By agreement, and notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, Members will be called in Private Members' Time this evening as follows: 7 p.m. to 7.10 p.m. a Fianna Fáil speaker; 7.10 p.m. to 7.35 p.m. a Government speaker; 7.35 p.m. to 7.40 p.m. a Progressive Democrats speaker; 7.40 p.m. to 7.55 p.m. a Fianna Fáil speaker; 7.55 p.m. to 8.10 p.m. a Fianna Fáil speaker; 8.10 p.m. to 8.15 p.m. a Government speaker; and 8.15 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. a Fianna Fáil speaker.
Private Members' Business. - Garda Overtime: Motion (Resumed.)
The following motion was moved on Tuesday, 1 July 1986:
That Dáil Éireann, deeply concerned about the serious situation that exists in regard to crimes involving firearms, robbery with violence and physical assault, calls on the Government to make adequate finance available for the necessary levels of overtime in the Garda Síochána needed to deal with this situation.
—(Deputy Hyland.)
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:
"Dáil Éireann commends the Government on the level of manpower and other resources made available to the Garda Síochána, requests that these resources be used with maximum effectiveness and notes with satisfaction the reduction in recorded crime for the second successive year." (atógáil).
—(Minister for Justice.)
Are the order of speakers and the times agreed? Agreed.
There is no doubt that there is an increasing use of firearms and violence in committing crimes, particularly robbery, and an increased fear among people that they will be the victims of crime. The number of armed robberies has increased from 17 in 1970 to 186 in 1976 to an all-time high of 320 for the first five months of 1986. This represents an increase of 12 per cent as compared with the same period last year.
What are the Government doing about this? The Minister for Justice had a meeting with chief superintendents and there followed an immediate clampdown on overtime spending. I should like to ask the Minister what caused the major overreaction by the Garda authorities after their meeting with him. Why did they act so hastily, withdraw men from the Border and take gardaí off the streets of LaoisOffaly to man Portlaoise Prison? The next day the Government, the Minister, or somebody, decided that the decision was wrong and corrected it.
The Minister engages in semantics when saying that there are no cut-backs. The fact of the matter is that there are real and significant cut-backs in the policing service on the ground. I accept that the original provision of £12 million for overtime in 1986 remains intact, but that is not the point at issue tonight. What we are concerned with, and what the Minister ought to be considering, is the actual reduction in the police service on the ground. The Minister does not appear to be aware of the practicalities of his responsibility for the Garda Síochána.
Over £9 million of the annual budget of £12 million was spent in the first six months of 1986. This means there is less than £500,000 per month for the remainder of the year. This is half of the original rate at which it was proposed to spend the overtime allocation and amounts to a reduction to one-third of the level of service being provided over the past six months. What proportion of this £500,000 will be spent on Border security overtime? Are we faced with a situation where no money will be available for the rest of the country?
In addition, a further burden is placed on gardaí in having to justify in detail and in advance the need for overtime. I am not saying, or suggesting, that there should be total freedom given to members on how many hours overtime they should work. Clearly, that would not be sensible or feasible. However, we should not go to the other extreme either, where the approval of a small number of hours overtime has to go to Assistant Commissioner level.
The budget for overtime has decreased from £13.5 million in 1984 to £12.5 million in 1985 and to £12 million in 1986. This reduction comes at a time when additional demands are being made on the Garda Síochána with increased Border security following the Anglo-Irish Agreement and a very significant increase in violent crimes in our society. It also comes at a time when there is no increase in the overall number of gardaí. In fact, there is probably an effective reduction with a reduction in the number of clerical staff, from 651 in 1985 to 635 in 1986, according to the Revised Estimates for the Public Service 1986, and a similar reduction in the number of traffic wardens, from 160 to 135 in 1986.
There is little point in the Minister referring to the additional temporary clerical staff who have been assigned to Garda stations. They are welcome, of course, but their practical contribution to reducing the workload of the members of the force is negligible. They are, after all, only trainees. That of itself implies that they should take more time from members in being trained. The stated objective there is to provide practical and varied training experience. This of itself emphasises that their contribution to reducing the workload of gardaí must be small.
There is, of course, another aspect of the present problem, namely the management, organisation and control of the Garda Síochána. Of the 11,400 gardaí, over 920 are engaged full time in Garda Headquarters and the training centre. This includes almost half of the country's chief superintendents, one-fifth of its superintendents, and one-fifth of its inspectors. There are also over 800 gardaí and sergeants stationed there. This amounts to 7 per cent of the total strength of the Garda Síochána and does not take into account the many other members of the force who are working full time in Garda offices throughout the country.
It became clear from the recent "Today Tonight Special" on the Garda Síochána that no more than 5 per cent of the force is engaged in preventing and detecting crime at any one time.
It is long past time for a radical reappraisal of the functions that gardaí should be performing. We want to see the Garda Síochána engaged on the activities for which their members are trained.
We should have a civilian structure, within the overall responsibility of the Garda Commissioner (which would perform the majority of the civilian tasks that have to be performed within the organisation. At the same time, the Garda Commissioner should be given full financial control and the necessary management training should be provided for senior officers.
The gardaí have shown that they can successfully tackle serious crimes if they are given the resources and the freedom to do so. An integral part of that freedom is removing the force from the direct dead-hand of the Department of Justice.
On a practical level, the Watercourse Road Garda station which is in my own area, has been allocated additional areas, including Cork Prison, Collins Barracks, a major shopping centre, the Glynn Industrial Estate and a major housing estate. The population of the station's area has been increased from 19,000 to 33,000 with an overall distance from one end of the area to another of six and a half miles. At the same time, the strength of the station party has been reduced from 25 to 23. Two members are engaged full-time in the issuing of warrants and do not patrol the area. The new area has meant that the reduced strength has had to deal with a crime rate which has increased dramatically.
The Deputy has two minutes left.
I was two minutes late starting as a result of the announcement by the Minister of State and surely I am entitled to my full ten minutes.
The Deputy must conclude at 7.10 p.m.
On Friday the Minister gave statistics about the reduction in crime but where I am living there has not been any reduction. I am dissatisfied with the approach of the Minister to this serious problem
On top of all of this, the Minister says that the gardaí at that station cannot have any overtime. The net outcome of all of this is that there is a considerable reduction in the level of the policing service and a much increased demand on Garda services. The prison alone takes up considerable additional man hours, dealing with problems there, including complaints by prisoners, all of which have to be investigated. There is one motor car and one motor cycle at that station. The car is used by both the uniformed members and the detectives. However, the car is frequently lying idle, because there are not the men to drive it.
That is the reality of the Minister's cut-backs, and irrespective of how he tries to dress up the situation, the fact remains that there is a totally unacceptable reduction in the level of the policing service.
Finally, I should like to ask the Minister if he or the Garda authorities have drawn up any guidelines or priorities for the use of overtime. It is not good enough to simply say that there is a reduction in the money to be spent on overtime and yet not outline his priorities for the spending of that money.
Because of the cut-backs the morale of the Garda force is at a very low level. While we are saving money now, we shall pay dearly for it in the future. Last night the Minister criticised this side of the House for putting down this motion and wasting the time of the House. For the second time this week, we have to tell him he is out of touch with the reality of what is happening on the streets. He should either act or move aside and let people who are genuinely concerned about the matter do something about it.
At the outset, I think it would be worth while to reiterate some of the points the Minister has already made about the question of Garda resources. The idea that overtime is a major element in determining the adequacy of the Garda response to the crime situation is all wrong. We must look at the whole picture, taking account of all the resources available and how they are being utilised to provide an efficient and effective response to the crime situation.
The Garda response to crime must not be static. It must be constantly adapted to meet changing needs and circumstances. The success of the Garda Síochána in meeting the police needs of the community and their capacity to respond to particular incidents must not be measured in terms of the financial provision for overtime. The important thing is to ensure that essential policing needs are adequately met and that the public are given a reassurance that the Government are totally committed to providing the resources necessary to enable the Garda Síochána to fulfil their paramount role in the maintenance of law and order and the prevention and detection of crime.
The Minister in his contribution outlined in some detail the resources which have been and continue to be provided by the Government to enable the Garda to play their part in the prevention and detection of crime. I think it should be clear to those who are willing to listen and consider the issues objectively that the resources required by the Garda in terms of personnel, equipment, and the necessary legisaltion to tackle the criminal have been provided.
Very often, I think, we look to what I might refer to as the "bigger and better" syndrome to solve our problems — more gardaí, with more and bigger equipment backed by more and more legislation. This, of course, is the quick and easy "solution", if I may use that term—especially for those who do not have to think through the hard questions. Very often those with this line of thinking forget or overlook that measures aimed at preventing crime are vitally important — a view held very strongly by the Garda authorities.
It is worth emphasising that the Garda Síochána have within their ranks a fulltime Crime Prevention Advisory Service. The total strength of this unit is 24, comprising a detective inspector and four sergeants based on Harcourt Square who serve the Dublin Metropolitan Area. There are two sergeants in the Cork East Division and one sergeant in each of the other 17 Garda divisions as well as the administrative unit at Garda Headquarters with overall responsibility for crime prevention. In addition, of course, all members of the Garda Síochána have a responsibility in the prevention of crime as part of their normal Garda duties and the Garda authorities are anxious that all members of the force should promote public awareness of crime prevention.
The Garda authorities report that measures designed to alert the public to the threat of crime are being impleprisin mented on an ongoing basis. These measures involve the staging of crime prevention exhibitions, the distribution of leaflets giving advice on security measures and visits to private residences and business premises to give advice on security when requested. The Garda Community Relations Section are currently developing a school lecture programme on the role of the Garda Síochána in society and the nature and purpose of the criminal law, it is expected that this programme will be ready next year.
This is a worthwhile exercise and is extremely important in informing and educating the community, particularly the young, about the role of the Garda Síochána. I know that gardaí deal with many criminal issues and on many occasions these merge into the social area, such as family disputes. The Garda deal in a fair and caring way when they are involved in youth crime and cases of vandalism. The programme to encourage greater understanding and education with regard to the role of the Garda Síochána is worthwhile and it will bear fruit quickly.
The successful implementation of so many neighbourhood watch schemes throughout the country is a measure of the ability of the Garda to ensure that crime prevention plays its full role in tackling and reducing the high level of crime. It is also, of course, a firm indication of the willingness of the general public to contribute in an effective manner to the fight against the criminal elements in our society. I have attended a number of meetings in my own constituency and elsewhere with regard to the setting up of these schemes and I have been amazed at the good attendances and the positive attitude to co-operate.
I want to say a word now to those persons who in the course of their business or employment have a responsibility for the safety of cash or valuables. The first responsibility for the safety of these items lies with them. The Garda do what they can to prevent and detect crime but the primary responsibility lies with the owners of such property and their employees. The beneficial effects which even the most preliminary crime prevention steps have in deterring would-be criminals are easy to underestimate. It should be borne in mind that crime prevention advice is available to the community at large, and particularly to those whose responsibilities include the security of cash and valuables, entirely free of charge.
I would now like to turn to the question of the employment of gardaí on clerical duties. The policy has been to employ civilians in a clerical administrative capacity in Garda offices where possible. The primary objective of this policy is to enable gardaí to concentrate on operational police matters. At present there are 430 civilian clerical personnel employed throughout the force, enabling a similar number of gardaí to be made available for operational work who would otherwise be engaged on clerical duties.
Recruiting of temporary clerical trainees to the Garda Síochána started last December and at present a total of 109 are serving in Garda stations throughout the country. The majority of these, 67, are assigned to country divisions and the remainder, 42, are assigned to Garda stations in the Dublin Metropolitan Area and Garda Headquarters.
At this stage I want to say just a few words about a particular form of criminality. The Opposition mentioned robbery and the use of firearms in the motion put down for debate in this House tonight. What is particularly heartening is that in recent weeks the Garda apprehended several persons after a number of armed robberies or attempted robberies in the Dublin area. Now, I am aware that I must be careful of what I say here. Nothing that is said in this House should come between an accused person and a fair trial. Accordingly, I will say very little else about these arrests other than to say that the special measures put into effect by the Garda earlier this year in an effort to curb armed robberies would seem to be having a beneficial effect.
Is the Minister disputing the figures I have given?
I know that one swallow does not make a summer, and in this case these arrests do not mean the battle against armed robbers is won; but it is an indication that things are going the way of those who have to enforce the law.
Last evening Deputy O'Dea raised a number of points to which I intend to reply during the course of my speech. He talked about a cut in Garda overtime. The fact is that £12 million was provided in the Garda Estimate for 1986 for over-time. That is still the position. The figure has not been reduced nor will it be.
How much has been spent so far?
Let us be absolutely clear about this, without any equivocation whatsoever; let there be no question of ambiguity or any distortion of the facts. The sum that was provided in the 1986 Estimates for Garda overtime remains the same. There has not and there will not be a cut-back.
Will the Minister answer my question?
Deputy O'Dea also referred to certain matters in relation to Garda involvement in security arrangements at Portlaoise Prison. I want to assure the House that the Garda authorities are satisfied that security at Portlaoise Prison has not been adversely affected in any way whatsoever by the recent review of Garda duty there. For security reasons it would not, of course, be in the public interest to comment in any detail on Garda involvement in security arrangements at the prison. Security at Portlaoise Prison is, of course, the subject of continuing review.
Deputy Hyland suggested that restrictions on Garda overtime are creating an environment in which the vandal can operate without any consideration about being apprehended. This, of course, is one of the many vague allegations of a general nature which are bandied about from time to time. It is, of course, completely without foundation. Indeed, if anything is conducive to such an environment it is the ill-informed press reports which suggest that the capacity of the Garda to respond to crime has been diminished.
As regards the implementation of the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the question of overtime expenditure on Border security, I must emphasise that Border security was always, and still is, provided mainly by members within their normal duty hours. There is no separate overtime provision for Border duty and, indeed, because of the constantly changing policing needs and demands for Garda services, it would not be feasible to make overtime allocations for particular duties. As a matter of fact, it would be totally unsatisfactory to depend on overtime to meet any particular policing needs. The amount of overtime required for Border security varies from time to time, having regard to overall resources and other demands on Garda services. Additional needs in relation to Border security, or security measures generally, are met by a combination of extra manpower, redeployment and overtime.
The Deputy also attempted to make great play of press reports about the arrangements for the manning of the Garda Technical Bureau over the June bank holiday weekend. The suggestion was that the capacity of the Garda to respond to emergencies was in some way diminished. The arrangements for the manning of the Technical Bureau are, of course, a matter for Garda management who determine requirements in manpower and other resources on the basis of need and good, practical management criteria. The Garda authorities have assured me that there were absolutely no deficiencies in the service available from the Technical Bureau over that weekend. They are satisfied that the arrangements for the manning of the bureau and the call out of additional personnel, if the need arose, were fully adequate. Again, I think this is another example of Deputy O'Dea's tendency to latch on to the most ill-founded of reports and to try to make something of them.
Deputy O'Dea also referred to the question of overtime working in relation to sporting fixtures. The provision of manpower for the policing of sporting fixtures is a matter for local Garda officers and it is for divisional officers to ensure that these needs are adequately met and to decide to what extent members on overtime are required in addition to the members rostered for duty.
Deputy O'Dea referred to allegations about cut-backs in the DMA Crime Task Force. Again these allegations are without foundation. The crime task force is a support unit available to assist local gardaí to meet particular crime problems or special policing needs and the essence of their role is flexibility to respond to incidents or events as they arise. The Garda authorities state that there has been no reduction in the manpower or transport allocated to the task force other than temporary vacancies arising from promotions. As regards the allegations that there are severe restrictions on late night patrolling in Dublin because of reductions in overtime, the Garda authorities state that the patrolling of the streets of the city has never been dependent on overtime. As a matter of fact, the normal rostering arrangements provide for a concentration of manpower on patrolling duties at the times such as late night and early morning when the demand for Garda services is greatest.
The reports that Garda cars are not being replaced are also incorrect. The number of cars operational at any one time depends on a number of factors and cars have to be taken off the road for repairs and servicing.
It took three months to replace a car in Cork.
There is one car in Dublin city centre.
Overall, however, the number of cars in the Garda fleet at present is the same as it was at the beginning of the year and the story about 15 cars being taken out of the fleet and not replaced does not stand up. There is no basis in fact——
There is one car in Dublin city centre.
Deputies should not interrupt the Minister when she is speaking.
Deputy Harney's amendment suggests that one method whereby better utilisation of Garda resources would be achieved is by the setting up of a night court in Dublin. The first thing I ought to say about this is that, as a matter of law, the arrangement of District Court business in the Dublin Metropolitan District is a matter for the President of the District Court.
As Deputy Harney should be aware, the idea of a night court is not a new one and it has been advanced on a number of occasions in the past. In 1982, a committee, chaired by the then President of the District Court, considered the proposal to institute night courts in Dublin. The Garda Síochána, the Department of Justice and the DPP's Office were represented on the committee. The committee, whose brief was to investigate whether the idea of a night court would work and be useful in Dublin, concluded that the setting up of a night court would not be justified. Against any benefits which would accure to the Garda there needed to be balanced the extra costs of the Judiciary and the court staff which would almost certainly be incurred in servicing a night court. We are not satisfied that there is sufficient reason to ask the President of the District Court — who, as I have said has ultimate responsibility for arrangements for District Court business in Dublin — to re-examine the question at this stage.
We are, of course, conscious of the amount of Garda time that is spent attending court and the Department have implemented measures in recent years to reduce as far as possible the amount of time so spent. Such measures include the computer scheduling of court cases so that unrelated prosecutions by an individual garda are listed as far as possible for the same court on the same day. The result is that the total number of court appearances by that garda has been reduced. In addition, a committee with representatives of the Department, court officials and the Garda Síochána meet regularly to resolve whatever problems may arise. A number of worthwhile improvements in the area of practical operations has come about through this committee's work.
I am somewhat puzzled by the reference in Deputy Harney's amendment to "not requiring gardaí to give oral proof of formal, written depositions in the District Court". It is not clear what precise change in procedure in the matter of proof of depositions the Deputy has in mind or what substantial improvement in efficiency in the use of Garda resources such a change would bring about. Sworn depositions may in certain circumstances be taken at the preliminary examination in the District Court of a charge of an indictable offence. They may be used in evidence in the subsequent criminal trial only where it is proved that the deponent is dead or unable to attend or prevented from attending to give evidence at the trial. Consequently, I understand, depositions are used only quite rarely.
In any event, under section 21 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1984, there is now provision whereby proof of depositions may be given by written statement. Indeed, section 21 has a much more general effect. It enables proof of any matter arising in a criminal trial to be given by written statement, subject to certain conditions. Also section 22 of the 1984 Act provides for proof by formal admission in criminal proceedings. These two sections are already in force and when they become fully operational in practice they should help to reduce considerably the complexity of proofs in criminal cases and to achieve appreciable savings in Garda time spent on appearances in court.
The reduction in the level of crime is to be welcomed. There is, however, no room for complacency, and the Government are determined to give continued support to the various measures which have already been taken to deal with the situation. The Garda Síochána, with the full backing of the Government, have played a vital part in the continued reduction in the amount of indictable crime recorded. The Garda, given the necessary resources and support of the community as a whole, can continue to tackle the crime problem successfully.
The measures taken to counteract drug abuse in our society are also proving successful, and the view of the Garda is that the incidence of drug trafficking has levelled off. While the trend in the early eighties was for an increase in the number of people charged with drug offences and the number of drug seizures, 1985 saw the start of a downward trend — a 7 per cent decrease in the number charged with drug offences and a 4 per cent drop in the number of seizures. This welcome trend is continuing. These trends are a fair indication of a reduction in the level of offences as the Garda have not relaxed their vigilance in this area. More and more gardaí are being trained in the skills necessary to deal with these offences. While there is no room at all for complacency in relation to this most serious problem, it is heartening to note that the measures which the Government have initiated in recent years are beginning to pay off. I assure the House that any further steps that are seen by the Government to be necessary to combat the drug problem will be taken.
The Garda authorities have informed me that the incidence of joyriding has greatly decreased recently. The reasons the Garda give for this are interesting. They point not only to the deployment of the special unit to combat joyriding which was set up early last year but also to the deterrent effect of certain legislative changes made in the Road Traffic Act, 1984, and in the Criminal Justice Act. The Road Traffic Act made the unauthorised taking of a motor vehicle a indictable offence with a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment. It also made interfering with the mechanism of a vehicle an offence whether it is committed on private or public property. The Criminal Justice Act introduced a provision whereby consecutive prison sentences instead of concurrent ones can be imposed in connection with offences committed while on bail. Let me mention also the changes which have been introduced by arranging for speedy trials for the perpetrators of this type of offence who were being arrested in the morning, coming through the courts in the afternoon, getting bail and then going out and committing the same offences again within a matter of hours. Of course, arrangements were made also for the necessary accommodation in places of detention to ensure that these people serve their full sentences.
In conclusion, let me say that the evidence certainly is different from the suggestions made in the speeches of the Opposition Deputies. Once more we put the facts before them. Once more we give them the real detail.
The Minister of State did not answer any of my questions.
If they want to live in the land of unreality with the scare headlines that in many instances are in the media but have no basis in fact——
(Interruptions.)
I move amendment No. 2:
To delete all words after "That" and to insert:
"Dáil Éireann deplores the Government's failure to make any provision in 1986 for the cost of the extra security arrangements associated with the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which has had a consequent adverse impact on the Garda over-time allocation for 1986, and also urges greater efficiency in the utilisation of Garda resources through: (i) the introduction of a night court in Dublin, (ii) not requiring gardaí to give oral proof of formal written depositions in the district court, and (iii) the more efficient management of overtime expenditure by the Garda Authorities."
This year's allocation for Garda over-time of £12 million is the same as the outturn for 1985. Therefore, on the face of it there is no cut, as both the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Dukes, have claimed. However, this allocation masks some unforeseen developments. Under the Anglo-Irish Agreement security arrangements it was agreed last year by the Government that 120 extra gardaí would be deployed on Border duty. The cost of this was part of the reason why overtime ran to £12 million last year. Although the Government promised the Garda at the time extra financial resources for 1986 to cover the cost of the increased Border policing, this has not materialised and the full cost of the extra Border policing is falling out of the £12 million allocation. That is why at this time of the year the overtime allocation is eaten up. In other words, as our amendment points out, there is no provision for extra Border security cost which this year will run to £8 million or two-thirds of the total allocation for Garda overtime. Indeed, it seems reasonable to forecast that before this year is out the Minister will be back in this House with a Supplementary Estimate to help to cover this new cost. The abolition of or restrictions on Garda overtime ordered recently by the Minister, therefore, mask the real problem of failing to make allocations for the increased cost of Border security.
However, our amendment makes clear that we are not happy with the way that the money allocated to the Garda is spent. One central problem is that there is no adequate management system in the Garda force and the present overtime ban has been applied in an insensitive, across the board manner which has failed totally to draw up any priority listing to ensure that the ban will not have an adverse effect on law and order and security in the State. There is no priority listing whatsoever. There is no better way to make my point than to quote from the May issue of the Garda News the official journal of the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors:
It is hardly conceivable that the Minister could have been so native, or so poorly briefed by his civil servants, that he was unaware that in the Garda Síochána there exists no mechanisms to implement the concept of cost effective policing. This entails the setting of objectives, priorities and plans, linking these to the availability of resources — manpower, equipment and money — deploying those resources to implement the plans, and monitoring the outcome. It involves a careful examination of each police operation, the elimination of time-wasting and inefficient practices, and the re-deployment of manpower — all within the overall context of clear and agreed priorities. Little of this exists in the Garda Síochána, and what little of that does has no bearing on the overall operations of the Force.
Our amendment also points to the need not only for more efficient allocation and utilistion of financial resources to the Garda but also to tackle some cost areas affecting Garda operations which could mean significant savings especially on the annual overtime bill.
I was disappointed with the Minister of State's response to our suggestion for a night court in the Dublin area. At present most arrests by gardaí are made by gardaí on duty at night, but at present they can only bring the people they have arrested before a court to be charged on the following morning. This inevitably involves Garda overtime. Would it not be much more sensible, even if there were additional court costs, to appoint an additional district justice? Obviously, the additional costs of court staff and so on would have to be considered, but it would be a tiny amount of money in comparison to what could be saved in the amount currently being spent on Garda overtime.
The Minister wondered what I meant by part (ii) of my amendment, not requiring gardaí to give oral proof of written depositions in the District Court. She said that already to some degree this has been provided in the present Criminal Justice Act. That is so, but defence counsel can dispense with this and can call a garda to come and give oral proof of the written deposition. We are asking that that be changed, and that is a matter for the Minister and for legislation. It would save considerable amounts of Garda overtime and resources if it were done.
The Minister of State's reply tonight indicates very clearly the vast difference between the garda on the beat and Garda management. In recent weeks we have had a number of statements in relation to the problems of the Garda, especially those faced by the garda on the beat. They seem to be living in a different world from the Minister and the various statements of the management. I presume that the Minister has based her reply fully on the information supplied to her by Garda management. This is a very serious situation and one which I hope the Minister will take up because obviously there is a vast difference between the views of the garda on the beat, who after all has to face the problems, and Garda management. We on this side of the House have regularly during this Dáil session tabled motions on crime and have raised this very serious problem at every possible opportunity. We do not apologise for doing so because it is one of the most serious problems facing the country today.
Unfortunately, the Minister failed to respond and the present serious crime rate, particularly crimes of violence, is causing great concern within our communities. On a daily basis our newspapers report countless acts of crime, including assault, major and petty robberies, rape and household break-ins. Murder in our cities has increased dramatically and the reported brutalities taking place in our cities and towns has created new fears to all households, particularly to older people and those living alone.
The warning signals have been there for a long time and it was inevitable that something horrific, such as the murder that took place in my constituency in Dollymount one month ago, would happen from the manner in which crime has been escalating in the past couple of years.
There is a duty and an obligation on the authorities to make sure that every measure and every step is taken and that the Garda are given the resources they need to defeat the crime-doer once and for all.
Dublin particularly suffers from an increased and appalling level of crime and vandalism and it is a matter of great sadness that it has become a city of shutters, barbed wire, expensive security systems, a city of fear. I made this point on a number of occasions previously and I make it again because Dublin is such a city. One very much regrets this because, apart from the security aspect, it destroys Dublin as a capital, which should concern us all. There are numerous no-go areas, so much so that tourists and visitors are advised not to go out alone at night. They are advised also of certain areas where they should not visit under any circumstances at any time in the day.
Business houses are paying huge sums of money for insurance, where it can be obtained, and to the neutral observer it is very obvious that the position has reached a serious and dangerous state.
The Minister for Justice has on numerous occasions spoken of the decrease in the level of crime and has also furnished statistics and figures to prove this claim. Very few people will accept that this is true and, indeed on the contrary, it has become very obvious that crime is much more organised today than ever before and that the petty thief of two years ago is now part of the very highly organised and sophisticated gangs who take part in armed raids and get away with huge sums of money, jewellery and other goods. Criminal gangs have perfected their techniques and when they strike or are cornered nothing stands in their way. This is one of the serious risks and dangers which gardaí are facing every day.
I have the highest respect for our Garda force and I sympathise with them in so far as they are operating at present within very stringent limits and are not getting the support they deserve from the Minister or his Department.
For some time there have been reports of cutbacks in Garda overtime and, despite denials by the Minister, these allegations have been repeated over and over again by the various Garda representative groups.
The Minister expressed alarm at the very high level of expenditure on Garda overtime and of the £12 million provided in the Estimates for overtime in 1986, two-thirds of this amount had already been used up to the end of the first quarter.
If this existing level of overtime is maintained it would be necessary for the Government to provide a further £12 million for this purpose. Instead of providing the additional funds the Minister has ordered the Garda chiefs to review their operation as they will have to operate within the original Estimate for the remainder of this year.
In the current situation it is very obvious that severe cutbacks in Garda services are taking place and, as a result, the job is being done in an arbitrary, inefficient and counter productive manner.
The Government have made it clear that they will make no more money available and that the force must live within their means. The Minister of State made it quite clear tonight that there would be no increase on the sum of £12 million already provided.
The Minister accused Fianna Fáil of over-emphasising the ban on overtime that was mooted some time ago and, of course, the consequent denials by the Government. We have merely been pointing out the realities and the facts that have been made public by the Minister's Department and allocated in this year's Estimate for Garda overtime. The Government should come clean and tell us if they will ensure that the original level of overtime is available for the rest of the year or if they can in some way manage to provide that level of support in the Garda services by providing only a small fraction of the amount required. That is something on which the Minister has not come clean, he has simply issued blanket denials and contradictions. We realise that as a result of the Anglo-Irish Agreement there has been a major redeployment of Garda forces to the Border and that has meant fewer gardaí on the streets in urban areas, particularly in Dublin.
We should also recognise that in 1982, in our last year in Government, we recruited almost 1,000 gardaí but in 1985 only 253 were recruited and this year none has been recruited.
It is important that we give priority to the crime problem but the performance of this Government does not seem to bear that out in terms of ensuring that we have enough recruits coming into the force and that we try to redress this imbalance that has resulted from the redevelopment of forces to the Border areas.
We should try to ensure that the sort of policing we have makes for a greater presence of gardaí on the streets and that the level of co-operation that might be there will be used to the maximum to ensure that we reduce the level of crime.
It is too simplistic, for example, to take some sort of credit — as the Minister of State did tonight — in relation to the so-called reduction in the crime rate as published in the Garda annual report on crime. In many types of crime, detection rates are so low that many people are not now bothering to report crimes of, what they might consider, a minor nature. That is a very serious situation and would seem to indicate that the public have given up all hope of obtaining greater success against the crime-doer and, of course, the consequential result of that thinking would lead to people making the decision to take methods into their own hands which would, unfortunately, lead to a worsening of the situation for everybody.
I also acknowledge the dedication and level of commitment by members of the Garda. They have been doing a very good job despite serious financial restrictions under which they must operate but they have constantly repeated over and over that they themselves are not satisfied with their rate of success in fighting crime and have very positively identified the Minister and his Department as being the main contributory cause, as the required resources and facilities needed by the gardaí are just not being provided.
No police force can be managed effectively without having sufficient money to do the job. The Government have not given the Garda sufficient money to fulfil their commitments during this year and until they do the public will continue to receive an inadequate service and the crime-doer will continue to have a field day.
Serious concern was recently expressed by the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors and the Garda Representative Association on the drastic cut-backs in Garda services ordered last May.
Having heard reports from all over the country the two committees expressed the view that unless these measures were rescinded the likely outcome would be an escalation of crime and lawlessness.
The Garda were appalled to hear the Minister state in the Dáil during the previous debate that no cut-backs had been ordered and it is very difficult to understand precisely exactly what the Minister is playing at.
It is imperative that the whole matter should be clarified either by Garda management or by the Minister at the earliest opportunity.
Very recently the Garda Representative Body spelled out to the Minister the very serious effects that the cancellation of many duties hitherto regarded as vital are likely to have on the maintenance of law and order. The Minister assured the deputation that he did not wish to see any cut-backs on essential services but nevertheless did not undertake to arrange the restoration of any specific one of the vital duties which had already been discontinued or cut back. For example, over the June bank holiday Garda forces were stretched to the limits arising from the tragic fire that claimed so many lives in the Loreto Convent in St. Stephen's Green.
Since then the Garda investigation as to what caused the fire proceeded very slowly due to the lack of manpower and I am informed that on a number of days only one member of the force was assigned to examine, and investigate, the debris. As a result of the slowness and the length of time that this took the possibility of tracing the cause of this terrible fire became more difficult and more remote.
Serious crimes in the Dublin area are not being investigated properly because of a shortage of manpower and night patrols have been seriously affected and not sufficient protection is now being extended to the people, to their property, or indeed, to their lives.
The massive increase in house burglaries is evident by the fact that house insurance premiums have increased by over 100 per cent this year alone and in business many companies cannot get any insurance against burglary and are trading under impossible conditions.
There is a need for a new and comprehensive programme to reduce crime. The Government have failed to take positive action in the allocation of personnel and resources to do this. It is accepted that the most valuable method of providing peace and security to homes and business is through an effective Garda Síochána force but the Government have failed to provide sufficient resources in this area.
How can the gardaí be expected to cope effectively with criminal activity when manpower levels and resources are not sufficient to meet the challenge of the criminal?
It is estimated that in all there has been a net cut-back of almost 1,000 gardaí as a result of deployment to Border security.
No amount of juggling of figures or statistics will get away from the fact that fewer gardaí are patrolling our streets and while the Government continue to delude themselves into thinking things are improving the situation on the ground is disastrous. A fundamental change of policy is needed immediately and the people are demanding that they be given the protection to which they are rightly entitled.
The Fianna Fáil motion expresses deep concern about the serious situation that exists in regard to crimes involving firearms, robbery with violence and physical assault and we call on the Government to make the adequate finance available for the necessary levels of over-time in the Garda Síochána needed to deal with this situation.
The Minister's amendment calling on Dáil Éireann to commend the Government on the level of manpower and other resources made available is a sick joke and even this Minister is asking too much for the House to take him seriously on this issue.
If the Minister cannot do the job and cannot persuade his Government to make the necessary resources available to the gardaí for this purpose then he should resign and allow somebody stronger to take over who will exert greater determination to ensure that our gardaí obtain the facilities they so badly need to combat crime and to make our cities and our towns a safer place for all of our citizens and enable people to carry on their business and walk the streets in safety.
This is the third or fourth time I have had the opportunity to speak about crime in this session. There have been a number of debates on Garda manning levels and crime in the city of Dublin. We discussed the high level of crime in the Dublin area after Christmas.
As we go into a fairly long summer recess I want to go again into some of the matters causing major problems in the city. I have read the speeches of the Minister and Minister of State and have listened to their speeches over the past few months. In February I had a question on the Adjournment about the large number of robberies in the city, particularly 14 armed robberies in the Phibsboro-Drumcondra area. Perhaps the problem is not as centralised as it was then but armed robberies continue. We are arguing as to whether the amount allocated for overtime is sufficient. The sum is clear. There is £12 million available for the year, £9 million of which has gone, and that leaves £3 million for the rest of the year. A Supplementary Estimate will be rushed through the House at about 10 o'clock on the evening of the Christmas recess for Garda over-time, if the Government are still here.
This happens in the House year after year and nobody loses face because the Minister, not long out of Finance, feels he has to stand by his old principles on the state of the public finances and is not prepared to admit an obvious error. The only other explanation is that the £9 million for the first half of the year was a waste of money and was not necessary. The Government should come clean. If £3 million is sufficient for the remaining six months of the year, why was a similar amount not sufficient for the first six months? Why was the total figure for the year not set at £6 million? Let us stop this nonsense, trying to cod ourselves and the public and everybody else. It is right or it is wrong. Either £6 million was enough for 1986 or there was some abuse or something wrong with the system that allowed £9 million to be allocated. There might be some variation because of the strain over Christmas in relation to the Anglo-Irish accord and so on. But that is only a small figure. The Government should come clean on this whole thing.
I want to put it clearly on the record that the public perspective and the perspective of the gardaí on the beat who know about crime is that because of the cut-backs manning levels are affected; there are not as many gardaí on the beat; not so many people in the inner city stalking out the criminals and the people in the drugs scene. The vast majority of crime in this country takes place, unfortunately, in my constituency. We saw last week that 35 per cent of the malicious injuries claims for the entire country came from the Dublin 1 area and that is one part of my own constituency. That proves what I do not like proving — the situation is becoming worse because of the cut-backs. The gardaí had very good success earlier on in the year stalking out some of the drug dealers and that was achieved because they spent night after night, week after week, sitting in gardens or in derelict houses watching and building up records. It is a long painstaking job and the gardaí are excellent at it. I have great admiration for the drug squad and continually praise the gardaí who participate in that work. But they are not doing the job now because they have not got the manpower to do so. The drugs squad is severely affected and there is no argument about that. The drug squad succeeded in beating many families at the drug game since 1980. They only recently charged somebody who is before the courts and if there is any justice in the land one can foresee the verdict in that case. That job must be done on overtime, but the curtailment of Garda overtime has put an end to these essential Garda activities. It is annoying to listen to the waffle contained in Government statements.
There is a huge difference of opinion between Garda management and the gardaí on the beat and the public about what is going on. The gardaí on the beat who are chasing the criminals, putting themselves at risk continuously trying to stalk out the offenders and bring them to court, are saying that Garda management are telling the Government that enough money is being spent on overtime and they do not need any more, but they do need extra money. The extra duties performed by the drug squad in areas like the docklands and the quays, the nightclubs, the side streets in the financial areas of the city and in some of the "flatlands" where there is high crime must continue, but the resources have been massively reduced. This was seen in a big way in this city last Saturday during a rock concert in Corke Park. The gardaí present did an excellent job, but there were not enough men available. There were 50,000 young people, a large proportion of whom, unfortunately, were drunk out of their minds from 11 a.m. They were falling all over the streets and yet the Garda succeeded in keeping some order. If the lightning storm had not coinlands' cided with the end of the concert, there would have been some major difficulties in the city. That brought some of the fans to their senses and the rest home.
Before that happened there was vandalism — windows smashed and cars damaged, shop windows broken and all kind of obscene happenings on some of the city streets. Some of the areas manned by the Garda could be compared exactly with the position last year. The promoter in this case kept his promise to provide manning levels in particular areas. He paid his money and the areas he said he would have controlled were controlled. The main streets of Drumcondra, from Dorset Street back to Ballybough and other areas which had 20 gardaí on patrol last year and 20 gardaí on the barricades were reduced to five gardaí this year. That is not enough. Everybody — the sergeants, inspectors, the organisers of the patrols — said that that number was not sufficient. That was one instance where one can make a direct comparison.
One of the areas of the city, with a great volume of business premises, is the area for which the Bridewell Garda station members have responsibility. That includes Moore Street, Henry Street, North King Street, Bolton Street, North Circular Road and almost out to the Navan Road. It is a massive, densely populated area and one of the toughest areas in the city and in the country. It contains important business premises and third level institutions. One patrol car operates in that area. The dogs in the street could tell you how that car operates. The people involved in crime know exactly the movements of that patrol car. Once a night in some of the toughest areas one unfortunate garda is asked to walk through some of the flat complexes. If he never sees or hears anything or arrests anybody, he is a wise man, because I do not think he should as it is so dangerous. Six months ago there were two and three gardaí on that particular dangerous beat. To send one man in is an absolute disgrace. The police officers in charge of the Bridewell Garda Station say that there is only one garda available. The Minister will probably say that from his records there are two or three patrol cars for that area. If there are, they are on specific duties, placed watching one spot, so they are not available. A huge proportion of claims under the malicious damages legislation that we have now abolished occurred in this areas. What will happen now in that respect?
If Garda overtime is not necessary, the Minister must prove this case. If the numbers of gardaí in the various stations can be manoeuvred or extra gardaí brought into certain areas and the available number can patrol the city, that is fine. However, the facts are that there is a massive reduction in the number of gardaí on the beat in the most crucial areas of the city and that the money available is not sufficient. Since the Minister is now in the House, I shall repeat what I said. He is trying to claim that the£3 million left out of the£12 million will be sufficient for the rest of the year to cover Garda overtime and maintain proper services. Was the £9 million wrongly spent? Was it wasted, and will £3 million allow the Garda to maintain their operations? The Minister must be fair and straight with the gardaí on the beat, who do an extremely good job and are facing armed criminals breaking into banks and insurance companies day after day with sirens on cars racing through the streets. The Garda are asked to provide their essential services on a shoestring, but the Minister knows that that is not possible. The people among the senior Garda ranks advising him are out of touch with what their membership are saying and with what the drug squad and the crime prevention squad are saying. These men cannot perform their duties as they should.
I have several times praised the work of the drug squad, who are extremely effective in keeping crime under some kind of order in Dublin's inner city. They operate on the basis of overtime, on the basis of staking out houses, often for months on end, watching and building up records on certain families. They have succeeded in breaking the ring. The people involved have made it clear that they cannot continue the same type of surveillance, or have the success that they had in the past. The Minister's arguments are wrong, mischievous and ill-advised. The gardaí who know will probably succeed in convincing the Minister of the true position when the House rises and sometime late in the Christmas session, if they are still in Government, the Coalition will have to seek extra money in a Supplementary Estimate. How else can the Garda maintain their usual service on a quarter of the money? It would be very interesting to hear the Minister's explanation. The gardaí in patrol cars, in the stations, on the beat, in the frontline facing crime, wish to know the answer. Either the Minister is getting wrong advice, or he is wrongly advising this House. He has an obligation not to allow the House to go into recess for three months, allowing the crime in the city to build up as it has since he took office last February.
A great responsibility rests on the Members of this House to be extremely careful in the issues they debate here, and the manner in which they debate them, in order not to frighten people or misrepresent the situation. I fully recognise the role of an Opposition party but there are some issues that it is not only futile to discuss but sometimes it borders on the dangerous.
The motion before the House this evening is about the third Opposition attempt in every recent times to create an element of scaremongering, that the whole Garda force are falling asunder, that there is no crime detection going on, no improvement in the number of gardaí on the beat, that Garda stations are being closed down willynilly with no consideration of the consequences. That is not the position. The Opposition do not want to read and take account of the facts in the speech the Minister made in the Estimates debate and in May on a Private Member's motion. This is not a fairytale. These are facts. The facts on crime are being given by the Garda Commissioner and by Garda headquarters. People are calling them liars when they say they do not believe the Government when they say the measures adopted by them over recent years are undoubtedly beginning to have the effects that we would all desire them to have. We would all like to have a society totally free of any crime so that we could all walk the streets without fear of mugging or, as I have been subjected to, having my handbag snatched twice. Society is not like that. If we think it is then we are looking at it through rose-tinted glasses and we are not being realistic. Sadly, no society has escaped the increase in crime.
There are some negative vibrations coming from this debate as has happened in other debates in regard to the Garda, the Judiciary and so on. It would be much better for this House to try to send positive messages to people and tell them that our streets are becoming safer. Of course, we will still read of horrific cases in the papers but that should not be used as an excuse for saying everything is still as bad as it was. Certainly there are improvements.
I welcome the recognition in recent years by Garda headquarters and by people who make such decisions that it is not enough to provide Garda manpower and stations in the city areas and areas where there is a large percentage of businesses and that there is a need to move to and upgrade stations in suburban areas of Dublin. I know the town in which I live is dear to the heart of the Opposition Leader. It is a town that grew very quickly but for many years had only a day time Garda service in the station. I had to battle with Fianna Fáil in Government for a number of years when I was elected to the county council. Subsequently when I was elected to the Dáil I battled with the Minister. I tried to make them recognise that, because there were only residential houses in these new towns without a high percentage of businesses or schools, as Deputy Ahern mentioned, those people needed the protection of having a Garda station that was able to answer their calls for help speedily. Sadly, there has been a movement to the suburbs of people involved in petty crime. There was a need to recognise that and I commend it.
Deputy Ahern talked briefly about an area that had one patrol car. I want to put on record my thanks for the fact that in Malahide the detective unit car which was badly rammed a couple of weeks ago was replaced as quickly as possible. The patrol car was also damaged in an accident and that has been replaced. There has been no tardiness in replacing those facilities. The motorcycle is still available. If we continue to negative everything and complain about everything, a perception will be built up among the people that there is no protection being given to them and that the gardaí are taking their salaries and doing nothing. We all know that is not the case. This House has the responsibility to be positive about what is happening to help to increase the detection of crime and to prevent it.
We have heard from the House, and this side of the House in particular, over the last two nights the concerns and fears of Deputies in relation to our motion, that Dáil Eireann is deeply concerned about the serious situation that exists in regard to crimes involving firearms, robbery with violence and physical assault. We must address ourselves to crimes of violence this year. We are aware that over the past number of years there has been a massive increase in crime generally. A feature of the last couple of years in particular has been the increase in crimes of violence of all sorts. That is shown in statistics given by the Minister yesterday and also in the recent past.
Deputy Owen pointed to the need for adequate Garda coverage and surveillance in areas such as Malahide, Swords and other areas. I agree very much with the Deputy that this kind of coverage is essential. I ask the Deputy to look for a moment at another question which was replied to by the Minister yesterday showing that in Coolock, the number of indictable crimes reported in 1985 was 2,106. The number in Malahide was 354 and in Swords the number was 255. If it is necessary to have adequate cover, adequate provision and an adequate supply of manpower with sufficient flexibility in Malahide and Swords, it must also be necessary to have that in Coolock where there is a massive level of indictable crime. If we look at the Garda strength we find that there are 20 crimes for every one Garda member in Coolock, ten for every one in Malahide and five for every one in Swords. I am not suggesting that Swords and Malahide do not need the kind of cover which the Deputy has proposed. I agree with the Deputy that it is necessary. It is necessary to prevent crime in these residential areas.
Our argument is that areas like Coolock, the centre city and other areas around the city where there are massive levels of violent crime at present are not adequately manned. Garda superintendents, inspectors and sergeants in these areas are not able to deal with the problem. When the headquarters are asked to allocate further resources they say their resources are too strained. They do their best with what they have but what they have is clearly not adequate for the levels of crime which exist in these areas.
There is a problem in relation to over-time. I would like the Minister to recognise that problem, despite all his protestations earlier. He has been claiming for some time that there is no problem, that the money can be found somewhere and that it is the Opposition, the media and the Garda who are complaining. The Garda associations have been pointing to the very serious problems. A number of Deputies, Deputy Brady and Deputy Ahern in particular, pointed out very clearly the nature of these problems, the lack of surveillance and the lack of manpower to carry out surveillance in an adequate and thorough way. If that surveillance is there the culprits can be apprehended. If the gardaí have to leave at the end of their normal roster, obviously the criminals will have a free hand thereafter.
That is what is happening. The Garda know how to do the job but they are being restricted by the Government. This does not apply everywhere in the country, only in areas of high crime. On many occasions the Minister has attempted to deny that there is a problem at all; last night he criticised the media for drumming up a problem which did not exist. The Minister gave a directive to the Garda, via the Garda chief, which, when gardaí and sergeants on the beat received it, became a black and white directive. The Technical Bureau was limited and technicans had to finish up at 5 p.m., having had a break for lunch. When the directive came through they understood what it was.
It is clear from the Minister's statement yesterday that £9.1 million has been spent out of the overtime fund and that there is only £3 million left for the rest of the year. We do not know how much of that the Government will apply to Border duty to meet the requirements of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. The Minister will not tell us how much of the balance will be devoted to Border duty. Will the Government supplement the overtime fund? Where will they get the money from? Who will decide where the money will be spent?
Overtime raises the question of management. Who is managing the Garda who are carrying the can? The overtime fiasco is only a symptom of a more serious problem. The Garda must be allowed to set out their priorities in the fight against crime and vandalism: they are the experts and they must be given the resources, within certain restraints, to meet their requirements. They cannot have the resources withdrawn half way through the year.
There is no point in giving the Garda resources if they are not allowed to control them. The present system is far too centralised, much more now than for many years. The time has come to give the Garda direct control of their finances. This requires a totally new approach. The Garda are a very responsible body of men and women, and they are professionals.
The present system of management by remote control, with financial control in the Department of Justice, is one of the basic problems. It is time we had an inquiry into the system of management and financial control of the Garda Síochána. The overtime debacle has indicated that there is a serious problem of resource allocation and management.
I appreciate fully — and we all do on this side — that overtime should not be allowed to be squandered or made available too readily, but in present circumstances there should be more flexibility. Therefore, as I have said, the Garda must be given the resources and management training to handle the resources. How many financial controllers do the Garda have to assist them in managing their resources?
At present the crisis about Garda over-time is evident. Has the Minister plans to move money between heads in the Department or will a supplementary sum be provided at the end of the year? We want to be assured that the Garda will have the resources to deal with violence, firearms, robbery with violence and physical assault. Deputy Ahern, with obvious experience, pointed out the need for surveillance and constant vigilance if perpetrators of crime are to be caught.
The Minister may say that because £12 million was allowed last year and this year for Garda overtime there has not been a reduction. In effect, there is a reduction. The fact is that the Government have taken from the Garda Síochána the money they need to do the job.
That is the most extraordinary song I have ever heard.
The Minister is very smug. He seems to be remote from the problems on the ground. I invited him to come out and have a look and see for himself some of the things I described here. Indeed, I have been told they are worse than I said they were. This morning we heard that 62 per cent of the malicious damage in the entire country has been committed in Dublin. That is what we have been trying to bring home to this remote Minister.
When the Minister said there was never any question of a reduction in the amount of overtime he was answering something that had not been asked, obviously knowing it would be good for a headline in the newspapers. I am now asking the Minister to appreciate the seriousness of the problem and to forget the global statistics. If he looks at the figures for non-indictable crime he will see there has been a massive increase in the past five year.
I would ask the Minister to get away from his generalised statistics and come back to reality. He should apply himself and the resources to the problems on the ground. Everybody outside the House knows that there is a serious problem which can be solved by the Garda Síochána if they are given the resources and the back-up to do the job. We have every confidence in their ability to do so, but not if they are left with their hands handcuffed behind their backs. They cannot handle the situation because they are not given the resources, in particular the resources of overtime. I would ask the Minister to review the position urgently and ensure that the Garda Síochána have the resources they need for the rest of the year to tackle the present high levels of crime and vandalism.
Amendment No. 1 put and declared carried.
Motion, as amended, put and agreed to.