Limerick East): I move amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following—
"supports the measures being taken by the Minister for Justice to deal with crime."
If my amendment is accepted the motion will read: "That Dáil Éireann supports the measures being taken by the Minister for Justice to deal with crime."
I am asking the House this evening to endorse the action that, as Minister for Justice, I have taken and am in the course of taking to deal with the crime problem. Listening to what has been said already on the opposite side I am struck by the lack of reality in the approach of the Opposition to this question and their insistence on treating it in purely political terms. They condemn the Minister for allegedly failing to provide the resources to deal with crime knowing full well that the record shows — and I will demonstrate that presently — that the Minister has provided resources in very adequate measure. They criticise the Minister for failing to deal with the causes of crime knowing only too well that the treatment of the root causes of crime is a highly complex issue necessarily long-term in nature and that, in any event, many of the measures necessary to deal with it are not and could not come within the ambit of responsibility of the Minister for Justice. These obvious facts are, of course, conveniently forgotten because political advantage necessitates that the issues be reduced to their most simplistic. But if Opposition politicians can, like armchair generals, draw the battle lines to suit themselves and ignore reality because it inhibits their freedom of action, Government Ministers and those who must use the power of office with responsibility and in the interest of the common good are unable to indulge in such self-delusion. Reality must be faced and one of the hard realities of modern society is that the problem of serious criminality — not just in Ireland but in Britain, in the United States, in virtually every democratic country — is plaguing our way of life and threatening freedoms and basic rights.
In Ireland the current obvious and publicised manifestations of the problem are the twin menaces of the so-called joyrider in our major urban centres and the hideous and brutal attacks on elderly people in the more remote and isolated areas of the west. In other countries the problem seems to present itself in different forms — in Britain, for example, the most recent cause for public concern is the appalling behaviour of hooligans who turn football pitches into bloody battlefields; and in New York, if one is to judge from recent reports, there is serious concern about the spate of robberies and muggings on the subway which has produced a response of a particular kind that is certainly not to be advocated.
In pointing out — as I have — that Ireland is not alone in Western society in having a crime problem, I am not to be taken as implying that a fatalistic approach to it is a necessary or an inevitable response. Fatalism is, I think, understandable only in the sense of accepting that there may be inherent in the kind of society that has evolved here a dynamic for causing criminality and that we may perhaps never totally eradicate it. But that does not mean that we ought to shrug our shoulders and say that there is little we can do about it. There is, of course, much that we can do — indeed must do — to control it even if in the short run we are unable to grapple successfully with its causes.
Mention of the causes of crime prompts me to reflect how often we hear demands — as indeed we will hear this evening — from politicians and others that measures that are being taken to deal with crime fail to address themselves to its underlying causes. Sociologists and criminologists everywhere have for long been preoccupied with seeking an answer to the causes of crime and, while it would be foolish to suggest that they have not contributed to increasing our understanding of the problem, they have not yet — so far as I am aware — been able to prove that one particular factor more than any other is responsible. They can of course show that poverty and social deprivation have a lot to do with it. That seems reasonably clear. Yet, as I have pointed out before in this House, that does not quite explain how it is that many people who are poor or live in what might objectively be termed deprived circumstances never commit crime at all. It does not explain how rapid increases in crime seem to have taken place in the country at times of growing affluence. And it offers no guide either — in causative terms — to the increasing incidence of so called white-collar crime committed by people who do not suffer any obvious social deprivation.
What then can we say about it? Looking at what has been happening in Ireland some facts seem reasonably clear. Up until about the mid-sixties this country enjoyed — if that is the right word — a very low crime rate, certainly a rate far lower than the major industrialised countries, and even lower than most other developed countries of comparable size. Then things began to change and change very rapidly. In the ten year period 1973 to 1983 the recorded number of indictable offences rose from 38,022 to 102,387 — an increase of almost 167 per cent. We are, therefore, a society which has experienced a transition over a very short period of time from a position in which crime — at all events serious and violent crime — was a relative rarity to one in which it is an everyday occurrence affecting the lives of many people.
While there might be some comfort in the thought that all that has happened in the ten year period I have referred to is that we have caught up with the crime levels which prevail in some other developed countries, the fact that we have done so over such a short space of time has had a shock effect on us. In saying that I am not to be taken as suggesting that our crime level is somehow acceptable. Indeed, I do not beleive that any level of crime can ever be acceptable, but I make the point merely to show that our experience of crime is not exceptional and that there are still other societies with far worse problems. It helps, reflecting on crime, to keep matters in perspective.
A large proportion of crime is attributable to young persons. The 1983 crime statistics show that juveniles under 17 years account for about a third of the total number of persons arrested for serious criminal offences. This propensity of the young towards crime and the fact that such a high proportion of our population is under 25 years of age accounts to some degree for what has been happening. It is also a matter that calls for a comprehensive policy in relation to youth, a subject to which I will be returning.
The advent of drug abuse in the 1970's has been another major contributory factor. There is undoubtedly a link between drug abuse and crime. It is well known that many addicts turn mainly to crime in order to finance their expensive habit. I will say more about this problem in a moment in the context of the specific measures being taken to deal with crime. I mention it here only in relation to its contribution as a causitive factor.
Another unsavoury influence has been the overspill of violence from Northern Ireland. This has led not only to an increase in offences such as armed robbery but it has also given rise to an increased use of firearms by criminals in general.
From what I have said it will, I think, be clear that I believe there may be much to the proposition that generally persons involved in crime come from under-privileged backgrounds and have been reared in conditions of social deprivation with limited opportunities for advancement, but we must be careful in trying to identify the causes of crime that we do not regard these causes as in any way excusing crime. I accept also that in present circumstances unemployment may be a factor. These are matters we must take into consideration in formulating a balanced policy for dealing with the ills of our society, including crime — and by balanced I mean a policy that combines economic and social measures directed at the underlying causes of our problems.
However, the social and economic conditions that give rise to crime cannot be eliminated overnight, as I think most reasonable people accept. Social change on the scale required will take many years to bring about and the general aim and thrust of overall Government policy is towards this end. However, law-abiding citizens who are the present-day victims of crime should not be faulted if they were heard to say that "That is all very well but we cannot be expected to wait until such change is brought about". They have a legitimate right to demand security in their persons and property now and it is the duty and responsibility of the Government to do all they can to provide them with that security.
What then is the Government's strategy for dealing with crime now? How does it propose to bring greater security into the lives of ordinary people? As the House knows, it is primarily my responsibility as Minister for Justice to advise the Government on the appropriate measures to deal with crime and, as far as I am concerned, the central features of the policy that I am pursuing to contain crime and to control lawlessness in our society is, first, to strengthen and make more effective the Garda Síochána so that there will be a greater likelihood that criminals will be caught; second, to ensure that the law and practice as administered in our courts is such that criminals can be effectively and expeditiously dealt with when they are caught and, third, to provide whatever prison accommodation is necessary to contain people who are sentenced to imprisonment so that they will serve their sentences in full.
I am satisfied and the Government are satisfied that the position has now been reached where the priority of Government policy must be the protection of law-abiding citizens. It must be regretted that this necessarily entails using the sanction of imprisonment to an increasing extent against the so-called joy-rider, the mugger and the attacker of the defenceless amongst us just as we now inevitably use it against the rapist, the drug pushed and the murderer. I am firmly convinced that the most effective deterrent that we as a society can arm ourselves with is neither the birch nor the shotgun of the vigilante but the creation of a position where the detection and apprehension of the criminal is a virtual certainty, and in which conviction and punishment — by long terms of imprisonment if necessary — follows as inexorably as night follows day.
The Garda Síochána are, of course in the forefront in bringing about the conditions for the creation of that deterrent. It is to the Garda force that we look to secure the detection and apprehension of the criminal. For that reason it is vital that we have the most efficient and effective force possible and it is to that end that I have directed the major emphasis of my programme since I became Minister for Justice.
Not only is it untrue to claim, as the Opposition motion does this evening, that I have failed to provide the resources necessary to deal effectively with crime, on the contrary, in the two years that I have been Minister for Justice more has been done to improve the training and the organisational efficiency of the force and more has been done to provide it with the most up-to-date equipment and technology than perhaps at any other time since the force was founded.
Let me begin by dealing with numbers in the force. The current strength of the Garda Síochána is approximately 11,400, the highest ever figure. The national plan Building on Reality provides that the strength of the force will be maintained at this level — 11,400 — over the period 1985 to 1987. This means that, notwithstanding restrictions on public service numbers generally, recruitment to the Garda Síochána will be continued and vacancies filled.
Since the Government took office in December 1982, over 1,150 recruits have been appointed to the force. Allowing for wastage due to retirements and deaths etc., there has been a net increase of over 700 gardaí since the beginning of 1983. The additional gardaí have been assigned to the areas where the Garda authorities considered that the need for their services was greatest. It is the policy of the Commissioner to have as many gardaí as possible on foot patrol duty. There has already been a substantial increase in the number of uniformed gardaí who are performing foot patrols and, in addition, the operation of new rostering systems is giving an improved Garda presence on the beat at the times of greatest need.
Increasing Garda numbers is not of course, in itself, the only response to meeting the policing needs of the community. Steps have been, and are being, taken to improve Garda effectiveness and to ensure that the available resources are used to best advantage.
I have already made it clear that I intend to raise the standard for entry to the Garda Síochána. What I have in mind is that a basic education examination such as the leaving certificate would be accepted as the qualifying educational standard. In addition, aptitude test would be introduced and final selection would be by means of competitive interview. Proposals along these lines are currently being examined in my Department in consultation with the Garda authorities and the Civil Service Commission and my intention is that the new procedures will apply to the next recruitment competition.
As regards the important area of Garda training, I am endeavouring to ensure that training at all levels in the force is improved and up-dated. To this end, the Commissioner, with my approval, recently established a committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Thomas Walsh to undertake a thorough review of Garda training needs. The committee, who include people from the private sector and the academic field who are experienced in personnel training and development, have been asked to examine Garda training at all levels from recruit intake up to and including the courses provided for senior management in the Garda college and to make any recommendations considered necessary. While, of necessity, it will take the committee some time to complete their deliberations, they have been asked to give priority to a review of recruit training so that any revised training procedures that may arise from that review can be in operation for the next recruit intake.
As regards Garda promotions, I believe that it is vital to the success of any organisation that it should have a sound personnel policy and a key feature of any such policy is the development of a promotions system that ensures that the best available people are selected for positions of supervision and higher management. The introduction, since I became Minister, of a new promotion scheme for the Garda Síochána, which has the full backing of the Garda Commissioner and of all the Garda staff associations, will I think make a major contribution towards achieving this goal in the years ahead. I will be looking also, in consultation with the Garda authorities and the staff associations, at other ways in which management in the force can be improved. The aim must be to ensure that the force attract and retain a reasonable proportion of the most able and best educated people — men and women — in our society and also that the specialist needs of the force for highly trained professional people are met in full.
As well as having well educated and well trained gardaí, they must be provided with the resources to do their job properly and, since I am being accused this evening of failure to provide the Garda with adequate resources, I think it is necessary to deal with this question. There are two main aspects to the question of resources that I want to deal with. First, there is the question of the tangible physical resources — equipment and the like — and, second, there is the matter of legal resources in terms of the powers the Garda need to bring criminals to justice.
When one considers how widely gardaí, of necessity, are deployed throughout the country, manning about 700 Garda stations, and the necessity to contact members when they are on operational duties away from their stations in cars and on foot, their need for a first-class national communications network is obvious. Such a system is now being provided. Approximately £7 million has already been spent on this project and about a further £2 million will be spent before the end of this year. The network is already operational in the Limerick Garda division and will be going "live" in other rural divisions within the next couple of weeks. This new system will provide a facility for instant communication between the divisional headquarters and each district in the division and between each district headquarters and the stations attached to it. This will mean that at practically all times gardaí out on patrol and other duties will be in contact with their stations and this will ensure a quicker response to requests from the public for Garda assistance. A particular facility of the system which is worthy of mention is the provision of radio telephone equipment, known generally, I understand, as the "Green Man", at small rural stations. This equipment enables the public to get into immediate and direct contact with the gardaí at times when their local station is closed. It should be extremely useful in small rural communities where station opening times are restricted.
Work is also well under way on the provision of a new communications network for the Dublin metropolitan areas. This will include a computer-aided system which will direct and control the most efficient use of all gardaí and patrol cars on operational duty. Similar systems have proved to be of very considerable benefit to police forces in cities abroad and I am confident that it will also be of immense value to the gardaí in Dublin. A contract for the Dublin radio system will be placed within the next few weeks.
Computerisation is another area of technology which can be of considerable assistance to the Garda Síochana. The garda have their own computer since 1981 and they are at present operating systems on it such as stolen vehicles, firearms, crime and criminal records. The service was considerably expanded late last year when about 60 visual display units and ancillary equipment were purchased. This equipment has enabled all the 18 divisional headquarters and some other major stations outside the Dublin metropolitan area and nine of the busiest stations within the Dublin area to have a direct link to the Garda computer. Improvements in Garda computer facilities are being made continuously.
As I mentioned, any discussion of Garda resources must include reference to the important question of the legal powers available to the force. One of the first things that I undertook when I became Minister was the completion of an urgent review of our criminal law and procedures. I was anxious to ensure that the force was not inhibited by outmoded laws from carrying out the task the community required of it. I was glad, therefore, to be able to bring forward the Criminal Justice Bill within a short period of assuming office and, as the House knows, many of its provisions came into force on 1 March.
I do not intend now to resurrect the issues debated in this House during the passage of the Criminal Justice Bill. The House knows, I am sure only too well, what happened and how some Members of the House opposed the central provisions of the Bill. With the benefit of hindsight and in the light of what has occurred and is now occurring in relation to crime, I am sure few — if indeed any — Members of the House would now consider that the Bill was unnecessary. Many indeed might regret that the detention powers of the Bill and some of the other key provisions are not yet in force as undoubtedly they would be useful in dealing with some of the current problems. I hope to be in a position to rectify that situation very shortly by bringing before the Oireachtas the Bill to set up a Garda Síochána Complaints Board and the necessary regulations dealing with the treatment of persons detained in Garda stations. That will honour in full the commitment I gave the House. It will also pave the way for the necessary strengthening of the hands of the Garda. One of the immediate effects will be that those suspected of taking cars will be liable to be detained for questioning and they can be fingerprinted and subjected to other forensic tests. The Garda assure me that this will greatly help them to eradicate the problem of car thefts in our cities.
Before I leave the Criminal Justice Act let me very briefly remind the House of one or two other provisions in the Act which I believe will also be of enormous benefit in dealing with crime: the dreadful trade in illegally held firearms is being tackled by making it an offence to withhold information about them and by increasing penalties generally for firearms offences. I will say more about the general question of penalties shortly. The trade in stolen property is similarly addressed in the Act and this should make it easier to get at those who deal in stolen goods —"the fences"— who are, as we know, the lifeblood of criminal activity. Court procedures are being improved so that gardaí can give evidence in certain circumstances in writing instead of orally thus freeing greater numbers of gardaí to deal with crime instead of having them tied up in court. Majority verdicts, which have helped obtain more convictions in other countries, are being introduced.
Before leaving the question of policing I want to say something about crime prevention. I believe that as well as dealing effectively with detection and apprehension of criminals the Garda Síochána must promote to the maximum extent practicable measures aimed at preventing crime. Crime prevention is cost effective. It can save lives and, of course, large sums of money. The Garda Síochána has within its ranks a full-time crime prevention advisory service. Apart from that special unit, however, all members of the force have a responsibility in the prevention of crime as part of their ordinary Garda duties and the Garda authorities are anxious that all members of the force should promote public interest in crime prevention.
I attach great importance to the improvement of Garda-community contacts and this is a matter that is being pursued by the formulation and implementation of a policy of community policing. In recent years there has been a growing recognition of the need to involve the community at large in crime prevention activities and specific policies are being developed to this end. One such policy is neighbourhood watch. Neighbourhood watch is essentially a network of public spirited people who observe what is going on in their own neighbourhoods and report any suspicious or unusual happenings to the Garda. In simple terms the civilian become the eyes and ears of the force with a view to counteracting the activities of the criminal and vandal. Early indications from the experiments that have been carried out suggest that neighbourhood watch has a useful role to play in crime prevention and it will be expanded and developed throughout the State as quickly as possible.
The need for better Garda-community co-operation is nowhere better illustrated than in the response to the recent spate of attacks on elderly people living in isolated areas. This is an area where the Garda alone cannot provide the answer and where they need the active support of the community not only in the passing on of information about suspicious events or suspicious characters in a locality but in providing a very positive security screen for vulnerable old persons. I am glad to say that the community has responded well in this regard.
As I said at the outset, not only is it an essential part of the policy I am pursuing that there should be better detection; it is also essential that the court system should function smoothly and play its part in dealing with crime. In this respect there is often criticism about delays in dealing with criminals in the courts and about inadequate sentences being imposed. As far as the District Court is concerned, the position is that where a person is arrested by the Garda and not released on station bail he is brought before a peace commissioner or a district justice as soon as is practicable — in effect not later than noon on the following day in places such as Dublin, Cork and Limerick.
Where such cases are dealt with summarily in the District Court they are normally disposed of within two to three weeks. Where a defendant pleads guilty his case is often disposed of on his first appearance. There can never be any question, however, of speeding up the working of the courts to such an extent as to deal with all accused persons on their first appearance as has recently been suggested. Nor do I think it is practicable to introduce special court sessions for "joy riders" to get over the problem caused by granting bail. Many offences, including unauthorised taking of cars, are inherently serious and in those cases there is a right to trial by jury. But even where cases are dealt with summarily in the District Court, it is frequently impossible to avoid adjournments to enable an accused to obtain legal aid or for social or medical reports or for other valid reasons, and, as I will mention in a moment, bail is mostly unavoidable in these cases. Where a case is not being disposed of in the District Court, that is, where a defendant is being sent forward for trial, a book of evidence has to be prepared by the State solicitor and this inevitably gives rise to delays. Of course, delays can also occur in cases where adjournments are sought by the prosecution or the defence.
There are delays of up to two months in the Metropolitan District Court in forwarding appeal papers to the Circuit Court in cases where defendants are on bail. There are no delays in forwarding appeal papers to the Circuit Court in cases where defendants are remanded in custody. The delays in non-custody cases are due to staff shortages. I hope to be able to do something about these delays and I intend to have the matter examined.
In relation to the criminal trials in the Circuit Court, I am aware that there are delays in some circuits. In an effort to improve the situation the Government appointed an additional circuit judge last year and it is expected that his services will have a substantial effect on the position over the coming year in that the President of the Circuit Court will be in a position to assign additional assistance to the circuits most seriously affected.
With regard to criticisms frequently voiced about inconsistencies and inadequacies in sentences being imposed by the Judiciary, the position is that under our legal system the law provides generally for maximum penalties for criminal offences. This enables the judge or justice to exercise his discretion, within the maximum penalty, by reference to the conclusions he has reached after trying the case, hearing all the evidence, assessing the culpability and the circumstances of the accused. This means it is inevitable that there will be divergencies between sentences even for the same offence because the circumstances will differ from case to case.
I am sure that the Presidents of all the courts will continue to do what they can to promote the future development of a sentencing jurisprudence in this jurisdiction. There may also be scope in the superior courts for greater use of practice directions in relation to sentencing which could be a help. There is already provision in the law for meetings of Justices of the District Court to discuss, inter alia, the avoidance of undue divergencies in the general level of fines and other penalties. There is no similar provision in the case of other courts, but I am aware that over the past few years regional conferences of judge have been convened to discuss the administration of justice. The holding of such regional conferences was recommended in the 12th Interim Report of the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure.
Deputies will, of course, be aware that the Constitution provides that all judges are independent in the exercise of their judicial functions and it would be improper of me to comment on an individual case in a way that would amount to interference with that independence. It is against that constitutional background that I am making these suggestions which may help to achieve greater uniformity in sentences.
One area which was very much in our minds in this House in debating the Criminal Justice Bill — and it is a matter about which concern has again recently been expressed — is the problem of offences committed by persons while on bail. There is, I believe, a widespread feeling that bail is too readily granted. Most people want to see bail harder to get and they want the courts to be able to refuse it where there is a likelihood that the person will commit further offences while on bail. People are understandably affronted at reports of car thieves being arrested and charged and then being released immediately only to be caught in the act the next day.
There is, however, a real difficulty about this stemming from a 1966 decision of the Supreme Court which was to the effect that to refuse bail on the grounds that further offences might be committed by the accused would amount to a form of preventive detention and would be unconstitutional. I am advised that that position cannot be changed except by amending the Constitution.
However, the law relating to other aspects of bail was reviewed in the course of preparation of the Criminal Justice Bill and different approaches to the problem were considered. The Government opted for three measures contained in sections 11 to 13 of the Act and these have been in operation since March. First, the law now requires any sentences for an offence committed-on bail to be consecutive on any other sentence passed or about to be passed on a person for a previous offence. Second, the aggregate term which can be imposed by a district justice when passing two or more consecutive sentences is now two years instead of 12 months. Third, failure to surrender to bail or, as it is more commonly known, absconding, has been made an offence for the first time and carries a sentence of up to 12 months imprisonment. Offenders who continue to engage in criminal activity while on bail can now expect much harsher punishment from the courts.
I should like to conclude by referring to the situation in the prisons. While it is true that previous administrations spent £13 million on the design of prisons on foot of decisions taken in 1978 and 1979, they never proceeded to build them.
