Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
ALAN SHATTER IS known to start his days well before 6am and is renowned for his relentless work ethic as a minster who straddles both the Departments of Justice and Defence.
In three years in government he has introduced 24 of the 159 Bills the coalition has brought before the Dáil, is currently bringing forward wide-ranging reforms to the legal sector, and has successfully passed two referendums – one to cut judges’ pay and another to establish a Court of Appeal.
So why, with all these reforms, does he find himself under pressure with calls for his resignation?
The simple answer is that the minister has been at the centre of the two biggest domestic stories in the last fortnight – the GSOC bugging controversy and now fresh revelations from a garda whisteblower.
The common thread is An Garda Siochána with Shatter seemingly now facing a perfect storm of crises that have literally been on the frontpages and at the top of the news bulletins for the last 11 days.
TheJournal.ie explains how it’s got to this stage and what it all means…
The GSOC saga
The Garda Ombudsman (GSOC) surveillance/bugging story is arguably as confusing now as it was when it was first revealed by the Sunday Times two weeks ago. Then, the paper reported that the GSOC’s offices had been placed under surveillance with the use of government-level technology.
Shatter sought to play down these claims and stated, off the back of a briefing from GSOC, that there was “no definitive evidence” of surveillance having taken place.
What kept the story alive was GSOC being less definitive about whether or not they has been spied on and some fairly obvious differences between what they told Shatter in a briefing and what Shatter told the Dáil.
Garda Ombudsman Commissioner Simon O’Brien trying to explain just what went on at his offices to an Oireachtas Committee last week. [Pic: Oireachtas TV]
Added to this were the opposition parties’ calls for an independent inquiry and the lingering suspicion – though denied by GSOC, gardaí and everybody else at official level – that the gardaí or rogue elements within the gardaí were involved in the surveillance.
Then it emerged that there was an innocent explanation for some – if not all – of the anomalies that had been identified in the original Verrimus security sweep of GSOC HQ. This was based on a ‘second opinion’ Shatter sought from an Irish security firm, RITS.
The differences between the RITS and Verrimus assessments, the continued controversy the story was creating in the media and political pressure led Shatter to recommend to his Cabinet colleagues that a former High Court judge review the whole matter.
With that process under way, and barring any new revelations, that story is effectively paused until we have the judge’s report in eight weeks time.
The “extremely serious allegations of garda misconduct”
But now another, more serious problem has arisen for Shatter in the last 24 hours and again concerns the gardaí and a saga that has been rumbling on for the past two years.
Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin claims to have received evidence from the garda whistleblower Maurice McCabe of gardaí having “seriously mishandled” a number of cases involving “abduction, assault and murder”.
Among the cases are that of Sylvia Roche Kelly who was found dead in a Limerick hotel in 2007 and her killer Jerry McGrath who had earlier that year attacked a woman taxi driver, Mary Lynch. Other cases included in the documents concern three separate assault causing harm charges, one false imprisonment and the alleged falsification of garda records.
Martin has given the documentation to the Taoiseach who himself said today there are “extremely serious allegations of garda misconduct” in the files. Enda Kenny said he’s going to deal with it. We’ve yet to hear from the Justice Minister.
Speaking in the Dáil earlier, Martin claimed that Shatter knew about the cases for over two years.
This claim is based on a transcript of a conversation between McCabe and garda confidential recipient Oliver Connolly who, according to the transcript published by Broadsheet.ie, told the whistleblower he passed the documents to Shatter.
Martin said in the Dáil today: “Minister Shatter knew about these shocking cases for two years and in the knowing of these cases he comes into this house and accuses the whistleblower of not co-operating in the penalty points saga – undermining the man’s credibility in the public domain, something I believe was very wrong.”
‘If Shatter thinks you’re screwing him, you’re finished’
Former garda John Wilson at a protest calling for Shatter’s resignation outside Leinster House yesterday. [Pic: Sam Boal/Photocall Ireland]
These claims over the last 24 hours are the latest developments in a long-running saga involving McCabe, a serving sergeant, and another garda whistleblower, the retired John Wilson.
McCabe has now alleged that serious criminal cases were mishandled while both he and Wilson have said for some time that there was widespread malpractice in the fixed charge notice system – essentially that penalty points were being wrongly and corruptly cancelled.
Two years ago this month, McCabe met garda confidential recipient Connolly to discuss his concerns about a number of issues, among them the recommendation by Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan to promote a senior officer who was under investigation.
Appointed by Shatter in June 2011, Connolly was charged with receiving confidential reports of corruption or malpractice within An Garda Síochána from garda members or civilian employees.
As we said above, the full transcript of this conversation has been published by Broadsheet.ie and some of the comments Connolly made to McCabe have been read in to the Dáil record. Connolly is said to have told McCabe:
“I’ll tell you something, Maurice, and this is just personal advice to you. If Shatter thinks you’re screwing him, you’re finished.”
These are remarks which the minister wasn’t able to definitely prove that Connolly had said, but which Connolly apparently wasn’t able to deny he had said, as a result the garda confidential recipient was was sacked yesterday and the office itself has been abolished.
In a statement, Shatter said: “I informed him [Connolly] that in the context of his failure to unequivocally repudiate the content of the alleged conversation or take the necessary action to restore public confidence in the office of Confidential Recipient, I believed his position was untenable and I had no alternative but to relieve him of the position.”
Serving garda sergeant Maurice McCabe arriving at Leinster House last month to give evidence to the PAC in private session - a historic first. [Pic: Laura Hutton/Photocall Ireland]
'Ignored... and owed an apology'
In April 2012, two months after he met Connolly, McCabe made a formal complaint through the confidential recipient system but it went nowhere as far as he was concerned.
Feeling ignored by the confidential recipient, by the gardaí, and by the government, McCabe and Wilson brought their concerns to TDs, with Mick Wallace and Clare Daly taking up the case publicly.
McCabe has also given evidence to members of the Public Accounts Committee about cancellation of penalty points and the potential loss of revenue to the State. The PAC's examination of the matter forced Shatter to ask the now-maligned GSOC to investigate the penalty points issue last month.
On the wider penalty points issue, Shatter has accepted the findings of a report into the operation of the fixed charge notice system by Assistant Garda Commissioner John O'Mahoney which largely vindicated the operation of the system when it was published last year.
But the minister went further in his response to the report, claiming that McCabe and Wilson did not cooperate with the internal investigation.
He told the Dáil in October last year: "They didn't cooperate with the garda investigations that took place. Now I don't know why that is... "
McCabe disputes this and Micheál Martin claims it's just not the case that McCabe did not cooperate or offer to do so. He wants Shatter to apologise to the whistleblower.
The questions that need answering
Even with all this, the controversy does not end there for Shatter.
Last May, while appearing on Prime Time to discuss the penalty points saga, the minister revealed that Mick Wallace had been stopped by gardaí for using his phone while driving.
Wallace subsequently complained to SIPO and said Shatter made improper use of confidential information which had been given to him by the Garda Commissioner. Critics say this is an example of too cosy a relationship between Martin Callinan and the Minister.
Martin Callinan and Alan Shatter [Pic: Eamonn Farrell/Photocall Ireland]
But aside from that, most problematic for Shatter right now are these "extremely serious allegations" in the documents that have been with the Taoiseach since yesterday, and which it is claimed Shatter was told about two years ago.
It is clear that Shatter needs to account for what he knew and when he knew it in relation to these documents. Following on from that what did the gardaí know and what do they have to say about the whole issue?
But the two key questions for the minister are: Was he, as is claimed, made aware of the "extremely serious allegations" in the McCabe documents two years ago? And if so, what did he do about them?
And finally, don't forget the politics in all this
Politically, it should not be forgotten that Shatter was a key ally of Kenny's in the attempted Fine Gael heave of June 2010.
Shatter is a key ally for Kenny at Cabinet level. The others are James Reilly and Phil Hogan, both of whom have their own problems with the latter more than likely off to the European Commission in the summer.
But it shouldn't be forgotten that in some ways Shatter is also a key ally for Labour, particularly on various social issues the junior coalition partner has been pushing in government.
Shatter will be leading the arguments on the same-sex adoption bill and will theoretically be front and centre on the same-sex marriage referendum next year. The minister also gave one of the strongest speeches in favour of the abortion legislation last year.
But all that said, Labour won't be afraid to burn Shatter if he becomes politically toxic.
We're not at that stage yet, but if the serious outstanding issues which have emerged over the last 24 hours are not addressed and addressed adequately, be that a statement from Shatter or a full-blown inquiry, then trouble lies ahead for the novel-writing minister.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I smoke loads of weed and I’ve never given birth prematurely.
My wife smoked 5 grams of weed every day of her 48 week pregnancy..
lol pure lies.
Ah sorry Daffy, just mean’t “lol”
And those who drink give birth about ten years prematurely…
“Its harmless” – stoners everywhere. Sure is, you idiots.
No stoners say it’s harmless. They tend more to the fact that it’s much less harmful than booze
And on top of that there’s plenty of safe things that are unsafe during pregnancy, so there’s no point being smug about it
It’s also dangerous to drink during pregnancy, smoke cigarettes and eat tuna so I’ve heard.
And caffeine.. and paracetamol, and sushi and etc etc etc. Besides who in their right mind was recommending that pregnant women smoke weed anyway ?
“It’s dangerous” – hypocritical , I’ll informed people everywhere
There are a lot smokers who act like MJ is a wonder drug that cures all ailments with no cons to it at all.
Not to mention whipped ice cream, raw meat, unwashed fruit, the list is endless…
Funny before I found out I was pregnant with my second, I craved Tuna and ate loads of it. He was born at 35 week weighing 7lbs 6oz and wasn’t even sent to the special care baby unit and was allowed home 24 hours later. *i don’t /didn’t smoke either*
It’s also dangerous to jump out of a plane with no parachute whilst pregnant. Or not pregnant for that matter.
no one who smokes should argue its harmless. the issue is it isnt harmful to any degree that merits its criminalisation, and the consequences of the war and drugs whatsoever. But folks love a bit of hysteria anyway thankfully the Canadians are now another to say this war should be over. But no lets just ban everything!
The one food I found out that surprised me as being dangerous during pregnancy and for new born kids was honey. Never imagined it can lead to botulism especially considering it’s often used as an antibacterial.
men only drug then
*war on drugs
There are, however they are idiots and would be spouting something just as moronic if they didn’t consume cannabis.
Your the f**kin idiot
I just can’t understand how a mother can do this to their unborn child. There is nothing more disgusting than seeing a heavily pregnant woman smoking, giving excuses that it would be worse on the baby if they give up, due to THEIR own stress. Any of the mothers I know who smoked during their pregnancies have children who constantly have chest infections or suffer asthma.
Are you referring to tobacco or weed? Because this story is about the effect of weed on pregnancy, the effects of smoking are already very well documented and widely known. Also how many women do you know who smoked during their pregnancy? And why did you continue to associate with someone you find disgusting long enough to see the effect on their children? Finally, chest infections and asthma are much more likely to be caused by the mother smoking after the child is born than before it, did these women you know give up after the child was born?
Ah the weed scaremongering has begun again
Pharmaceutical companies dont want weed legalized because it is a cure time to free the weed
https://youtu.be/0psJhQHk_GI this is worth watching enjoy
I am employed (for too long!) to work with families midir!!! I have seen the effects of weed and tabacco on kids who should not have been subjected to it while in the womb and after birth.
There is also the nurture side, if you are selfish to do the above while pregnant, they are still selfish after
I agree with you, that you have a career in social work makes your initial comment make a lot more sense. I still say that the effects of parents smoking around children are much more likely to result in asthma and chest infections than smoking while pregnant (which often results in much more severe damage). There is also the increased chances of kids who’s parents smoke taking up smoking themselves and at young ages. Cannabis on the other hand is just starting to be examined for its effects on people at all stages of development. Women take it during pregnancy to alleviate the effects of morning sickness and scientific research is so new on the subject that they say it shouldn’t work, despite the fact that it clearly does for many women. This particular article links to (what I consider to be) a dodgy scientific paper. Of the 5588 women involved just 315 are cannabis users, that is just 5.6%. They seem to believe that this is enough to make a conclusion about the effect of cannabis on a baby’s development. They also don’t show how many of the women who use cannabis also smoke tobacco or drink alcohol. The method of using cannabis is also not made clear.
I’m a regular weed smoker and I understand that weed isn’t completely harmless, but I understand the effects from positive – to negative, and as a responsible I’ve made the choice to smoke weed while understanding how it could negatively affect me.
There’s no doubt about it that weed has some amazing medical uses, but there’s also no denying it can really screw with some peoples heads, but I look at it like alcohol. In moderation it’ll reduce any possible side effects from developing – like with alcohol.
Ireland needs to move forward with the times and decriminalise drugs.
Drug for Dummies
And Alcohol is for fools!
I have lost two members of my family to alcohol and a childhood friend. The dangers to alcohol out weighs the dangers of weed 10/1 or by a multitude more. How many people die of alcohol on a weekly basis, directly or inadvertently. You have the right to drink as many bottles of whiskey you want a night and yet I can’t smoke a joint! Why is that?
I’ll challenge you on that. You can smoke 5 joints everynight for the rest of your life and I’ll drink 5 beers a night for the rest of mine and we’ll see who dies first and from what….
So you are of the opinion that a joint is about as potent as a bottle of beer? You need to put more weed in your joints my friend.
Haha.. a jayzee is far more potent than a beer.. I’ve put enough hash & weed in my joints over the years mate.. the key to both substances is moderation but smoking weed every night is definitely worse for your health than drinking in moderation every night.
Everything is bad for you these days. Even fruit ffs.
I hope all you guys are getting your 5-a-day?
That depends what you mean in moderation. If you have 5 beers every day you are seriously damaging your health. If you smoke anything every day you are seriously damaging your health. However, if you eat one cannabis cookie every day, is that damaging? I don’t really know and there is no study I know of that covers any kind of consumption besides smoking.
Wtf? Sorry dude but I can’t make head nor tail of your comment. Who eats cannabis cookies everyday? Maybe have a few when in Amsterdam or when your eccentric weed smoking friend calls over to share his latest bake but besides that I know of nobody who eats cannabis on a regular basis. Moderation is knowing your limit, be it drink or weed but I would take my chances on drink in moderation over smoking dope anytime.
What about drinking 5 cans of beer a day versus smoking a couple of grames of weed through a vaporizer? Smoking it in a blunt is your own choice and obviously not the best option for the lungs but millions of ppl smoke weed everyday and still live a good life without causing anyone else any harm, I’d say at least 90% of ppl who drink alcohol everyday don’t stop at 5 cans and are a nuisance to their friends and family at least probably also a nuisance to society. Not to mention the binge drinkers who make a nuisance of themselves every wkend. Go to an A&E on any Friday night and you won’t find many weed smokers filling the waiting room
@Edmund.. you’ll die first from acute pancreatitis, most likely having suffered from diabetes while you waited..
Is that 90% of people you know or is it a study? In A&E you will mostly find people who don’t take any substance in moderation.
Go for it Daffy. 5 beers in moderation versus 5 blunts.. do you ingest cannabis or inhale it?
I know a number of people who eat cannabis every day as they enjoy it and don’t like to smoke. What you mean to say is nobody you know eats it every day. I agree that moderation is the key to staying as healthy as possible while consuming either cannabis or alcohol, but with cannabis there is no damage to your liver or kidneys like there is with alcohol, even in moderation.
Goodnight.
@Edmund, do you understand the English language? If I said I’d say at least 90% of ppl who drink alcohol everyday don’t stop at 5 cans, then it’s my opinion otherwise I would’ve stated that it was fact, in a&e you won’t find anybody there due to excessive weed smoking but you will find many ppl there due to excessive drinking, I’d even take a guess at over 50% on Fri and Sat night’s (again that’s my opinion not fact). I’m not throwing out any fake facts willy nilly like this article. Anybody who thinks alcohol is a less destructive drug than cannabis in my opinion is an idiot. Fact.
Why are you talking about A&E? Your opinion and guestimates don’t really matter. Find a room and argue with yerself mate, goodnight.
You questioned my point and I answered you. I’m not looking for an argument. I was responding to someone who claimed it’s better health wise to drink 5 cans of beer a day than smoking 5 joints. Regarding that, my main point was very few ppl who drink everyday stop at 5 cans. But I’ve many more arguments re cannabis being a far less destructive drug than alcohol, and the only reason one is legal and the other isn’t is due to lawmakers who hadn’t got a clue making the laws. Our country is severely stuck to laws made by ppl who died long before any of us were born..
Apologies, didn’t realize it was you who made that claim. Not bad news though, at least it means there’s 50% less idiots in the world.
May I ask you your age?
Niall, did the psychosis from smoking the devil’s lettuce cause you to push a child from a chair?
@Edmund.. If you consider physical effects, weed has virtually no negative when compared with alcohol. Of course, smoking is harmful but you may as well compare the effects of five beers versus five cigarettes every day; I’ll still stand over my original assertion that you’ll be dead first. If you consider the psychological effects, five beers versus five spliffs is just not a realistic comparison; five beers to one spliff would be more like it, in which case I really don’t think there’s any quedtion of who’ll be first on the ground due to the effects of their chosen vice..
There are many ways to ingest marijuana without smoking it. We already know smoking can lead to premature births so why bother with this study. They would find the same results no matter what was in the cigarettes, smoking is smoking so the results were obvious.
The headline says “marijuana users” but that is false as not everybody smokes it in joints. Should say marijuana smokers to be correct.
Marajuana suppositories, gives you a hole new experience
They’re no good, you might as well stick them up your arse
I think the actual study was independent of tobacco and was focused on medical weed.
Sorry not medical weed, they called it maternal weed in the study. They did separate smokers though, but I can’t tell from the study if the non-smokers mixed the MJ or not with tobacco when they used.
Holding your breath for to long during pregnancy is dangerous too… Also, who in 2016 smokes anything during pregnancy in the first place ? surely….
Complete b****x
Twice as likely to get up the pole in the first place.
This study is not conclusive, of the 5588 women in the study only 315 used marijuana this is not nearly enough for any kind of significance. That is about 5.6% of the total and only 27 of those 315 suffered premature births. This is despite the fact that 53 of the 315 women continued to use marijuana 20 weeks into the pregnancy. This data is far from convincing with such small numbers.
Oh, and the study makes no distinction of the amount consumed. Nor do they reveal the crossover between drinkers, tobacco smokers, and marijuana users.
Also, what kind of serious study refers to cannabis as marijuana? If you want to be considered scientific then use proper scientific terms in your research.
Well there we have it, let’s hope it is made illegal now.
Free. It is illegal.
Great problem solved.
Shall we ban carrots too? Excessive vitamin A consumption is also bad during pregnancy.
If carrots are bad for you Owen then yes.
So chocolate too? And ice cream? Perhaps we should ban air too as it is full of harmful pollutants.
Vitamin A- beta carotene is not harmful. Vitamin A- retinol is
If you feel that way Midir.
premature,dam right, don’t wanna be all curled up in a bongwomb for the 9 months,coz when I do arrive it be a steak and chips can of coke, and sucking on Dodie for dear life.give the baby a chance
That’s because women who aren’t stoned make any massive deal out of it and they’re like oh it’s so painful, I can’t give birth yet.. Its all a ploy to make men suffer more, they are the real victims here
This is peer reviewed science….not stoner talk.
This is why marijuana should never be leglaised.
Even when confronted with the facts surrounding the drug the stoners refuse to accept them.
Coz that might mean having to confront reality for a while.
OOOOOH……Scary.
Nobody’s disputing any of the science, or any of the dangers of marijuana use. Weed smokers know the facts. The know the health risks. What they find ridiculous is the illegality in spite of it being provably, substantially less harmful than alcohol. That something is harmful during pregnancy is not rare, do we just ban everything with potentially detrimental side effects? The argument for legalisation also incorporates social and economic aspects, potential taxation and the removal of a revenue stream for criminal enterprises, as well as making it easier to do research on the potential beneficial attributes of the drug. Use of marijuana is so widespread anyway that legalisation would make little difference to the number of users.
The science here may be peer reviewed but it is not convincing. Too small a number of the women in the study were marijuana users to give any significant data on use of the drug. When only 5.6% of the women in the study are significant to the point being made by the study then your study is deeply flawed.
BTW, I am disputing the science of the study.
fair point, my wording was poor!
For time immemorial marijuana was used as a herbal remedy by various cultures around the world to reduce labour pain and to ease birth for the benefit of mother and child…..tobacco and alcohol were not… !!!
I don’t think anyone is suggesting the prescription of tobacco and alcohol to ease labour pains.
Only idiots smoke.
Only idiots make generalisations..
That is a generalisation that I would tend to disagree with.
Only generalisations make idiots.
Is that a specific generalisation?
All generalisations are untrue.
CARL SAGAN was an idiot?
Cannabis is twice more potent at giving cancer than tobacco and breathing CO2 damages the baby as does alcohol…
Are you citing a comparative study which covers the cancer causing effects of cannabis vs tobacco? If so I would love to read it.
So, of the articles you linked to (other than the daily mail on which inrefuse to read on principle as they are about as credible as our new Taoiseach) one (reuters) says that cannabis smoke has more carcinogenics than tobacco but the only study they cite is one that only has 79 patients who already have lung cancer. They interviewed these people to try to figure out what caused the cancer… This is not science it is guesswork. The other two actually state the opposite to what you think as they both say that although there are more carcinogens in cannabis smoke, the nicotine in tobacco increases the effect of the carcinogens while the THC and other cannabinoids in cannabis actually reduce the effect. The only one which is an actual study (ncbi) also says that the carcinogens in cannabis can be completely avoided by using a vaporiser rather than burning it. So unless you originally meant to say that cannabis is less likely to give you cancer, I’m fairly sure you didn’t even read your own links.
When you put all the studies together it shows that cannabis is more risky than tobacco from cancer to psychological problems, at the very least it states more research is needed and at worst Cannabis is very carcinogenic but you seem to miss the “Smoking a joint is equivalent to 20 cigarettes in terms of lung cancer risk, scientists in New Zealand have found”?
I didn’t miss that statement but you have to keep reading after that and see how they justify their statement. In this case the research was based on interviewing patients with lung cancer and using their anecdotal evidence to make conclusions about the risks of cannabis use. That is seriously dodgy research. Interview based studies are good for highlighting social and socioeconomic factors in many of society’s problems, but they have no place in research about medical risks.
And I though I was constipated !!!
Especially the men!
What a lot of bullocks, I smoked throughout my pregnancy. Helped me with appetite and I was induced coz I was 42weeks pregnant.
@♋️⚫️lilly: and my baby is very alert and is developing quite fast. She’s already started teething at 2 months. So if weed really is harmful then what was I using daily through out my pregnancy? Note I stopped drinking alcohol and stopped smoking cigarettes.
have your say