Garda corruption rampant still in 2026, no one held accountable?
Gardaí
failed to provide auditors with overtime records
https://www.rte.ie/news/2026/0802/1586186-garda-overtime/
An Garda
Síochána failed to provide auditors with approval records for overtime payments
despite repeated requests for the documents.
A review of a €201 million annual overtime bill found supporting paperwork was
unavailable in 45 of 67 cases selected for testing.
The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) found examples where members
were paid for more hours than were authorised.
In two cases, more than 50 hours of overtime was paid without the required
approval from a senior officer.
Ten payments could not be examined after An Garda Síochána failed to organise a
meeting requested on several occasions by the C&AG.
The audit said: "A meeting with members of the [garda] team to carry out
elements of the testing, including overtime approval, was not arranged despite
a number of requests to do so."
The report said the system created a risk of errors, overpayments or the
misappropriation of public funds.
It said there was no overarching policy on overtime in place even as costs
involved had more than doubled in the space of five years.
From 2023 to 2024, costs increased from €184m to €201m, a rise of 11%.
During its examination, the C&AG found three cases where gardaí received
more money than was approved.
It found multiple instances of sergeants signing off overtime for other
sergeants, and a case where an inspector cleared paperwork for colleagues of
the same rank.
The report also found "instances where members booked other members in and
out of their tour of duty in the absence of appropriate approval from a more
senior rank".
The C&AG also reported it had sought access to An Garda Síochána's internal
system for monitoring overtime.
However, access was denied due to the limitations of the system and because
audit staff were not trained in how to use it.
The garda roster and duty management system also could not determine which
overtime resulted from illness or other staff absences.
The C&AG said An Garda Síochána needed to review its policies and
procedures for managing attendance and overtime.
It said this would help "ensure they are applied accurately and
consistently across the organisation in order to mitigate any processing errors
on payroll".
A garda response said significant consultation had taken place, and it was
anticipated that new policy and procedure would be implemented during 2026.
It said during 2025, there had been "considerable focus on the drivers and
costing of overtime".
Its response added that work had taken place to manage the "cost-effective
deployment" of garda members during the EU Presidency.
Fraud in overtime was exposed 10 years ago and what happened , it was covered up as always
https://www.businesspost.ie/news/garda-reports-reveal-expense-claim-irregularities-385737
http://www.oic.gov.ie/en/Decisions/Decisions-List/Gavin-Sheridan-and-An-Garda-
S%C3%ADoch%C3%A1na-FOI-Act-2014-.html
In submissions to this Office, AGS argued as follows:
"The report itself is not an administrative record for the purposes of finance, human resources or
procurement and is an internal investigative report which flowed directly from the allegations into
criminality by members attached to the SCRT (investigation report currently with the DPP for
decision). This audit report is the result of a deliberate process to identify if the acts of criminality
alleged against members of the SCRT...had spread to other sections within the NBCI Region."
The Executive Summary of the report states that it is a "thorough audit of NBCI financial systems
and associated processes." I am satisfied that a substantial number of the matters considered
comprise core functions of AGS that are excluded from the scope of FOI, including drugs storage
and recording and property and evidence management. However, I do not accept AGS's
argument that, because the audit was conducted on foot of allegations of criminality against
members of the Serious Crime Review Team (a constituent part of the NBCI), the report cannot
be considered an administrative record.
In my view, the
circumstances surrounding the decision to carry out the audit do not
automatically alter the nature of the audit report itself. I am satisfied that
a number of the matters considered comprise administrative matters relating to
human resources, or finance or procurement and that certain parts of the report
are, therefore, subject to the provisions of the Act. Those matters include
management of attendance, overtime and allowances, management of travel and
subsistence, procurement of goods and services, sickness absence records, and
financial management. I am also satisfied that those parts of the report which
essentially cover all aspects of the audit, such as audit methodology and scope
for example, are not confined to administrative matters relating to human
resources, or finance or procurement and are therefore excluded.
NBCI are
being investigated for fraud and Noirin O Sullivan is covering it up as an
error
“Record 7
This is a report of an examination of the systems of control within the Serious
Crime Review Team (SCRT) in the NBCI Division. Access to this record was
refused by AGS. This record was recently considered by this Office in Case
160257 (Tighe and AGS) where I found that access to the record should be
refused under section 32(1)(a), in circumstances where criminal proceedings
against certain members of the SCRT are being contemplated. That decision is
available on this Office's website at www.oic.ie. As my understanding is that
the circumstances remain unchanged, I find that AGS was justified in refusing
access to the record under section 32(1)(a).
Comments
Post a Comment