Winds of cultural change need to blow through Garda HQ
DESPITE the stinging criticism of Garda headquarters in the latest Garda Inspectorate report, one would have some sympathy for whoever in Phoenix Park has the task of reading and digesting the 400-page tome.
It covers everything from the structure of the organisation at national, regional, and local levels, an extensive analysis of the deployment of resources on the ground, including the new roster system and levels of supervision, further details on the condition of the force’s technology, financial management issues, and the general hierarchical culture.
There are 81 recommendations in thereport, spanning 11 pages. The executive summary alone is 37 pages.
This is on the back of the 490-page crime investigation report which the inspectorate published a year ago. That was even more damning of the force, covering the recording (and non-recording) of crime, the investigation and prosecution of crime, and the treatment of victims.
What sets this week’s report apart — and is of concern to both people within the organisation and among the wider public — is the trenchant criticism of the failure of Garda management to implement changes recommended both by the inspectorate and other inquiries.
The report said “many of the policing issues” that resulted in inquiries, tribunals, and government reports could have been “minimised or avoided” if the recommendations had been implemented.
Chief inspector Bob Olson said there had been “minimal and ineffective changes” in the structures of the force despite all the recommendations. In the case of the inspectorate, some of them go back almost 10 years.
The report puts this failure largely down to the traditional culture of An Garda Síochána, driven and inculcated by Garda headquarters.
“The current culture is inhibiting change,” the inspectorate said. “Many staff view the organisation as closed, defensive, and having a blame culture.”
The inspectorate spoke to 2,500 employees of the force, both Garda members and civilians.
But how do you change that culture? It is a culture that has continued, in one way or another, since the Morris Tribunal reports right through to the scandals and crises that buffeted the Garda in 2014 and the promised “sea change” with the replacement of the Garda commissioner, new powers for GSOC, and establishing the Policing Authority.
Mr Olson said that to change the culture, you must first change the operating structures of the force — which in part involves decentralising power and control from Garda HQ downwards, to the regions and the divisions.
“We’re saying first change the structure — and we’re hoping there’s someone at the top driving the change — and that a new operational culture will develop over time,” said Mr Olsen, adding that the problem was not with the gardaí or supervisors on the frontline.
“It’s not the rank and file, they are doing the best they can with the tools they have. [The problem] is a big mix, from lack of money, lack of technology, and lack of governance — governance is the big one.”
The report argues for sweeping structural changes, with power and resources being diverted from Dublin to the regions. It proposes replacing six regions with three — Dublin, North, and South — and halving the number of regional assistant commissioners. It calls for the amalgamation of divisions, from 28 to somewhere in the region of 15-18.
A chief superintendent would be in charge of larger divisions, supported by four to five superintendents who, instead of being tasked with geographical areas, will have responsibility for certain functions.
In addition the national units will be regionalised, with branches in each of the three regions, to be at crime scenes, do the assessments, and respond to incidents.
As it stands, the report says the national units are “very much Dublin focused” and, in many cases, including murder investigations, are increasingly not attending locally.
At national level, the report wants the various departments to be realigned significantly.
The current National Support Services will be split between Serious Crime Services and Operational Support Services.
The Serious Crime Services will have a new Major Investigation Teams section, covering murder, kidnap, and cold-case reviews as well as an expanded and beefed-up Serious and Organised Crime Unit, a Public Protection Unit, an Offender Management Unit, and Forensics.
The Operational Support Services would include a new Firearms Command Unit — bringing together the regional support units and the ERU, Roads Policing, Command and Control, Operational Support, and Major Emergency and Event Planning.
It would mean the Crime and Security Branch would lose control over the ERU, armed response functions currently carried out by the Special Detective Unit, and emergency planning.
Crime and Security would be replaced by a new Security and Intelligence Services, but would be expanded by bringing local surveillance units into the National Surveillance Unit as well as a new Border Security Unit from the Garda National Bureau of Immigration.
The inspectorate highlights, again, key shortcomings in garda expertise, including in cybercrime.
Deputy inspector Mark Toland said gardaí have “no capacity” in this area, which he said was an “emerging threat” globally.
Likewise, they again highlighted the backlog in the Computer Crime Investigations Unit, with delays of up to four years in examining computers. This has jeopardised investigations in child sex abuse and indecent imagery prosecutions.
The report said the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation was struggling to cope with demand. It said all fraud cases were referred to it, but some of the cases sent back out to divisions were considered “too complex” for local investigators.
The report said the bureau does not have “dedicated financial analysts” and has to look for help from elsewhere.
The inspectorate said all major fraud cases should go to the Serious and Organised Crime Unit and that it should have the necessary expertise. The Computer Crime Investigations Unit would merge with the Technical Bureau to form a Forensics Unit.
Garda HQ has been tight-lipped in responding so far to the report and its recommendations.
Some senior sources have pointed out that the restructuring proposed was a “colossal” undertaking. They also cast doubt on the case for reducing the number of regions and amalgamating divisions.
One source said amalgamating Dublin North Central and Dublin South Central — as the report proposes — would place an impossible burden on the one chief superintendent.
“One chief superintendent could not deal with the work load,” said the source. “They are two of the busiest divisions in the country.”
The source also disputed claims by Mr Toland that 75% of the recommendations could be implemented with little or no cost and that many were a “flick of a switch”.
He also took issue with the criticism of the culture of Garda management and said many changes have been implemented.
But he said there was an acceptance of a need to delegate authority to the regions.
What happens now is not clear. The inspectorate has recommended a high-level independent body, such as the Policing Authority, be tasked by the justice minister to oversee implementation of the commissioner’s recommendations.
Noirín O’Sullivan, in turn, is set to give a presentation to the minister next week setting out her response to the report and her reform plan.
It will be up to Frances Fitzgerald, perhaps in consultation with the chair of the Policing Authority, Josephine Feehily, to decide the next step.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
