld. If GSOC's investigation of a complaint validates the allegation of misconduct, I am sure GSOC will reach that conclusion. More than any of us, GSOC has an insight into the nature of what is being alleged against members of the Garda Síochána. GSOC could initiate a general inquiry under section 102 if it determined that such an inquiry was appropriate, but it has not sought to do that.

I will conclude by mentioning that when the Deputy comes into this House, he constantly throws out a whole range of allegations. The complaints that have been made substantially relate to the rank and file members of the force whom the Deputy pretends to wish to protect in this House. The Deputy should substantiate or withdraw the wide-ranging allegation he has made against senior members of the Garda force with regard to the tactics being deployed at Corrib.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputies Daly and Mac Lochlainn want to ask questions. I appeal to Deputy Wallace to be brief because we do not want to run out of time.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No problem. The Minister seems to love misquoting me. I did not say €16 million did not matter - I said it was "a separate issue". The Minister has loved misquoting me for nearly two years now. Can the Minister explain why GSOC asked to be allowed to investigate the Corrib issues under section 106? Can he tell me why 111 complaints were received from one area? He has said that most of them were inadmissible. In how many of these cases did gardaí investigate themselves? All of this keeps going back to the lack of oversight and proper monitoring of any kind of external opinion.

While out of one side of his mouth the Minister says GSOC is wonderful, he keeps undermining and challenging it and refusing to allow it the extra power to use section 106 to investigate practices, policies and procedures. The Minister is limiting GSOC. It is he who cowed it into backing down on the bugging allegations with his outrageous misreporting.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister's response is incredibly poor. It is typical that he has circled the wagons. Although he said he did not want to comment on public order, that is precisely what he did. His answer was completely one-sided on the protestors. He said nothing about the alcohol situation. Could the Minister address the fact that alcohol delivery by a business and Shell to gardaí is being investigated now but has already been the subject of two internal Garda inquiries, which reported that there was no case to answer? The only reason it is being investigated now, despite the fact that the evidence was given to the Department a long time ago, is that an English journalist has put the spotlight on the situation. Again, external pressures are the lever to call the Minister and the Garda to account rather than a genuine question of reform.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Mac Lochlainn has a brief question.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am concerned at having three different questions. Perhaps we could give Deputy Mac Lochlainn a little extra time and I can respond to Deputies Wallace and Daly.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One minute.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I can only regard Deputy Wallace's onslaught as of a regular nature. I missed it over the couple of weeks of the Easter break. There is always an onslaught, drama and allegations about all sorts of things. However, his onslaught about GSOC is extraordinary considering Deputies Wallace and Clare Daly delivered to my Department last October a series of complaints against 24 individuals, mostly concerning the manner in which GSOC had dealt with a broad range of complaints it had received.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister did not give GSOC the power to deal with them.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let the Deputy not accuse me in this House of undermining GSOC when he is running around the place with a series of complaints about the manner in which GSOC has dealt with complaints. Let us have some honesty about these issues.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is the problem.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the specific question the two Deputies raised, GSOC has investigated approximately 124 complaints against members of the force arising from the policing of the Shell to sea protest. Of these complaints, GSOC deemed 37 to be inadmissible. That left 87 admissible cases of which 85 are closed. The following is a breakdown of 57 complaints directly linked to the Shell to sea protest. There were 33 allegations of assault; 17 cases of abuse of authority; three of discreditable conduct; two of discourtesy; and two of neglect of duty. The remaining 30 complaints do not appear to relate directly to the protest, for example, a person driving home having participated in a protest at the Corrib gas site who was stopped by a garda and who subsequently made a complaint about the manner in which he or she was dealt with. There were no adverse findings in these cases. Some seven files out of the 124 were forwarded to the DPP for consideration, and the DPP directed no prosecution in all seven. These are all GSOC investigations. Disciplinary proceedings were recommended in 16 cases under section 95 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005.

Clare Daly (Dublin North, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

How many were investigated internally?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There was one adverse finding as a result of which the member received advice.

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

By any objective analysis, the policing of the Corrib gas debacle was a sad episode in the history of the Garda Síochána. Many of the people of Erris suffered during that period for standing up and confronting a profound injustice to the people of that community and this State in terms of the revenue that was attained from it. The Minister is aware that the UN special rapporteur on human rights, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, among many others, is part of an increasing call for an investigation into these matters. GSOC found that the superintendent in charge should face disciplinary measures. The Garda Commissioner failed to enact that, without any explanation.

We are considering GSOC powers and looking to amend the Garda Síochána legislation, which is coming before the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, so does the Minister believe it appropriate for complaints to be investigated by officers who have served with other officers under investigation? Is it appropriate for GSOC to refer complaints to officers who have served with officers under investigation? Would the Minister recommend that this be changed with the ongoing reviews?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is open to GSOC to determine whether it should investigate a complaint or use the mechanisms provided under the Garda Síochána Act 2005 to ask that a designated officer of An Garda Síochána investigate the complaint. This is a matter on which GSOC, as an independent investigative oversight authority, makes decisions. It is not for me to interfere in its independent oversight, and if I criticised individual decisions of that nature, either Deputy Mac Lochlainn or Deputy Niall Collins would accuse me of undermining the independence of GSOC.

Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Again.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

GSOC makes those decisions. In the context of the review of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, there are a range of worthwhile reforms which could be made regarding statutory revisions in respect of GSOC. It was created under the Garda Síochána Act 2005 and we have almost nine years of experience of GSOC's operations. I look forward with expectation to what the Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality may propose. One of the key issues is whether GSOC would conduct all the investigations that arise when it receives a complaint. It is an issue that is not divorced from the matter of resources and the number of individuals who may be employed by the commission to investigate matters. I invite the committee in its consideration to estimate the financial implications for resources of making such a proposal in light of financial circumstances in which the State remains. In an ideal world I would agree with the Deputy, as it would be preferable for all investigations of complaints to be conducted by a body with oversight. That is not what the statutory provision provides for, but ultimately it is for GSOC to determine which complaints it has received pursuant to the statutory provisions it should investigate and which complaints it should request to be investigated by a member of the force.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you. We must get to the next question.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a final important comment. When GSOC receives the result of an investigation, that is not the end of the matter. It is open to GSOC, under statutory provisions, to request that a matter be further examined or to raise issues regarding the outcome of any such investigation. It is not that GSOC gets a result and it is the end of the matter.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I must call Deputy Daly.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

GSOC exercises an oversight of those investigations, which is frequently forgotten in the context of this issue.