GARDA COLLEGE WORSE THAN FÁS AND CONSOLE, SAYS HEAD OF HR
What Garda HR chief was told when he asked of concerns at Templemore
GARDA Commissioner Nóirín O’Sullivan dismissed concerns about financial irregularities at the Garda College in Templemore, Co. Tipperary, when they were first raised with her at the disputed ‘very brief’ two-hour meeting in July 2015, the dossier claims.
Detailed minutes of the meeting between the Commissioner and the Executive Director of Human Resources and People at An Garda Síochána John Barrett cast serious doubt over Ms O’Sullivan’s suggestion the meeting was ‘very brief’ and over a cup of tea.
Responding to questions at the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on May 4, Ms O’Sullivan said: ‘I believe there was a very brief conversation in a room after the meeting in Templemore in which Mr Barrett raised certain issues specifically around some work he was doing when I was present, along with two deputy commissioners and the chief administrative officer. My recollection is very brief. ‘I would say, I don’t know, deputy, but I would say from recollection and memory, it was brief.’ Ms O’Sullivan also said she ‘immediately’ set up a working group to look into the issues. The meeting was held in the Garda College on July 27, 2015, and was attended by Mr Barrett, Chief Adminstrative Officer Cyril Dunne, Commissioner O’Sullivan, then Deputy Commissioner John Twomey and then Deputy Commissioner Dónall Ó Cualáin.
Mr Barrett’s minutes claim the meeting lasted for ‘well over’ two hours, noting the meeting started at approximately 5.20pm and that he left the meeting at 7.37pm.
Another main issue arising from the minutes of the meeting is that, during the meeting, Ms O’Sulllivan said she could not see any evidence of misappropriation of funds. In the minutes, Mr Barrett says Ms O’Sullivan ‘perused’ a 2008 report into financial irregularities at the Garda College, carried out by Barry McGee, and concluded ‘there was no evidence of misappropriation’. ‘I countered and raised my concern that the structural arrangements complained of in 2008 are still currently operating, and that material funds from the vote were not accounted for in the accounting process and continue to be managed and controlled outside the view of the CFO and the responsibility of the accounting officer,’ he said. Mr Barrett’s minutes claim the room became tense after he said it was a briefing from him that prompted the Head of Legal Affairs Ken Ruane to inform Ms O’Sullivan of her legal obligation to inform the Minister for Justice in July 2015.
He said: ‘Early in the meeting, I made clear that I was the source of the briefing of HOLA [head of legal affairs] upon which his opinion was based. I felt a real tension in the room around my acknowledging that I was the concerned party behind the letter of advice from HOLA.’ His minutes also detail how a ‘local
‘I felt a real tension in the room’
political dimension’ was discussed and a letter to the Minister for Justice from Tipperary TD Michael Lowry was seen as a ‘complicating factor’.
The minutes also detail the scale of the money involved.
He said: ‘At the meeting in the college, I made specific reference to my concerns around the scale of the comingled monies involved. (€12m over ten years), the practices in the restaurant, laundry and shop (some of which had now ceased), the existence of a total sum of the order €2.3m in various investment accounts at peak, (but estimated to be some €600,000 as at the date of the meeting and no clarity around the historic disbursements of monies other than lands were purchased at some stage and €222,000 was expended on staff redundancies c2010).’ Mr Barrett says he received ‘considerable’ push-back when he referred to the loss of all books of accounts prior to a date which coincided with the retirement of a restaurant manager.
‘I was counselled by all others in attendance that I “needed to be very careful” in making such unproven assertions and connections. I agreed and withdrew the remark, noting the perspective of the meeting.’
He goes on to say: ‘A discussion also took place around the need to ensure that we had appropriate context and that “we must not get trapped into seeing this historic situation through 2015 governance lenses” which may not be appropriate. There was general agreement on this…’
During the alleged two-hour meeting, they also debated the degree to which the Department of Justice was aware. Mr Barrett said: ‘I referenced a point made to me by [executive director of finance and services] Michael Culhane, at a meeting on July 2, that the department were aware of the profit-making potential of the college operations and were supportive if such profits were used for investment in college facilities.
‘I offered my opinion that they were likely to be completely unaware of the scale of what has transpired over the years.
‘I did point out there was some anecdotal evidence that the department would have had to be aware of the restaurant situation to some degree because previous efforts to have the staff there made civil servants had been refused.’ Mr Barrett goes on to say the meeting was of the view that there was ‘no evidence’ of wrongdoing on the part of individuals. ‘With specific reference to my remark concerning the disappearance of the books of account, quoted in the McGee report, I was warned again to ‘be very careful’. ‘The action was given to the CAO [Cyril Dunne] to move forward with the work of the “working group” and for that such should progress before any thought of a S41 [a section of the Garda Síochána Act which puts certain obligations on the Garda Commissioner to report matters to the Minister for Justice] could be considered fully, thus rejecting the letter from HOLA.’ Mr Barrett said he left ‘perplexed’ as Ms O’Sullivan, Mr Dunne, Mr Twomey and Mr Ó Cualáin were ‘in continuing discussion’.
‘I was counselled that I needed to be careful’