I wish to make a passing reference to a comment made by Deputy Durkan earlier this afternoon when he referred to what he called the groundswell of public demand for this Bill and for the additional powers contained in it. I can only say that in my contacts with the public I have not been aware of any groundswell of demand for additional powers for the Garda. I am certainly aware of a groundswell of public concern that something be done about the crime level, but a huge distinction has to be drawn here. I disagree that the powers contained in this Bill will reduce or deal more effectively with the crime rate in this State.
Having said that, I wish to state that I support the amendment put forward by Deputy Woods. However, I wish to emphasise that this in no way detracts from my opposition to the Bill in its entirety. I do not believe any amendment can outweigh the negative impact of the Bill as a whole. This is not because of any lack of concern on my part regarding the level of crime: quite the contrary, but because I do not believe that the Bill, no matter how it is amended, whether by way of amendment in the Minister's name or in the name of Deputy Woods, will achieve the objectives we are told the Bill was designed to achieve in the first instance. It will not improve the detection rate of crime and it will not achieve a reduction in the level of crime. In the areas I represent, in disadvantaged parts of this city, this Bill whether amendmed or not will only exacerbate relations with the Garda.