I wish to share my time with Deputy Browne.
Private Members' Businness. - Crime Rate: Motion.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move that:
"In view of
— the large increase in serious crime;
— the fact that drug abuse on our streets is now an everyday occurrence;
— the level of fear generated among the most vulnerable members of our community, including children and old people, in urban and rural areas alike;
— the increasing necessity for shop, car and home alarms;
— the number of street ramps in cities and the number of requests for further ramps to deal with stolen cars speeding around neighbourhoods;
— the increase in muggings, burglaries, vandalism and car theft; and
— the increasing incidence of violent crime, especially crimes against women, organised crime and the proliferation of weapons being used in crime; and
given that Garda numbers are greatly below authorised establishment levels and the need for penal reform and the reform of our courts, Dáil Éireann calls on the Government to publish forthwith a comprehensive and co-ordinated plan of action to deal with the current crime, vandalism and law and order problems facing the community, such plan to incorporate quarterly reports to Dáil Éireann on its implementation."
The Garda crime statistics published last week show an increase in indictable crime, that is serious crime, from 86,574 in 1986 to 95,391 in 1992. Despite this garda recruitment remains almost 500 below the authorised strength. Unfortunately, I am unable to give the accurate numbers because, despite having telephoned the Department of Justice on three occasions, I did not receive the courtesy of a return call. Yet, alarming though the Garda crime statistics may be, they understate the position. They do not reflect the true level of crime, but merely the level of reported crime. I have been making that point for a number of years and I know it irritates some people, but I will continue to make it because I believe it to be true and, furthermore, it is the starting point in any fight against crime. I published the National Bureau of Crime Statistics Bill during the summer recess and I hope the Minister will accept that Fine Gael Bill.
In addition to accurately measuring crime and the increases and decreases from period to period, in order to gear up the fight against crime it is necessary to reform sentencing policy so that judges and legislators know which sentences have the greatest effect, a point which has been referred to in both the Whitaker report of 1985 and the Law Reform Commission report of 1993. Furthermore, it is shameful that no prison statistics have been published since the 1989 prison report was surreptitiously placed in the Oireachtas Library during the recess without informing anybody. Is that any way to plan a fight against crime? I suggest that we have not even started in the correct place.
According to an Irish Independent IMS survey published last Saturday, only 82 per cent of people report burglaries, 91 per cent report theft of property from cars, 79 per cent report vandalism, 62 per cent report theft generally and a mere 56 per cent of assault cases are reported and an average of 78 per cent of people contact the Garda when they become victims of crime. That is why I believe the crime statistics are understated and the response is similarly understated. What has happened to people's confidence in the criminal justice system when they do not bother to report crimes? That survey revealed also that six out of ten Dubliners are afraid to walk alone at night and nearly three-quarters of the capital's citizens believe the number of gardaí in their area is inadequate to provide a reasonable level of security for themselves and their families. There has been enough pussyfooting; it is time to call a spade a spade.
There are two categories of prisoners — those who have been brought before the courts and sentenced because of their crimes and those old, frail and nervous members of our community who are prisoners in their homes, who are afraid to go past their doorsteps after dark and on many occasions to open their doors during the day. Yet the gurriers who prey on them are free to walk the streets. When I was 11 years old I travelled on my own from my home in Inchicore to Áras an Uachtaráin to see the late President Kennedy. My daughter is now 11½ years old and I would not dream of allowing her to travel any distance in this city on her own. Such has been the decline over a few decades. We have retreated too far behind car, shop and house alarms, shutters on shops and ramps on our roads, not only to prevent cars from being stolen but to prevent people from driving at high speed and knocking down others. A child was killed a few nights ago by a person driving a stolen car. Many people in Dublin and elsewhere are seeking to have more ramps put in place. In Dublin alone applications have been made to have ramps put in place on approximately 200 roads to prevent cars being stolen and driven around with impunity on our streets. This is not the same city or country in which I grew up and this is not what is happening in other capital cities around the world. For example, in Vienna it is commonplace to see women walking on their own at night and there are no shutters on windows there. That used to be the case here, but what went wrong? At one time people went window shopping in O'Connell Street on Sunday afternoons, but that is no longer the case because there is nothing to be seen but shutters on shop windows. There is something seriously wrong and we have retreated much too far.
Before dealing with the need to improve the various arms of the criminal justice system, there are two points I want to raise — unemployment and housing and how they are releated to crime. There are now almost 300,000 people unemployed. That is a record number and there is no indication that it will be substantially reduced this side of the turn of the century. That is an appalling reflection on this House and on the Government who preside over such outrageous levels of unemployment.
I am sick and tired listening to people talking about improvements in the economy. We have had a sustainable growth rate for the past number of years, twice the European average. The debt-GNP ratio has been decreasing for some time and, with the exception of a short period of European-wide disruption of interest rates, our rates have been low and our inflation rate has been under control for a number of years. But where are the jobs? It is time we realised we are not running an economy, but a country. There is far too much talk about the economic value of a job, what about the therapeutic value? When the Conference of Major Religious Superiors made a fair and just proposal to create jobs, because it understands the problems created by unemployment, we were told the proposal would cause economic blips. What sort of blips is the crime rate causing? The devil is finding work for idle hands. It is natural that a young, vulnerable and unsupervised unemployed person will be open to temptation. All of us would be open to temptation in those circumstances. Is what Seán Lemass said correct? He stated that a country that measures its success in economic terms alone is a country that has lost its soul. We are running a country and the therapeutic value of a job is just as important as its economic value.
In parts of the country the unemployment rate is 70 per cent. People in their mid-twenties have never worked and have no prospect of working. Yet the Programme for National Recovery and the Programme for Economic and Social Progress are reported to have been a great success. What national recovery or economic and social progress has taken place when 300,000 people are unemployed? Surely those people should be represented directly in some form in the negotiations for Programme for Economic and Social Progress mark II so that we can deal with the position before it boils over into something uncontrollable with all the consequences that would involve for public order, security, crime, vandalism and other related matters.
Poor housing in urban areas is another matter directly related to the crime problem. The Lord Mayor's Commission on Housing which I set up and which is chaired by Dr. Garret FitzGerald produced probably the best report on housing in Dublin since 1914. Those who served on that commission held a cross section of political opinions. The commission pointed out that there are 9,600 local authority flats along the canals in Dublin which are in need of major refurbishment, and that the same problem pertains in many urban areas around the country, for example in Cork and Athlone. The 9,600 families who live in those flats in Dublin are neglected by the legislators. Nobody in this House would aspire to live in such conditions. I am sure the money can be found to finance the refurbishment of the flats. The environment of those flats is that of dark, dank stairways, broken sewers, public lights that are broken; it is ripe for the criminal, the vandal and the drug pusher. It is no wonder that we have very high crime levels in parts of the inner city when people are living in those conditions. Elected councillors and the Comptroller and Auditor General have pointed to the outlandish waste in the maintenance budgets of local authorities, particularly that of Dublin Corporation. Such budgets could provide for financing major refurbishment of local authority accommodation and maintain a living city for its citizens and not allow the city to be one that closes at night, one in which people are afraid to go into certain blocks of flats where drugs are being taken on the stairs and where people are vomiting after taking drug overdoses. The environmental question is central to the drugs problem.
The question is often asked, does crime pay? A prominent businessman recently told a national newspaper that he had to close one of his premises, even though it earned between £75,000 and £80,000 annually for the Government in taxes, because it had been robbed at least six times annually for the past four years. There are barriers on the windows of convents in my constituency and despite such safety measures nuns have woken up at night to find intruders in their rooms. I grew up in an area which was quiet and rustic, but the local post office in that area was held up twice in two weeks and a betting shop three times during the same period. In a south Dublin suburb a businessman had been held up so many times that he is now inquiring about a licence for a hand gun to defend himself.
The incidence of criminal acts, particularly stealing, has almost quadrupled since the seventies. This is understandable when the rate of detection is only 34 per cent and the revolving door syndrome still operates in our prisons. Criminals know the criminal justice system is under-resourced, falling apart and works to serve their interest, that is, they have higher than a two out of three chance of never being brought to justice. This means that two-thirds of those who reported crime will never see justice done and 22 per cent of people never report crimes because they know there is a very slim chance that justice will be served. We need law but we also need order. In the Minister's county of Galway, I stopped on my way to a wedding in a remote part of the county——
Glenamaddy.
——to ask directions of an elderly couple who were terrified to answer the door. Crime is rampant in rural and urban areas. That elderly couple and many others throughout the country are preyed on by criminals, some on an excursion from nearby urban areas. Many younger people have emigrated, while elderly people in rural areas are under threat from criminals. That was not allowed happen in any earlier period of history.
Much of the crime problem is drug related. Feeding a drug habit may cost hundreds of pounds daily. Drugs are being sold openly on our streets. The Minister stated some time ago that there was no indication of an increase in heroin on the streets but her statement is not supported by Garda statistics. Drug seizures in 1992 increased to 4,262 from 3,500 the previous year, an increase of 20 per cent. While cannabis resin accounted for 77 per cent of all drugs analysed at the forensic science laboratory there were notable increases in amounts of other drugs seized. These included cocaine, LSD, heroin and ecstasy. The Garda report stated that the amount of heroin seized is the highest since 1986. Surely the Minister owes the House an explanation in regard to her recent statement that there was no evidence of an increase, when those 1992 statistics show otherwise.
Burglaries, theft, muggings and larcenies are commonplace and often fund drug addiction. Action has been overtaken by public relations in pretending to deal with this problem. Every time drugs are found on a boat, the Minister is photographed stocktaking the catch, yet 95 per cent of illegal drugs get on to the streets. Drugs and alcohol crazed kids are now carrying knives. During the last two months two youths were stabbed to death by other youths carrying knives in my constituency.
A plan of action is needed to deal with the high level of crime, one which will be vigorously implemented and reported on quarterly to this House. A ten-point plan would include: measuring the true level of crime and basing the response on need, reform of the prisons, reform of the courts, the creation of a drugs enforcement agency, greater accountability in given circumstances to the DPP, greater care that we get value for the £500 million spent annually on the justice system, the confiscation of assets of criminals, more gardaí on the beat, parental accountability for regular juvenille offenders and restriction on the sale of hunting knives.
It is essential that the level of crime be accurately measured and that judges and legislators know which sentences are effective and which crimes are of most concern to the community. I urge the Minister to accept the Private Members Bill to set up the national bureau of crime statistics.
Only those people who need to be in prison should be there. A recent press report which stated that I am seeking more jails is inaccurate and presumably should have been attributed to someone else. Imprisonment is a costly remedy, if it is a remedy at all. For those who refuse to pay fines or are involved in non-violent crimes, other penalties should be considered before imprisonment. For example, non-payment of a fine for not having a TV licence should result in the confiscation of a TV or a similar asset. Community work orders, deduction from social welfare or wages at source and similar penalties should be applied for such crimes. It is an essential part of this policy that any person who goes to prison will be detained there for the duration of the sentence.
We must end the revolving door policy and if a judge requires a person to be detained there must be a place for that person. It is nonsensical that 12 per cent of all committals continue to be for non-payment of fines. When a fine is applied there should be provision for its collection either by taking assets or by an attachment order to social welfare payments or wages.
The Whitaker report has been with us since 1985. It sets out what needs to be done in reforming the prisons. There is no point in building more prisons without a policy about their objective. Prisons on their own will fill up at a cost of £250,000 a cell and up to £30,000 running costs per year and they will become crime factories turning out recidivists in greater numbers unless we have a policy to reform the prison system. If the Department of Justice has neither the competence nor the desire to do what Whitaker recommended in 1985 it should step aside and appoint a prison board and an inspector of prisons to get on with the job.
Juvenile recidivism is of particular concern. I am grateful to Young Fine Gael, who researched this problem. I am informed that most juvenile crime is committed by persons aged from 14 to 17 years, that in 1990 one in every six juvenile crimes committed was committed by a person under 14 years and that one-third of the juveniles in detention have problems with drugs or alcohol. Recidivism of juveniles is in the 50 per cent to 80 per cent range. The Young Fine Gael research shows that on a given day 9.9 per cent of Dublin pupils will play truant from school, many falling into bad company. It is time to invest in crime prevention among juveniles and in rehabilitating juvenile criminals. To incarcerate a juvenile for three months for stealing £500 costs £5,000. It was revealed in reply to a parliamentary question in my name that there were 695 juvenile offenders in prisons or places of detention, constituting 31 per cent of the total prison population and costing the Exchequer £26 million to maintain. Surely if recidivism could be reduced, it would pay a handsome dividend to the State.
In combatting crime we need to control the supply of alcohol. Licensed people are giving alcohol to juveniles. The Minister should seek ways of penalising those who break the law.
It is strange that the Minister's recent announcement of 200 additional prison spaces at Wheatfield was accepted in silence by certain members of the Labour Party. If Labour was truly in Government, such an announcement would have been received by some Labour Members with howls of indignation. The provision of these places is not an attempt to deal with the problem, which is that our penal system is not geared towards assisting the fight against crime. Rather is it a contributory factor as recidivists continue to be churned out by the system.
We should make greater use of the probation and welfare service in the fight against crime. It is little short of disgraceful that over the past seven or eight years the probation service has never operated at full strength. I note that provisions are made in the current Estimate for an increase of seven or eight in the number of probation and welfare officers when it would seem that an increase of 40 or 50 would be more in line with needs. We can supply programme managers to beat the band but we cannot get essential workers to deal with crime.
Because of the absence of adequate statistics we are not in a position to assess the current use of the community service orders or to judge their success as an alternative to imprisonment. We do not have enough details about the rate of recidivism of offenders who are required to provide a service to the community rather than go to prison. We know that an increase in community service orders would help, but their has not been an increase in community service orders to match the increase in crime.
I note the success of the training workshops and hostels run by the probation service in conjunction with voluntary bodies. Why is consideration not given to the provision of extra workshops throughout the country as such workshops would provide another option for the Judiciary to steer offenders, especially juvenile offenders, away from crime towards rehabilitation?
We need to reform the administration of justice. The reform of the administration of the courts accompanied by a fair and equitable complaints system concerning the legal profession, along the lines of the Reform of the Courts' Administration Bill, 1986, the provision of sentencing guidelines for the Judiciary, a modern system of appointment and training of the Judiciary and the provision of modern court facilities conducive to the administration of justice are a prerequisite to a smooth running courts system. This would probably cost about £1 million per year which could be recovered through increased fines and commercial enterprises being required to make a contribution to the costs of arbitration in the courts. A more efficient collection of fines would also assist in this area.
It is time to consider not merely applying fines which when collected go into the coffers of the State. The courts, as part of a range of sentences, should be able to impose fines, some of which would be paid to the State and some to the victim of the crime. Restitution to those who have suffered from crime should come more to the centre stage. At the moment victims are no more than witnesses summoned to attend court as outsiders while the State gets on with the business of dealing with the offence. We need to take much more account of the victim and we should legislate accordingly.
The joint submission of the Incorporated Law Society and the Bar Council on the reform of the administration of the courts is a welcome document. It shows that those organisations are endeavouring to look afresh at the situation. The Irish Independent survey shows that the majority of people are not happy with the role of the Judiciary. I admire the independence and fairness of the Judiciary and they have a part to play in reforming the courts. In difficult financial times it is not sufficient for judges to think that we can proceed endlessly with the appointment of more and more judges. The Judiciary must take some responsibility for reforming themselves and they might well take a leaf from the book of the British Lord Chancellor in this regard.
We need to create a drugs enforcement agency including, if necessary, a European drugs enforcement agency. In some countries GNP from illegal drugs is greater than the total GNP from all other normal products. These illegal drugs flood the world and it is essential to tackle this internationally. I seek the creation of a drugs enforcement agency here to coordinate the role of the Garda, customs officers and the health services to combat crime on the ground. This should not involve additional cost as the agencies are already there. We need a European agency to combat crime on a Community basis and carry out a diplomatic offensive against countries which continue to manufacture and distribute illegal drugs with impunity. I am aghast at the weakness of the European Community response to date and even Europol is a meagre response to the need. Using the freed up facility caused by the scaling down of NATO, would a European coastguard be out of the question?
There should be a system of accountability in given circumstances for the Director of Public Prosecutions. The Director has done a good job down through the years and has shown independence in his work, but being independent and accountable are two different things. In Britain the Attorney General is a member of Parliament and must account to Parliament, but that is not the case here. We do not have a system whereby anybody can account to Parliament for the work of the Director of Public Prosecutions. In the past there have been multiple deaths where explanations have not been given to the next of kin and where there have been no prosecutions.
Furthermore, I am flabbergasted to read in the most recent report of the Garda Commissioner on crime statistics, under the heading "Crimes for which the perpetrators were detected but for which no proceedings are shown" that the following categories appear: unnatural offences, nine; rape, 37; indecent assault on females, 80; defilement of girls under 15 years of age, 17; defilement of girls between 15 and 17 year, three; incest, six; abduction, one; false imprisonment, four; possession of firearms or ammunition in suspicious circumstances, three; carrying firearms with criminal intent, one; burglary, 1,164; aggravated burglary, 11; robbery, 30; robbery with arms, one; arson, 30; killing and maiming cattle, one; malicious damage to schools, 47; other malicious damage to property, 415; interfering with railway, one; unlawful possession of housebreaking implements, 19. This amounts to a total of 1,719 serious indictable offences for which the perpetrators were detected but for which no proceedings are shown. The Director of Public Prosecutions should be held accountable to this House and these statistics should be explained. This is a serious weakness in the criminal justice accountability system. I am aware of the possible difficulties that could arise for the Director of Public Prosecutions but a system could be found in consultation with him.
We should ensure we get value for money for the £500 million that is paid out annually by the taxpayer for our defective justice system. We should consider the possibility of giving the Comptroller and Auditor General the power to carry out regular value for money audits of the law enforcement system and to report to the House on this expenditure. We can do this by changing the law and we should confer this responsibility on him.
The next point is that we should confiscate the assets of criminals where these were acquired through crime. I give notice to the House that if the Minister does not introduce a Bill within a month I will intorduce one myself. It is time that those who acquire assets through criminal activities are made to feel the pain.
The eighth point is that there should be more gardaí on the beat. The Minister accepts this point and has made provision for it in the Estimates. It forms part of the Programme for Government. It is outrageous, given the level of crime, that the number of gardaí is approximately 500 short of the authorised level of 11,400. I do not have the exact figure, for the reason I have stated. Not only should we have the full complement, we should consider the possibility of providing an auxiliary force to complement the gardaí in areas such as Dublin. We need more gardaí on the beat not only to detect crime but to prevent it.
The ninth point is that there is a clear need to make parents accountable for the actions of their juvenile children where they constantly offend. Those of us with children know that even in the best of homes a child can wander. The children I am talking about are juvenile children who constantly offend, whose parents have abdicated their responsibility. In some circumstances there is a reasonable suspicion that the parents may be sending them out to commit crime. In these circumstances, in deciding on the sentence to be imposed, the courts should have the power to take the role played by parents into account. I ask the House to note this point. It is not unusual for the courts to impose a curfew whereby juvenile offenders must return home by a certain time. If they fail to do so the gardaí may remove them from the street.
If the parents of juvenile children who constantly offend abdicate their responsibility by going to the pub, the courts should have the power not only to impose a curfew on their children but to impose a curfew on them whereby for a certain number of weeks they must remain at home on certain nights between the hours of 9 p.m. and midnight. I am not suggesting that the courts should apply this provision in every case, but they should have the right to apply it in certain cases. It is time we considered the possibility of allowing the courts to take the role played by parents into account in deciding what penalty should be applied against juvenile children who regularly offend.
The final point is that there should be a requirement, before hunting knives can be sold over the counter, to obtain authorisation from a Garda station stating the suitability of the applicant to acquire such an implement. These knives should not be sold over the counter to persons irrespective of age or intention.
That is my ten-point plan and it is not perfect. It was devised by me without any resources. I would like the Minister to outline her plan to the House. Like her Minister of State, the administrators in her Department, senior gardai and others, the Minister is paid a substantial salary. I wonder if the public feel that we earn our keep. I would have to say that if that charge was put to the jury it would take them a long time to acquit. We need a plan of action with regular reports to this House. I ask the Minister to accept the motion and implement it.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Tá mé an-bhuíoch de Gay Mitchell gur thug sé cead dom labhairt anseo anocht. Déarfainn go bhfuil sé thar am againn athrú nó feabhas a dhéanamh ar dhlithe na tíre seo i dtreo is go mbeidh gnáth-dhaoine macánta in ann dul timpeall de ló nó d'oíche gan eagla a bheith orthu go gcuirfidh duine éigin isteach orthu.
In dealing with the crime problem I often wonder if we are trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted. It is difficult to define the causes of crime but I often wonder if children have been set on the wrong road. Nowadays people decry the use of the words "corporal punishment" but very often the threat of corporal punishment in schools had the same effect as any punishment that might have been administered. Some time ago I heard a parent representing a parents' group decry the intervention of a bishop but was that parent really expressing the views of the parents of Ireland?
Many parents are anxious that their children do well and do not want them to be harassed or bullied in school. It is my experience that the vast majority of parents trust teachers to deal with any problems that may arise and give them their full backing. This does not mean, on the question of corporal punishment, that we should condone abuse but are we reaching the stage where we will not be able to retain control, given that children are not subject to serious discipline? Unfortunately this is the case in many homes. Given the high rate of unemployment, many parents find it difficult to adhere to the old role played by parents where they put manners on children. Nevertheless parents have a right to expect that discipline will be imposed inside and outside of school. Nowadays children can learn new tricks on television within a matter of days or nights.
There is an imbalance in the system having regard to the way in which judges treat those charged with technical offences. I do not want to encourage anyone to break the speed limits but many a decent citizen has been caught speeding and treated as if they were a criminal, whereas those who have used guns and injured people have got away with it because they can afford, with the proceeds of crime, to employ top solicitors and barristers to defend them in court. As I said, there is an imbalance in the system. Those who use guns in perpetrating crime should be shown no mercy and receive a long sentence, having regard to the fact that their victims, ordinary citizens, will continue to suffer for the rest of their lives.
I would like the Minister to put an end to gangsters from the city being able to drive down in fast cars, maybe stolen cars, to a place like Carlow to smash windows and — something I could never understand — make their way back to the city in a car laden with property without being stopped by the Garda within that distance of 50 miles. Has overtime been cut back so much that there are no gardaí?
A Cheann Comhairle, I formally move an amendment to the motion before the House in the following terms:
To delete all words and substitute the following:
Dáil Éireann commends the efforts of the Government, the Minister for Justice, the Garda Síochána and the prison service in the fight against all crime and in coping with the unprecedented growth in the numbers in custody and on various alternatives to custody and looks forward to the implementation of the special law and order package which the Minister intends to introduce to enhance further the capacity of the law enforcement agencies in the fight aginst crime.
With regard to Deputy Mitchell's motion, let me say first of all I do not for one moment doubt the sincerity with which he has advanced it, nor do I wish to suggest in proposing the amendment I have outlined that in so far as crime is concerned it is a case of "all is well". Nobody doubts that there are problems. The Government acknowledges this and I will inform the House in the course of my statement what the Government has been doing and will be doing about the problem.
What concerns me about the motion put down by the Deputy is that it gives the impression that we are now in the position where everybody, or most people, in this country are in a state of virtual siege because of the activities of criminals and where the Government simply stands by and does nothing about it. The Deputy is not alone in putting this message about. But I have to say to him and to others who put across the same message that the message is misleading, it is a message which signals nothing but despair and that what we want now, and what I am pursuing, are solutions and not simply a further recitation of the list of problems.
Above all else I would ask the House not to support the creation of further reporting obligations which seems to be one of the principal purposes of the motion. The preparation of such reports imposes enormous demands on limited staff resources — anybody who has held ministerial office will vouch for this. We need to ensure that we do not add further reporting requirements at the expense of actual achievement in the fight against crime. I simply do not have the resources to meet the reporting requirements envisaged in this motion. I am in no doubt that the staff concerned are already much more beneficially engaged in trying to cope with the tasks already on hands. I am not suggesting that this House should not be kept informed of developments on this extremely important subject. What I am saying is that existing reporting mechanisms are adequate and we cannot afford to further stretch our very limited and valuable resources in preparing further reports.
Perhaps the most misleading proposition which tends to be advanced concerning crime — and it is advanced time and again in debates on the subject — is that it is simply a matter of pouring more and more resources into the law and order system. Other western countries have experienced an unprecedented growth in crime in recent years — many of them far worse than ours — but none, I believe, would go along with the idea that extra resources for the law and order system will on its own, provide all the answers. The problem is a complex one which demands a multifaceted response. This was one of the core conclusions which emerged from the report of the Interdepartmental Group on Urban Crime and Disorder, the implementation of which is part of the Programme for Government 1993-1997.
Before I go on to say what has been done and what will be done, it is worth expanding briefly on another point I made. That is on the danger of putting across a message which signals something close to total despair. While not suggesting that Deputies on any side could reasonably set out to argue that the crime situation warrants some sort of general euphoria, we do have a responsibility to be objective. We must acknowledge that much has been done; that the battle against crime absorbs hundreds of millions of pounds per year; that this Government, like Governments that went before it, accords top priority to law and order expenditure, that measures have been taken to combat crime and more are planned in the very near future and, finally, and most important, that we have in this country now, as we have always had, the capacity and the will to demonstrate that the activities of the selfish, criminal minority among us can be and will be contained and that each of us will provide the crucial co-operation which the Garda needs to ensure that that minority is contained.
Let me proceed now to what has been done and will be done to deal with the crime situation. The Programme for Government 1993-1997 commits the Government to introduce a radical set of measures and provide the resources to fight crime, including white-collar crime, and vandalism. A new broad-based approach to crime prevention will be adopted in urban areas where particular law and order problems are being experienced. A five-year corporate strategy for the Garda to enhance their capacity to fight crime in present day conditions will be drawn up and implemented.
Finally, I am currently engaged in a comprehensive review of prisons policy and strategy and I plan to publish a document on that subject in the future. It will be the first document of its kind published by a Minister for Justice. It is a document on which I shall look forward to constructive comment and criticism because the whole question of imprisonment and custody alternatives is now seen by many people — rightly, I believe — as an area deserving of priority attention.
Apart from the Programme for Government, and in order to set the crime problem in a broader context, there is of course the National Development Plan, 1994-1999, which was launched yesterday by the Taoiseach. Among the core aims of this plan are a significant growth in jobs and “an attack on the social exclusion and marginalisation caused by long term unemployment and by poverty”. It is of course a gross slur on those who are unemployed or below the poverty line to point the finger at them and say that it is they who are responsible for the crime situation. The vast majority of people in that unfortunate situation are as law abiding as everybody else. Having said that, however, there is no doubt that unemployment, especially among young people, is a factor which contributes significantly to crime growth. The reversal of the unemployment trend, through the implementation of the national plan and by other means, will undoubtedly make a significant contribution towards the control of crime.
What I am now doing — and I am glad to note that Deputy Mitchell agrees with me on this — is preparing a co-ordinated plan of action which will embrace all of the elements I have mentioned in relation to the Garda, Prison Service, urban crime and so on.
With regard to the specifics, it is impossible in the course of a brief contribution on the very substantial topic of crime to deal with all the facts, to deal with the responses already made and deal also with all the plans for further action. I shall therefore concentrate on the following matters: The available statistical evidence, the Garda Commissioner's Corporate Strategy Policy Document, Garda strength and deployment, the drugs situation, which is mentioned in Deputy Mitchell's motion and which I agree is an extremely important issue, the position in the courts and what is planned in that regard, prisons and custody alternatives, the implementation of the urban crime strategy and criminal law reform.
With regard to the facts about crime and specifically the statistical evidence, the first point is that while the overall crime level grew by 1 per cent in 1990 by 7.7 per cent in 1991 and 1 per cent in 1992, the latest figure is still 6.8 per cent below the 1983 peak figures. In making this point I am not suggesting that we therefore have grounds for complacency; I am simply stating a fact and I am doing so in the interest of balance.
I know that Deputies — certainly Deputy Mitchell — believes that Garda statistics do not reflect the true picture, but I do not believe that the reporting of crime has fallen off to such an extent since 1986 that the trend evident from the published figures cannot be relied on, even as a broad indication of what has been happening, which is that overall crime levels have actually fallen in that period.
I fully accept that gross figures, even if they are totally accurate, may not succeed in reflecting the seriousness of individual criminal incidents — for example, the level of viciousness which has become a feature of criminal activity — but neither do I consider it reasonable to dismiss the statistical evidence produced by the Garda Commissioner as being without substance. Crime statistics in other European countries have been climbing at a very significant rate in the same period and it seems extremely unlikely that the only explanation for the drop in figures here is that Irish people, unlike their fellow Europeans, have simply abandoned the practice of calling the Garda when they need them. The Garda are called to intervene in many situations which are far from serious and it seems odd therefore that people generally would fail to alert the Garda when they fall victim to criminal activity. If we are going to tackle the problem of crime we need to begin by adopting a rational and realistic approach towards the evidence on hands and I cannot agree that it is either rational or realistic to begin by setting aside the evidence produced by the Garda Commissioner as to the actual crime situation.
This brings me to the Garda Commissioner's Corporate Strategy Policy Document which was presented to me last April. Members of the House will be aware, I am sure, that a five year Corporate Strategy for the Garda forms part of the Programme for Government.
Two of the key features of the plan are identification of key policing priorities, including countering terrorism, violent crime, drug dealing and domestic violence and emphasis on the service ethic. This is highlighted in the plan's mission statement and is a fundamentally important feature of the whole plan. Another feature underlines the key role of the Garda on the beat. The plan reinforces the crucial contribution and role of the Garda at street level in preventing and detecting crime. Computerisation and civilianisation are other features. The report maps out ambitious plans for the further development of information technology in the force with a view to enhancing Garda operations efficiency and expanding the prospects for civilisation of the force. The final feature is assessment of resource implication. While observing that certain staff and financial resources are required to enable the gardaí to meet their obligations to our society in the short to medium terms, the plan lays emphasis on the need to ensure that all resources are used in the most cost efficient and cost effective way.
The plan has been the subject of an intensive examination by an interdepartmental review group. I am currently studying that group's first report in the context of proposals to Government for implementation of the plan. Needless to say there are important policy and fiancial considerations to be taken account of in this regard and decisions will have to be taken on matters which will affect the quality of policing in this State well into the next millennium. I shall be placing my proposals before the Government in the matter shortly in the context of the action plan I mentioned.
As regards Garda strength, the highest ever strength of 11,396, including 144 recruits in training, was in 1985. The total fell back to around 10,500 in 1989 but rose to just under 11,000 at the end of 1992. The present strength is 11,373 including 513 student gardaí at various stages of training.
They are not gardaí.
On the subject of Garda recruitment the position is that 1,000 gardaí have been taken on since 1989 and recruitment is ongoing from the current competition following a specific Government decision in 1991. In line with previous policy 1,000 gardaí are being recruited in the period 1992 to 1995. Already, 269 gardaí have been taken on in 1992, and to date this year 294 have commenced training with a further 30 or so to be recruited later this year, though the figure may be higher.
The Government's programme also contains a commitment to increase the number of gardaí through accelerated recruitment. What is in mind here is a telescoping of the present four year recruitment plan to three years. That is a matter which I have under active consideration at the moment and I hope to bring my proposals before the Government very soon.
While it is my intention to maintain Garda numbers at this level I also want to increase Garda operational strength. That is the crucial matter. I do not want to be recruiting young and highly motivated men and women to the ranks of the gardaí and giving them expensive training just to have them desk bound under mountains of paper and hidebound by bureaucracy. That is why I am committed to the principle of civilianisation in the Garda Síochána which is also a commitment in the Government's programme.
Over the past 30 years police forces all over the world have been recruiting more and more civilian staff for non-policing duties, especially in the clerical area. At present, almost 700 civilian staff are employed on work in Garda offices which would otherwise have to be done by gardaí. Apart altogether from savings in cost, the practical benefits of having gardaí doing the work they were recruited to do on the streets in our cities and towns are enormous. However, I also think that the process of civilianisation should not stop at the level of clerical positions. I see no reason civilians cannot be assimilated into the Garda structure at higher management levels. A start has already been made in this connection for example, the fleet manager, the radio engineer and the head of research, soon to be appointed, are civilians and I see it as part of my brief to develop this process.
The number of persons charged in connection with drug offences and the number of drug seizures showed an upward trend during 1992 — 13 per cent and 20 per cent respectively. Although these increases show a major reduction in the rate of increase for the previous two years, they remain nevertheless very significant. In this regard I have had discussions with the Garda Commissioner on all aspects of drug-related crime. Indeed these meetings have resulted in changes in strategies to tackle the drugs problem including the allocation of manpower and resources. In addition, discussions are held on a regular basis between officers of the Department of Justice, Revenue Commissioners and the Garda and Customs authorities to build on the co-operation that exists between the gardaí and customs officers.
I am aware that concerns have been expressed about aspects of the co-operation effort at local level between the Garda and Customs service in the battle against drugs. I have specifically directed an assistant secretary in my Department to examine that issue and report to me as a matter of urgency on it. Extensive consultations have taken place and I expect a report in the near future. I should of course emphasise that it is a question of improving co-operation not creating it for the first time. The co-operation between both services is already quite extensive. As evidence of this interagency co-operation, more than £26 million worth of cannabis resin has been seized by the Garda Síochána and the Customs authorities over the past two years and so far this year. Discussions have also taken place between officers of the Departments of Justice and Defence in relation to the possibility of more extensive use of the Naval Service and the Air Corps service.
Intelligence based strategies are central in combating the importation of drugs and the closest international co-operation is an essential prerequisite if such strategies are to prove effective. A significant development in this respect was the decision by the European Council at its meeting in December 1991 that a Europol Drugs Unit should be established as soon as possible to act as a centralised exchange and co-ordination unit for, in particular, drug-related information between member states. I am confident that the Europol Drugs Unit will prove extremely effective in combating drug-related crime and will enhance the co-operation that has been taking place among EC member states for many years.
With regard to the courts, specifically the subject of disposal of criminal business in our courts, I can assure this House that delays in the hearing of criminal cases are minimal and that priority is given in all our courts to the criminal business and, in particular, to cases where the defendant is in custody. There are delays in the disposal of civil cases but it is not strictly relevant to today's motion and I am dealing with it separately.
Deputies will of course be aware that procedures have been put in place to facilitate victims appearing in our courts and to emphasise the impact of crime on the victim. The Criminal Evidence Act, 1992, provides for an audio visual system in certain cases, including sexual offences, to enable witnesses under 17 years to give evidence and be cross-examined outside of the courtroom setting. I recently signed regulations to bring into effect provisions of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992, allowing a witness to give evidence through a live television link at a preliminary examination of cases involving physicial or sexual abuse before a District Court and to allow for the transfer of proceedings to district courts which have the necessary technical facilities. This development has been widely welcomed.
Facilities in courthouses are also being made available on request to the Irish Association for Victim Support, an organisation which also receives and deserves State financial support. I intend, at the very minimum to maintain that support.
That is very welcome.
In the context of sentencing, I am glad to know that more judges are seeking reports on the impact of crimes on victims before imposing sentence. This is a very welcome development.
Another important initiative on the the courts side which is in the course of preparation is a system for the service of summonses by post by means of recorded delivery which will have many advantages including for other policing duties. My Department is also watching with interest pilot multi-media systems in other jurisdictions such as developments in court stenography and the use of closed circuit television linking courthouses, prisons and hospitals which may contribute to the more efficient use of court time and has the potential for considerable savings also in prisons and elsewhere.
More generally, on the subject of courts the Programme for Government includes a commitment to establish an independent judicial commission to examine and make recommendations to the Government on the review and reform of court practices and the streamlining of court services. Arrangements for establishing the commission are well advanced.
With regard to prisons, as I mentioned I am currently carrying out a major review of official policy on the operation of prisons and the treatment of offenders generally. I am aiming for a draft corporate strategy for the prisons which will clarify aims and objectives. Finding the right balance between calls for more and tighter sentences and the operation of a humane criminal justice system which holds out the prospect of individual self-improvement by way of the prisons and the probation system is, as most Deputies will appreciate, a daunting task. The task is made no easier by the fact that the generality of crime is so diverse, ranging as it does from petty property offences to the most serious offences against the person. Among the options being considered are the provision of more cell places, and also the expansion of custody alternatives. I will make a further statement in this regard when my review is completed.
As I mentioned the Programme for Government contains a commitment to implement the report of the Inter-departmental group which was set up by my predecessor in the wake of public disturbances in the Ronanstown area of County Dublin. The group prepared a detailed report some of which is in course of implementation. This task involves a co-ordinated intervention by Government Departments and State agencies to promote employment and improve education and environmental facilities and to provide the necessary level of social services, tailored to meet the actual needs of each area. I hope to make a further statement in due course concerning progress on the implementation of this report.
As well as providing the necessary resources to the various agencies within our criminal justice system it is clearly vital that our criminal law should be kept under continuous review and reformed where this is needed to adapt to — and cope effectively with — the modern realities of crime. In this context the House will already be aware that since becoming Minister for Justice I have initiated a comprehensive programme of reform in this area. For example, the Criminal Justice Act, 1993, contains a series of very important measures designed to make our system of justice place more emphasis on the plight of victims of crime. The Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill was debated in great detail for over 21 hours by the Select Committee on Legislation and Security Committee during the summer. It is only right to acknowledge the generally constructive approach taken by Members from all sides of the House in dealing with the Committee Stage of the Bill.
I hope to be able to introduce two further pieces of major criminal justice reform later in this session. The confiscation of proceeds Bill will, as its title suggests, deal with the seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime, the creation of an offence of money laundering, and give effect to a number of international agreements on international co-operation in the areas of drug trafficking, money laundering and mutual assistance in criminal justice measures. I will save Deputy Mitchell the bother of introducing a Bill within a month. The Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which I will also introduce, is intended to achieve improvements in the operation of the criminal justice system generally.
Deputies will be aware of other criminal law measures I have introduced since I became Minister for Justice, including the Criminal Procedure Bill which provides for new procedures to deal with cases of alleged miscarriages of justice. At present I am awaiting two important Law Reform Commission reports, one of which deals with the law on offences against the person and the other with sentencing policy. As I assured the Select Committee on Legislation and Security during the summer, those reports will be acted upon as soon as they are received in my Department.
Deputy Mitchell raised a specific point in relation to hunting knives. I am informed that the carrying of hunting knives is outlawed under the Fire Arms and Offensive Weapons Act but there is some vagueness in relation to the selling of such implements. I will look at this point in the context of this legislation.
The entire area of juvenile justice is a priority in my Department and, as Deputy Mitchell was informed by me during the past few months, a juvenile justice Bill is in course of advanced preparation in my Department. This Bill contains more than 150 sections. Those sections have been sent by my Department to the Department of Education which has a crucial role to play in parental responsibility and juvenile justice generally.
Some further areas of criminal justice legislation are also being given attention in my Department at present, including juvenile justice, fraud and dishonesty, offences against the person — I am awaiting a report from the Law Reform Commission on this issue — and the indexation of fines. I intend to bring forward proposals in all of those areas as quickly as possible.
The Government's position in relation to crime is one of realism and achievement. While much has been achieved, we are all acutely aware that more is required. We are determined to press ahead with the task and to provide the resources necessary. Molaim an rún seo don Teach.
I wish to share my time with a member of Fine Gael who will speak this evening and Deputy Gregory who will speak tomorrow evening.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
One of the striking things about a debate of this kind is that we end up with a case being presented that there is a problem and the Minister, in responding to that case trying — if she is not trying to convince us that there is no problem — to minimise the extent of the problem. In the course of her contribution the Minister relied very heavily on the statistics presented in the recent Garda Síochána report on crime. She referred to a 1 per cent increase here and a 1 per cent decrease elsewhere, comparing the statistics with those for the past few years and, more dramatically, with the high level of crime which existed in 1983. With respect, that is missing the entire point because if one looks at the statistics on crime for the past 20-30 years one can clearly see what has been happening. The level of crime in Ireland at present is five times the level it was 30 years ago and the nature of crime has changed very dramatically. Crimes which were virtually unheard of 20 years ago are now quite commonplace. For example, the use of fire arms and weapons in robberies, burglaries and attacks on people is now very much part of the crime scene.
It is no consolation to the victim of a crime, a person who has been attacked, a person whose house has been burgled or a person who has had their car broken into or stolen, to be told that the crime statistics do not show a significant increase in the level of crime. Many people in our community are living in fear, are afraid to leave their homes, are afraid to open the doors of their homes and are afraid to go about their ordinary business, particularly at night. The basic freedoms we should be defending are the freedoms of those people to go about their normal business; that is what the battle against crime is all about. The battle against crime, put positively, is a battle to enable people to go about their normal business without living in fear, without being molested, without being intimidated and without being subjected to attack or vandalism.
Like any problem we have to address, it is important that we go to the source. It is remarkable that the concentration in much of the public commentary about crime over the past few years has been on what one does when a vandal is caught. The usual kind of answer is trotted out — build more prisons, provide more places in jails, impose stiffer sentences, ensure tougher application of the law by judges, etc. To a certain extent, I would go along with much of that thinking. However, the thinking is defective because it addresses the problem after it has occurred; it addresses the problem of crime after the crime has been committed, for example, after a victim has been very badly injured. We need to focus our attention much more acutely on the prevention of crime. Prevention is not just about putting more gardaí on the street. We could cover our streets with gardaí but we still would not necessarily prevent all of the crime which takes place.
The survey carried out by the Irish Independent at the weekend has been referred to by a number of speakers. The most remarkable finding in that survey was the extent to which the public understands the causes of crime and the circumstances which give rise to crime. It seems that the public understanding is way ahead of that of Members of this House and many commentators on crime. I was struck by the fact that almost half the people asked to give their views on the single factor contributing most to the rise in the level of crime identified unemployment as that factor.
Significantly, many people identified associated causes, poverty and the social circumstances which high unemployment produces, as contributing to creating the climate in which crime breeds. That, of course, never justifies crime nor does it explain it away. The vast majority of unemployed people do not become involved in crime. In fact, very often the people who are living in the poorest communities are the first victims of crime, the first victims of the drug pushing and physical crime.
Deputy Mitchell, in his contribution, described the physical environment in those communities, the dilapidation and the neglect which, coupled with the levels of unemployment, give rise inevitably to a climate where crime is prevalent. I agree it is easier for criminals to commit crime in an estate or a block of flats where there is no public lighting and a general state of dereliction but often in those communities, which people are quick to identify as areas with high levels of crime, there are people trying to cope with the problem.
In trying to prevent crime, money would be better spent assisting the community organisations, residents' associations, sports clubs, youth clubs and voluntary bodies who are trying to keep their communities together, to keep youngsters off the street and to create recreational facilities for young people in their immediate areas.
It is a scandal that the national lottery funds have been virtually hijacked by successive Governments for purely political gain. They have been doled out at strategic times, before an election and so on, in order to give the impression that there is support for local communities. National lottery funds should be used to support voluntary organisations in their battle against crime. We should help the sports clubs who are required to raise funds to keep their clubs in operation. Regularly members of sports clubs tell me that because whatever discretionary spending in the community is being used to buy national lottery tickets and so on, they are not in a position to raise the money needed to keep their teams going. It would be better to spend £1,000 on a local club — virtually what it will cost to keep somebody in prison for a little more than a week — than to spend money after the crime has been committed and the damage has been done.
I know the Minister has put the juvenile justice Bill before the Department of Education but there is a need for more than a purely legislative response to the problem. There is a need for a greater degree of co-ordination between the Departments of Justice, Education and the Environment to make facilities and resources available to local communities to help them address the problem and build communities in which crime will not thrive.
Many of the contributions on this motion have concentrated on the question of policing and addressing the crime problem. Of course, when one is addressing the crime problem one has to consider what is happening. We must examine two areas. The first is the level of crime attributed to juveniles. The figures are known to all Members. It is remarkable that although almost half the crime here is attributed to juveniles we have only a little more than 80 juvenile liaison officers. Second, it is remarkable that although 55 per cent of all crime committed here occurs in the greater Dublin area, only approximately one-third of the country's police force is based in the greater Dublin area.
Unlike Deputy Mitchell I did not have access to the most recent figure for the number of gardaí as quoted by the Minister this evening. That figure included the number of students.
Once upon a time they were regarded as gardaí on the day they were recruited. Now they are recruits earning a very small pay. To include them in the statistics is totally misleading.
I am not including them in my statistics because my statistics show a figure 10,984 gardaí in the State, of whom 3,988 were based in the Dublin Metropolitan Area. The Minister told us on a previous occasion that that works out at a ratio of one garda per 260 people in Dublin as against a national average of one garda per 320 people. That distorts the picture somewhat because the Dublin Garda figure includes those gardaí engaged in special duties within the Dublin area, those engaged in this House, the policing of major events, special duties associated with the courts, embassies, guarding VIPs and so on. The real picture is that the number of gardaí available for normal policing duties in Dublin is much less than the 3,988 quoted.
Dublin would be under policed even if the level of crime was similar to that in the rest of the country but the remarkable statistic in the Garda report on crime, which was published last week, is that the crime rate in Dublin is three times the rate outside the city. The crime rate given in the Garda report is 49 crimes per 1,000 population in Dublin and 17.8 crimes per 1,000 people outside of the Dublin area. The number of drug related crimes was 3,494 and 2,154 of them — almost two-thirds — occurred in the Dublin Metropolitan Area.
Of the 12,000 crimes including motor vehicles 8,500 occurred in the Dublin area. Of the 1,497 missing persons 1,137 cases were in the Dublin area. Of "999" calls 165,313 out of a total of 206,985 nationwide occurred in the greater Dublin area.
It will be quite clear to anybody that the crisis points, the areas in which the largest amount of crimes committed, are those in which there is the lowest level of policing. It is not unreasonable to state that there is a "cause and effect" situation prevailing. Major social problems contribute to the climate in which crime grows. Where the levels of policing are inadequate, there are the highest levels of crime.
The Minister in her approach to the provision of gardaí must devote particular attention to the Dublin area. Of course, it would be difficult to make the case that remote areas of the country should be denuded of gardaí and that they should be sent to Dublin. I am not making that case, but I am making the case that newly recruited gardaí should be deployed in the Dublin area where the crime problem is out of proportion to that in the remainder of the country. On the question of recruitment, I would have to dispute what the Minister said in the course of her contribution. It was interesting that she referred to the Garda five-year plan and her support for it. She talked about the numbers of recruits, about 1,000 gardaí being recruited between 1992 and 1995. My understanding of the Garda corporate plan presented to the Minister was that they spoke about a recruitment over the same period which was about twice what is actually taking place, that they spoke about an annual recruitment, in order to stand still, I think in the region of 510 gardaí per annum over that precise period. It appears that the level of recruitment to the Garda is significantly behind the levels envisaged in the corporate plan.
This has been a very important week in Irish politics with the launch of the National Development Plan which was most welcome. In that plan the Government sets out its proposals for job creation and for economic development and prosperity over the forthcoming six years. I hope those Government objectives will be realised for the good of the nation.
Prosperity without security will be of little use to our people if they live in fear of their lives and property, of danger to their families. This has become very evident in several cities in America, especially in Washington, where law and order have broken down. We do not want this to occur here.
Being my party's spokesperson on tourism I might refer specifically to the problem of crime committed against tourists. Much attention is devoted to the development of tourism in the National Development Plan and much emphasis is placed on tourism as a sector that will deliver extra jobs. It is alarming when one observes how little has been done to combat crime against tourists, especially in this city.
According to recent figures furnished to me, in 1992 2,841 crimes were committed against tourists, 2,239 of which occurred in the greater Dublin area and 609 in the remainder of the country. That represents approximately 2.97 per cent of the overall crime rate which, while appearing to be insignificant, when measured by its potential impact on our tourist industry, gives rise to concern, if not alarm, in some circles.
I understand that to date in 1993 2,552 offences have been reported. No doubt when the figures are available for the full year they will be more or less the same as those for 1992 showing that there has been no decrease in the overall trend. This gives rise to much concern. This problem has been identified in this House, the Minister has proposed various solutions, there has been much contact between Bord Fáilte, the Minister and the Garda, yet the problem remains.
The alarming aspect is that in 1992 112 offenders were convicted by our courts but, to date in 1993, 25 offenders only have been convicted. This is quite alarming and demonstrates a major deficiency within our overall judicial system.
Tourists are regarded by criminals as soft targets. Usually they arrive in a very relaxed frame of mind expecting to find this country as it is sold to them on holiday brochures, a green, peaceful island. They can become totally disillusioned if they become the victims of crime. We must maintain that good image of our country to which I have referred. Generally tourists carry quite an amount of cash on their persons — in the case of women, in their handbags. They wear jewellery most of the time, a very marketable commodity. They bring cameras, including video cameras, binoculars and so on, which are rich pickings for the criminals.
Some of the crimes committed against tourists may not be of a very serious type. Over 50 per cent involve thefts of or from motor vehicles, while most others relate to offences by pickpockets and so on. Nonetheless approximately 6 per cent involve the use of violence. That aspect in the course of this summer became even more alarming in that it involved a more intensified type of violence. We heard of cases of tourists having been threatened at knife point, with needles and, in several cases, being physically assaulted. I must warn the Minister that the international media are beginning to take an interest in what is happening to some tourists who come to Ireland. For example, when on holiday in August last I read an article in the London Times, the caption of which was “Mugging of Dublin Tourists Increases”. This followed on the injuries sustained by a student priest when he had gone to the assistance of a Swiss holidaymaker who was being robbed. There has been reference also in the Daily Telegraph to attacks on tourists in Dublin. The Minister will agree that we can do without such publicity. We have observed the drop in tourism that has taken place in Florida because of the spate of attacks on tourists there. We do not want this to happen in Dublin.
While I would be the first to contend we should not be alarmist or exaggerate the effect on tourism, it is something we must face up to and not allow to continue. There is no point in pretending it should be ignored or should not be highlighted.
A number of proposals to counter these problems have been advanced. The problem arises because of lack of prison places. The revolving door principle obtains in our prisons, in that prisoners appear to enter by one door and leave by another. Apart from tourists swearing affidavits before leaving the country, giving evidence on camera in court, or whatever, we must provide the requisite number of prison places for offenders. It is alarming to note that many crimes are committed by people who are either on bail or on temporary release.
Debate adjourned.