Reforming justice

Peter Cheney analyses the reform agenda set out for the Department of Justice and Equality after the Garda tapes scandal.

The Department of Justice and Equality has been given two years to radically improve its governance and structures following the highly critical review into its workings. The department’s core functions cover the civil and criminal justice systems, national security, and immigration. It regulates a varied range of activities including betting and gambling, insolvency, charities, property transactions, the classification of films and publications, and the setting of summer and winter time.

Equality policy was added to its remit in 1997 and has remained there apart from a brief move to the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs (2010-2011).

Set up on 3 June, the review reported back to the Minister on 11 July after conducting at least 45 interviews and reviewing 100 documents. The exercise was led by Dublin Airport Authority CEO Kevin Toland and also involved consultants Pat McLoughlin and Greg Sparks, former Attorney General David Byrne SC, former Secretary General Geraldine Tallon, and Kathleen O’Toole – a former Chief Inspector with the Garda Inspectorate.

Importantly, the team recognised the department’s key strengths – a loyal and professional staff who are “very careful to be correct in everything that they write, respond to and implement” and are motivated by a strong sense of public service. An increasing workload has coincided with a decreasing workforce and management structures “have not kept pace” with these changes.

A “closed and unnecessarily secretive” culture stands out as the main weakness. This approach is, of course, sometimes necessary but has become “part of its DNA”. The department therefore looks inward and is reluctant to take new ideas on board.

Senior managers appeared to have a much more positive view of the organisation than many of its staff and external stakeholders. Leadership and management practices needed to focus more clearly on core priorities. Oversight and accountability arrangements for the “proliferation of agencies” were lacking.

In the dispute over Garda recordings, four main failings occurred:

• no one person was in charge of the overall issue;

• there was no overall plan to deal with the issues as they unfolded;

• the serious potential impact of the issues was not recognised; and

• managers were unable to see where the situation had gone wrong.

The events led to the Alan Shatter’s resignation on 7 May but the department had not yet carried out an internal review on how its performance could have been improved. Shatter had intensively focused on legislative reform but the department was struggling to prioritise the “ambitious and competing workloads involved.”

The current strategy statement (covering 2011-2014) did not have clear priorities and the “strongly silo-based culture” made co-ordination and the sharing of information more difficult.

Only a small number of key performance indicators were in place and the risk register was not “effectively integrated” into the overall management system. The management advisory committee acted as “an administrative, procedural forum with a limited leadership role” which focused on operational rather than strategic issues.

Review group members also found inadequate record keeping for key meetings and decisions. Staff tended to retire without their knowledge being noted and passed on. Relationships with agencies were generally “very informal” and, critically, the department “does not appear truly to hold agencies to account.”

The relationship between the Minister and the Garda was meant to be formalised in the 2005 Garda Síochána Act but the review group found a “deferential relationship” in favour of the Garda and “a lack of proper strategic accountability.” Support for the oversight bodies had “waned over time” and there was a conflict of interest in the Garda Ombudsman and Garda Inspectorate both reporting to the department’s Garda Division.

Given the ability and experience of staff, the review group is confident that the department can reform itself and help to lead change in the Civil Service.

Change

Managers from other parts of the Civil Service (and elsewhere) will be brought in to facilitate a ‘programme for change’. This was involve drawing up a vision of the future culture of the department, changing the existing culture of secrecy and insularity, setting up more formal structures for working with agencies, and establishing key performance objectives.

The department will be restructured into justice and home affairs portfolios – with the latter incorporating policing, prisons, courts, equality and integration, and headed up by a Deputy Secretary General. A review of IT systems will also occur. The new ‘management operating protocol’ will clearly define roles and responsibilities. The management advisory committee will hold a core monthly meeting on strategy and shorter weekly meetings on current and emerging issues.

An Garda Síochána must be held to account as a “critical and resource intensive public service” while respecting its operational independence. This will be achieved by a more formal working relationship, setting key priorities and ensuring that they are delivered on.

The Garda Inspectorate should still report to the Minister and department but not the Garda Division. The Garda Ombudsman could report to the proposed Garda authority and the Secretary General should take the lead on how the department should work with the authority.

A corporate secretariat (supporting the Minister) and an effective human resources unit would also be put in place. The press office would report directly to the Secretary General and have direct access to the Minister. A quarterly review of the risk register is also planned.

Minister Frances Fitzgerald accepted the report and expected the new Secretary General to play “a pivotal role in managing and embedding the recommendations”. Brian Purcell has stepped aside from the post after 23 years of service.

Fitzgerald acknowledged the “significant recent disquiet over the administration and oversight of justice in this State” and described the key findings as “serious and hard-hitting.” The new Garda authority would add “a valuable additional layer of transparency and public accountability” and the department “must become a 21st century organisation to meet 21st century challenges.”

Australian model

Most other common law jurisdictions have split their justice ministries into a ‘department of justice’ and a ‘department of home affairs’. The closest comparison with Ireland’s model is found in Australia, where the Attorney General’s Department has a similar wide-ranging remit. The Attorney General is assisted by the Minister of Justice, who currently focuses on law enforcement and emergency management. The review group also highlights that the department has three strong deputy secretaries with clearly defined areas of responsibility. Any comparison therefore has to take Australia’s federal system into account as each state and territory has its own Attorney General and justice system.