Here we are again talking about practices within An Garda Síochána. We have had the O'Higgins report and the O'Neill report and earlier this week the Tánaiste announced a new commission of investigation, all of which were essentially designed with the same remit, that is, to investigate the practices of An Garda Síochána which underpinned the appalling treatment of whistleblowers in the force. Surely, this underlines the point that there is something fundamentally wrong at the most senior level of An Garda Síochána.

The same commission was announced by the Tánaiste with zero recourse to the Dáil in advance regarding the terms of reference, and we will have a debate on the matter this afternoon. That was unfortunate. The minority Government of 59 members, underpinned by Fianna Fáil, does not represent parliamentary democracy, and the mandate of the entire Dáil must be remembered. It feels like a throwback to the majoritarianism and arrogance that developed in the last Dáil. I welcome the debate this afternoon, which comes after the fact.

There seems to have been a kind of attitude that things can be managed. This has spectacularly backfired. Two weeks ago, John Mooney had a Sunday Times piece dealing with a report which the Tánaiste had been aware of since last year yet which had not found its way into the public domain. The report concerned serious mishandling of funds in Templemore Garda training college. In any other week, the story would have run and run, but the Tánaiste got lucky with the news cycle. The report is indicative of the malaise in the force.

The Commissioner's statement last night that she was surprised by the revelations made yesterday astonished me and, I am sure, others because these allegations had been circulating at political and media levels for some months. If the Commissioner genuinely did not know about them, there is a very serious failure in the intelligence gathering capabilities of her office, and indeed the force, and a serious problem with internal communication. Given the tittle-tattle that the last Commissioner seemed to know about Mick Wallace's minor motoring offence, for example, it is very hard to believe that the current Commissioner is oblivious to the most serious and scurrilous allegations about her and Sergeant McCabe that were circulating. Given that it appears RTE correspondents were made privy to the intricate details of the O'Higgins report before it ever saw the light of day, the Commissioner might ask if RTE is getting more information than she is. It is very hard to believe the Commissioner's statement last night, and it begs the question what else we can believe. We in the Social Democrats see no option but for the Commissioner to step aside while the commission undertakes its work, given her central role in disciplinary procedures in the force.

Does the Tánaiste accept that the establishment of a third inquiry into the force is indicative of serious problems at the most senior level of management? Does she accept that the force is undermined? Does she find it credible that the Commissioner did not know about the allegations that were circulating? Will she publish the report about Templemore college?

Regarding Templemore college, the Deputy referenced a story which I think appeared in The Sunday Times. That was in the public arena, and questions were answered on it in the justice committee well before it was. Detailed information was put on the record about the audit and the actions that were being taken internally to deal with what had been uncovered by the audit of the college. That is the reality of the situation. However, what was put in the public arena is unacceptable in practice and governance terms, and that must be changed. My understanding at this point is that procedures have been changed. They were far too informal, but action has been taken internally to address that. I am very happy to come into the House to talk about this at some point and put all the information I have on the floor of the Dáil.

Regarding the various issues that have arisen with An Garda Síochána, I have never denied that ongoing change, modernisation and reform is necessary as far as the Garda is concerned. That is the job of management and the job of Government in so far as I and the Government can set the parameters that will help that reform and that change. That is what I have done in establishing the independent Policing Authority, which is a sea change in the way the oversight of An Garda Síochána is done in this country. It is extremely important that we now have the independent Policing Authority dealing with a whole range of issues. I did refer the question of whistleblowing and how it was dealt with in An Garda Síochána to the independent Policing Authority many months ago. I have received the report from the authority about that. It suggested a number of improvements, and they have been dealt with. I will not take up the time of the House in putting on the record the other changes that have been made within An Garda Síochána regarding whistleblowing, but it is important to say that the manner in which whistleblowing is dealt with is an area that every organisation must examine. Any time I have had discussions with An Garda Síochána, my questions have concerned the examination of how well whistleblowers were being dealt with and the procedures that were in place. I have always been looking for improvements in this regard, and that work goes on.

As far as the Commissioner's position is concerned, I make the point that regarding Judge O'Neill's inquiry, the various parties co-operated fully with the O'Neill review, and I have no doubt but that they will do the very same when it comes to the commission of investigation. This is a commission with strong powers, and everybody has said they will co-operate with it. I will not repeat what the Deputy said about the Garda Commissioner's statement, but the Garda Commissioner made a statement last night outlining her view and her response. I have no reason to believe that is not the truth of her situation. We must take the statement she made last night. I will not question it the way the Deputy has. It is a very serious charge to make against anyone that he or she would, by innuendo - this is what is being suggested - try to obstruct the work of a commission of investigation in any way. It is extremely unfair to make such a charge when there is no evidence whatsoever to support it. Let us remind ourselves that a commission of investigation has very extensive legal powers, should there be any obstruction of its work.

I do not believe I was making allegations.

A very extensive piece of secondary legislation was produced in 2007, namely, the Garda Síochána (Discipline) Regulations. The Commissioner is central to these regulations and to any disciplinary process against rank and file members of the Garda, such as Superintendent David Taylor, for example, who finds himself at the centre of the process overseen by the Commissioner. He has been suspended for almost two years. An investigation into the matter was initiated by the Commissioner and conducted by her own husband. The Commissioner is a subject to investigation in this inquiry.

It is very difficult to see how the force is not undermined by the Commissioner's staying in situ in respect of the disciplinary aspect of this case while the commission of investigation is under way. I ask without prejudice how the Tánaiste can think it is appropriate to be subject to an inquiry and perform the disciplinary procedure. I encourage the Tánaiste to reconsider encouraging the Commissioner to step aside for the duration of the inquiry.

I have already made the point but it bears repeating that in my and the Government's approach to this, and on taking legal advice on it, I have had to consider our general constitutional obligations to protect the good names and reputations of persons who may be the subject of untested allegations. Allegations have been made in the recent past in this House which on detailed examination by appropriate parties were found not to be correct. That happened very recently. We owe it to people to follow the correct procedures to have the right standards, the right approach when we are dealing with an issue such as this. It is an obligation. All of us would want to have our good names and reputations protected. We would not want people rushing to judgment and by taking certain actions we could be undermining that. That is why I am making the point that these are not circumstances where there is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing. These allegations are seriously contested by those against whom they are made. The judge who has examined this for us, Mr. Justice O'Neill, has spoken to all the main players involved and examined the protected disclosures, which nobody else in this House has had the opportunity to see because they are protected. He has said that the way to deal with this is to have a full commission of inquiry. The Commissioner and indeed the other parties have made clear that they will co-operate fully. We should await the outcome of the commission of inquiry.