When the two whistleblowers on the penalty points scandal stepped forward into the public light, having been frustrated in their efforts to bring the matter to a conclusion within the Garda Síochána, the instinct of the Minister for Justice and Equality was to rubbish these two men. He did so publicly. He did, of course, allege that they refused to co-operate with internal Garda procedures, which was patently false. The same Minister and members of the Government tried to prevent the whistleblower, Sergeant Maurice McCabe, from appearing before the Committee of Public Accounts. Members of the Government backbenches seek to frustrate the whistleblower from receiving a transcript of the evidence he gave to the committee.

This is disingenuous nonsense.

Damage has been done to the Garda Síochána, to accountability and to whistleblowing within that organisation. The chief author of the damage is none other than the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter. The mystery is that the Taoiseach stands by him regardless, as do all members of Fine Gael and Labour. This causes much public bewilderment. The same Minister is now charged with drawing up the terms of reference for the review into what happened in GSOC, the bugging of the offices of those that police the police. Yesterday evening, the Minister came to the House to tell us there is no evidence of any surveillance on those offices. It harks back to his initial Dáil statement when he sought to bury the story yet the Taoiseach entrusts him to draw up the terms of reference for this half baked review. Who is the Taoiseach trying to fool? It is so far wide of the mark and so clearly deficient as to be laughable. It would be comedy if the issues at hand were not so serious. Deputy Shatter has relieved his friend and former political contributor, Mr. Connolly, of his duties. Very interesting.

The Deputy should stay away from these sort of allegations.

No, it is a matter of record.

I suggest that the Taoiseach relieves Deputy Shatter of his duties. With regard to the most serious allegation, that of bugging of the GSOC offices, I suggest the Taoiseach does the right thing at this point and uses the legislation available to him to establish, as a matter of urgency, a fully independent and functioning committee of investigation.

I dealt with this yesterday. The Government made a decision that it was appropriate that a High Court judge should look into the question of the chronology and sequence of events that took place in this matter, which led to the public interest investigation pertaining to safety concerns commenced by GSOC. The Government also mandated the Minister for Justice and Equality, in conjunction with me as Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Attorney General------

His babysitters.

-----to work on the terms of reference. It is not just a question of the Minister for Justice and Equality happening to be the Minister with responsibility for personally producing terms of reference for the High Court judge. These are advised by the Attorney General. The terms of reference will be published today and the Minister is appearing before the committee today. I expect members may want to discuss this point with him. The opportunity in the terms of reference will be to review and to assess the evidence, if any, of the security breach within the GSOC office, to establish any facts in respect of that and to make recommendations regarding measures to be taken to improve the existing security arrangements at the GSOC offices for the purposes of addressing risks to the data and communication systems in place. All of this will be in public and will be discussed and the judge to be named will report back within eight weeks. I am sure Members accept the involvement of a High Court judge is completely objective and completely independent-----

No.

-----and he will have unfettered access to the technological report produced by the British company and the peer review produced for the Minister in respect of technology and communications. That will be published in the report of a High Court judge and debated in the House. We are trying to ensure the putting in place of more effective systems for GSOC.

That will allow those who wish to make complaints to GSOC do so in the knowledge that their complaints will be heard and, if appropriate, acted upon. It should be an effective system and much more effective than what currently applies. That is the reason we involve the Oireachtas committee, members of the public with an interest in this, State servants of one sort or another-----

Maybe Angela Merkel.

They should be involved with the High Court judge to review, analyse, comment on and question all of the documentation, reports, statements and technology so we can get a system that works and in which the GSOC entity and An Garda Síochána have credibility. The judge will report inside eight weeks.

All the evidence to date indicates very clearly that the Government has no interest in effective systems of oversight or governance. The Taoiseach has established that very plainly in public view. It is astonishing that the Labour Party and Fine Gael are to be allowed to be complicit in Alan Shatter's activities, which are aimed at undermining whistleblowers within An Garda Síochána and burying any controversy arising in respect of malpractice by An Garda Síochána. In this particular instance, it is a most serious allegation of potential bugging of the oversight offices. Alan Shatter is the lead Minister in this but the Taoiseach is his boss and those who sit around the Cabinet table are his colleagues. They are responsible for the actions he undertakes.

Could we have a question please?

I believe I speak for a great many people when I say I cannot for the life of me understand why Alan Shatter has been allowed to bully, ballyrag and bad-mouth Garda whistleblowers. For the life of me I cannot understand why the Taoiseach would be complicit in his actions, which are clearly aimed-----

Will the Deputy put a question?

-----at playing down, setting aside or even whitewashing issues in respect of GSOC.

A cover-up.

That is how serious this is. If the Taoiseach cares about public confidence, he has no option but to establish a fully independent inquiry with this High Court judge which arms him with all the powers to call and compel witnesses and papers and come to findings of fact. That is the single act that will put this matter to rest. The Taoiseach knows this and I cannot understand why he has not communicated that to Alan Shatter. It is not too late; the Taoiseach still has an opportunity. I ask him to take that opportunity and not dig a deeper hole, not just for Alan Shatter but for the Garda and the oversight body. It is effectively what has been done up to now.

Those opposite would know about digging holes.

I ask that when Members address the House they apply the normal procedure of addressing people as the Minister or the Deputy rather than calling them by Christian and surnames.

That is good oversight.

It is a bit ironic to have the deputy leader of the Sinn Féin Party talking about expertise in communications and surveillance.

Is that the best the Taoiseach can do?

It is not.

Is that the Deputy's best effort?

I reject Deputy McDonald's assertion that I have no interest in the matter.

What about Fine Gael's history?

We know where those opposite stand on the basis of the Blueshirts so.

As the Deputy is well aware, the vast majority of personnel involved are State servants. Will any of those people refuse to speak to a retired High Court judge about the facts, chronology and sequence of events, comments, reports and statements? Will any of them refuse to do that in the interests of safety, integrity and credibility? I do not think so. If my recollection is correct, when the chairman of the GSOC spoke he indicated that seven people had access to sensitive material and that somebody leaked that information. I do not know who that was.

What is the relevance of this?

We are talking about bugging.

That would be interesting to people in a very sensitive position if there is a concern about security, integrity and credibility. Perhaps somebody might step forward and say "I made this available," or whatever.

Is the Taoiseach undermining GSOC again?

In any event the Minister for Justice and Equality has stated he is not happy with the structure of this legislation and the confidential recipient structure as it currently exists.

I asked about an independent inquiry.

The Deputy wants a public inquiry.

An independent inquiry.

Of course that is what she wants, as she always wants public inquiries.

Independent.

What is being hidden?

The Government made a very clear decision to ask an eminent retired High Court judge to go through all this-----

On what terms?

-----and report publicly within eight weeks. That report will be published and debated here and it can be debated within committees. The Oireachtas committee dealing with justice matters will have its own reflections in public session about the structure of the Act.

It will be over cups of coffee.

Deputy McDonald has no faith.

In Alan Shatter? No.

She has no faith in the former High Court judge being able to produce an objective and independent report on this.

She did not say that. The Taoiseach is digging.

There is no faith in the Minister.

Deputy McDonald has no faith in the legal system. All she wants are endless commissions of inquiry.

Who is writing the terms of reference for the judge? That is the question.

The Taoiseach is clearly annoyed about the Labour Party.

I heard some of the comments of Sinn Féin Members last night and they make very interesting reading. In this case the Government has made a clear decision and a High Court judge will get all the assistance he needs so he can report within eight weeks. This is about having a structure that works and which has integrity and credibility, both for the GSOC and the Garda Síochána. These are two fundamental aspects of our society. The Minister has already said this is not working-----

Maybe he is the problem.

He has no credibility.

Who determines the terms of reference for the judge?

We need everybody involved to make that happen. Perhaps, for once, Deputy McDonald might have a little faith in the integrity and objectivity of an independent High Court judge.

What about the Minister?

Shameful.