|
Minister for Justice,
Equality and Law Reform (Mr. McDowell):
Mr. McDowell: It is
standard practice for visiting Heads of State and other similar VIPs to
make the Government, via the Department of Foreign Affairs, aware of any
intention to visit or pass through the State so that any necessary
security arrangements may be put in place to ensure an incident-free
event from the perspectives of both the visiting VIP and the local
communities. In the case of two stopovers by US President Bush at
Shannon Airport on 1 and 5 March last, this standard practice was fully
adhered to. In response, the Garda authorities put in place security
arrangements at Shannon Airport commensurate with the risk associated
with the profile and standing of a President of the United States of
America. These arrangements included the deployment of Garda personnel
supported by the Defence Forces acting as an aid to the civil power.
It is not the practice and it would be contrary to the public interest
to detail the specific security arrangements in place at Shannon,
including the number of Garda personnel involved. In this regard, I hope
that the Deputy will appreciate that revealing such information about
past security arrangements would be manifestly detrimental to the very
purpose of invoking such arrangements in the future.
I have previously informed this House that the Garda authorities
deployed 281 members to police the Love Ulster parade on 25 February,
with an additional 67 member detachment of the public order unit held
discreetly in reserve. As the appalling scenes of rioting developed, a
further 138 members arrived to assist, including a 47-strong additional
group of members drawn from the public order unit. Although for sound
security reasons I am not in a position to detail the precise number of
gardaí deployed at Shannon, I can say, perhaps to the Deputy’s
disappointment, that numbers did not exceed those initially deployed at
the rally in Dublin city centre, contrary to some media reports. There
were fewer people at Shannon for the Bush visits than were initially
deployed for the Love Ulster rally in O’Connell Street.
I am not in a position to provide details of the costs incurred by the
Garda Síochána in respect of the Love Ulster rally or the Shannon
stopovers, as this information is still being collated by Garda
management and is not yet available. I wish, however, to comment upon
the attempted juxtaposition of policing strengths at the Love Ulster
rally and the security arrangements at Shannon Airport. We are dealing
with two entirely separate and distinct kinds of Garda operation. The
two events were entirely separate in nature and, consequently, demanded
an entirely separate response for which comparisons are invalid, except
to say that, contrary to what was printed in newspapers, the number of
gardaí deployed for President Bush’s visits to Shannon was smaller than
the number initially deployed to police the Love Ulster rally.
Mr. Gormley: The Minister has not given many details, citing
security reasons. I have nothing to go on other than the Minister’s
assurance that we cannot compare the demonstrations. Only nine people
stood in the rain in the middle of the night to demonstrate at Shannon
Airport. I hope the Minister accepts that many people will be annoyed to
discover that a major security operation was mounted in Shannon to
protect one man, albeit the President of the United States and
commander-in-chief of US forces in Iraq, while on the other hand there
were insufficient gardaí on the streets of Dublin to protect the
citizens of the city from a rampaging mob who engaged in wanton violence
and caused millions of euro worth of damage to business. Does this not
demonstrate that the Minister’s priorities are skewed?
Will the Minister tell the House the basis on which he mounted the
security operation in Shannon? Did he have prior information that there
would be trouble? There was no inkling of it on the Internet. Could the
Minister explain how neither he nor the Garda had any inkling of
potential violence in Dublin when the Internet was alive with traffic
that indicated there would be trouble. The Minister has surveillance of
the Internet but this did not require much effort. One need only have
looked at the various sites and blogs. Deputy Costello indicated that
there could be violence when he spoke in the House. How could the
Minister not have a clue what would happen in Dublin when he is the
Minister who knows what he knows?
Mr. McDowell: The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
does not decide the security arrangements at any event. Such decisions
are for the operational judgment of gardaí under the Commissioner. I am
not consulted in advance and have no input into Garda security
arrangements. I do not micro-manage them. The strength of the Garda
Síochána at either event or at any other is not dictated by me so my
priorities are not skewed.
I notice the Deputy said he has nothing to go on since I gave no figures
or costs. He has nothing to go on anyway because his point is flawed.
More gardaí were not deployed at Shannon than at the Love Ulster rally.
To say otherwise is not true. The fact that only nine of Deputy
Gormley’s sympathisers turned up in the middle of the night at Shannon
is ex post facto. If 500 of his friends had turned up, he would be the
first to say if there had been an incident that I was unprepared for it.
Going back to the Love Ulster events, either this House thinks it is
better at policing events than the Garda or it does not. I do not under
any circumstances pre-empt the way in which the Garda Síochána chooses
to allocate resources save to say that it enjoys unprecedented resources
in terms of numbers and money. When the main constituents of the rainbow
Government were in office, the number of gardaí fell.
Mr. Gormley: If the Garda has such resources at its disposal, why
was not it not possible to monitor the Internet traffic that showed
there would be trouble in Dublin? I have seen the sites telling people
not to go into town because there would be trouble on Parnell Square. I
do not understand how the Minister and Garda Síochána did not know about
this in advance.
Mr. McDowell: I am not acquainted with the websites that Deputy Gormley
stares at in the early hours of the morning, but one of them,
www.indymedia.ie, has in the past produced interesting footage. On this
occasion, it produced footage - from outside - of the Progressive
Democrats Party offices being ransacked by a group of Deputy Gormley’s
type of people.
Mr. Gormley: That remark is out of line.
Mr. McDowell: It made interesting viewing. We downloaded it and
sent it to the Garda for investigation.
Mr. Gormley: The Minister cannot abuse Dáil privilege by making
serious allegations against me. He is out of order. I would not condone
any such behaviour and I politely ask him to withdraw his remark.
Mr. McDowell: I am merely saying that the party and viewpoint
with which most people, including me, would most closely associate the
anoraked group which descended on my party’s offices would be the
Deputy’s.
Mr. Costello: The Minister is confusing Deputy Gormley’s
supporters with the Taoiseach’s followers.
Mr. Gormley: His comments are outrageous. He has abused Dáil
privilege in the past to engage in this kind of slur. He misled——
Mr. J. O’Keeffe: Deputy Gormley should not take the Minister
seriously. His behaviour is par for the course.
An Ceann Comhairle: My understanding is that the House is
debating a priority question for which the time has concluded.
Mr. Gormley: On a point of order, the Ceann Comhairle cannot
allow a Minister to behave in this fashion. He has cast a slur by making
a serious, outrageous allegation.
An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy may not make statements during
questions.
Mr. Gormley: The Minister misled the House on 12 December and had
done so on other occasions. He abuses Dáil privilege on a regular basis
and has nothing but contempt for the House. He should disown the
disgraceful remarks he made.
An Ceann Comhairle: That is not a point of order.
Mr. McDowell: There was muesli in the air and open-toed sandals
on the street. |