PRESIDENT FACES NEW QUESTIONS OVER JET TO BELFAST
PSNI anger at Higgins’s security escort claim
PRESIDENT Michael D Higgins was under growing pressure last night to clarify a Government jet flight to Belfast in May after PSNI sources told the BBC his claims that they couldn’t cover his security were ‘inconceivable’.
The incumbent candidate was left hiding behind his office, with his campaign refusing to comment and his official Áras spokesman refusing to say who gave Mr Higgins the security advice.
The President travelled by Learjet to Queen’s University to speak at an event organised by the Senator George J Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice.
President Higgins was asked by rival candidate Peter Casey, during Wednesday’s TV debate on Virgin Media, why he used the Learjet for a trip to Belfast, while his State car was also driven to pick him up at
PRESIDENT’S TRANSPORT Belfast airport. Mr Higgins’s reply in the debate was: ‘For security reasons I couldn’t be picked up at the border,’ and that he had to fly to Belfast instead.
On the campaign trail he later added that the Police Service of Northern Ireland were unable to provide security cover.
However, a PSNI source told the BBC last night: ‘It would be inconceivable that the President of Ireland would not have been afforded security if it had been requested.’
The Irish Mail on Sunday attempted to get a response from both the President’s official spokesman and his campaign team but both failed to clarify the issue.
The President’s spokesman Hans Zomer said: ‘The President has made many visits to Northern Ireland by car and is grateful for the support received from the security services. For logistical reasons and on security advice, the President did use the Government plane to Belfast in May, to deliver the Harri Holkeri lecture.
‘It would not be appropriate to further comment on the detail of security arrangements,’ he said.
When the MoS then contacted Mr Higgins’s volunteer campaign spokesman Bernard Harbor about the PSNI comments, he insisted it was a matter for the President’s spokesman.
We asked him specifically if the President had misled the electorate, and Mr Harbor replied: ‘This is a matter for the Áras rather than campaign as we do not have access to security or travel data.’
When it was pointed out that Mr Higgins was speaking as a candidate when he made the remarks, Mr Harbor again refused to answer.
A spokesman for presidential candidate Seán Gallagher said: ‘The comments from the President and subsequent comments from the PSNI are clearly at odds with what the President said and it is important that he clarifies his position immediately.’
Sinn Féin presidential candidate Liadh Ní Riada also called on Mr Higgins to immediately make a public statement on the matter.
She said: ‘It is clear now that Michael D’s claim has caused considerable anger within the PSNI.
‘Michael D Higgins must make a public statement on this matter immediately. This is very serious. He must come clean.’
The PSNI said in a statement: ‘It is the long-established policy of the Police Service of Northern Ireland not to comment on the security arrangements made for individuals.
‘The Police Service of Northern Ireland routinely work with visiting heads of state and other key figures visiting Northern Ireland and make full provisions for their safety in line with their requirements,’ Assistant Chief Constable Alan Todd added.
The clear inference is that the PSNI would have provided security for the President’s visit to Belfast in May if asked to do so.
‘No matter how busy we were with other duties, the fact that there are more than 6,500 PSNI
officers means we would have had the necessary resources to provide an escort if we had been asked,’ said a source.
Last night, Peter Casey returned to the race after briefly suspending his campaign.
Separately, President Higgins has insisted that he should be allowed to use his State car for campaign events during the Áras election race.
He said his use of an official car is necessary for security reasons and that he should not be penalised for it.
A request to use the car came in correspondence sent through his election agent, barrister Conor Power, to the Standards in Public Office Commission.
It resulted in Sipo changing the draft guidelines that would have required the President to account for the costs in his campaign spending.
A copy of the letter, obtained under Freedom of Information legislation, revealed that Mr Higgins wanted any guidelines for the election to be fair to all parties.
The letter said: ‘Being the incumbent he ought not to be constrained as a candidate or be disadvantaged vis-à-vis other candidates.’
In it, Mr Power, a senior counsel, said that the President was ‘uniquely conscious’ of his role as Head of State but should not be subject to ‘strictures and constraints’ that didn’t apply to the five others in the Áras race.
In particular, it raised an issue over the use of an official driver which an early draft of election campaign guidelines had said would be counted as an election expense.
The letter said: ‘It is the President’s understanding, again consistent with previous advice, that his State-provided transport in fact amounts to necessary security over which he has no control.
‘The President remains Head of State until the end of the day before the inauguration of his successor... the President also remains under a duty to carry out his functions throughout the campaign. He is thereby required to use his Presidential transport with attendant security at all times.’
Mr Higgins’s campaign also argued that ‘incidental use’ of services associated with the presidency should not be counted as election expenses.
The letter said: ‘The use of the State car, for example, would not be inappropriate even if the President were travelling to and from an election campaign engagement.
‘However, it would clearly not be appropriate for this official transport to be used in direct support of an election campaign eg, for transporting campaign workers.’
Mr Power said there needed to be clarity on what was allowed in the campaign as early as possible.
Separately, the letter also said that the official website of the President would continue in operation but would not be used for ‘campaigning purposes’.
Mr Power wrote: ‘However, it is intended to point (in a campaignneutral way) to the separate election website. This is consistent with the advice received.’
He concluded by saying that the guidelines needed to specifically address all the issues surrounding the ‘incumbent President running for re-election’.
He said: ‘The absence of same is liable to contribute to avoidable ambiguity and may be the subject of unnecessary distraction in any campaign.’
The difficulties over Mr Higgins entering the Presidential race had been anticipated, according to the records. After being circulated a copy of the draft guidelines, Comptroller and Auditor General Séamus McCarthy said they were ‘likely to be a minefield’.
‘I am not sure if all the exigencies of a sitting President campaigning have been taken into account,’ he wrote.
‘How is a distinction to be made between “enforced” security for the President which will likely see him transported in an official car to all events and elective use of publicly funded resources for electoral purposes?’
An email from Art O’Leary, Secretary General to the President, said the use of a State car did not count for election expenses for the Taoiseach during a general election.
‘Presume the same arrangement will apply and also be reflected in the Presidential election guidelines,’ he wrote.
In a statement, Sipo said its draft guidelines had been published on August 13 with the intention of seeking feedback and comments from potential candidates.
Sipo said: ‘The commission had inadvertently overlooked... specific guidance on the use of State cars by a holder of public office who is a candidate at the election and is required to use such facilities.
‘It was subsequently brought to the commission’s attention that this specific guidance on the use of State cars was not included in the draft guidelines.’
They said the final version of the guidelines, published on August 31, had reflected this.
Asked about the correspondence, the Office of the President – which has publicly committed to greater transparency around spending at the Áras – said: ‘We have no comment to make on the matter.’
‘PSNI routinely works with heads of state’ State car necessary for security reasons