Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 1 Oct 1997

Vol. 480 No. 7

Europol Bill, 1997: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Ms Shortall

Before the debate was adjourned I referred to the success of the multi-agency approach in tackling drug barons in the past year. The need for such an approach had been obvious for a long time but the political will may not have been there to pursue it. Complaints had been made about the failure of the Garda and the Revenue Commissioners to tackle the problem. I always argued that as the Revenue Commissioners were not afforded Garda protection it was perfectly understandable why they were not prepared to tackle the problem. The decision to bring all the relevant agencies together under the Criminal Assets Bureau was an obvious and long overdue move. This move is now beginning to reap rewards and many leading criminals are on the run abroad.

The person who regards himself as the prime suspect in the murder of Veronica Guerin is in London awaiting extradition to this country. That is a good example of the benefits of international co-operation in the fight against drug-related and other crimes. Drugs are international in so far as only a small amount are produced in the European Union. Ireland has a particular responsibility to the rest of Europe in this matter. Our long coastline and position on the western most fringe of Europe make us a key target for drug importers. From our shores attempts are made to move drugs into Britain and other parts of Europe. There is no difference between our fight against drugs and that of the Danes or the Dutch.

The purpose of the Bill is to facilitate improved co-operation between national police forces across Europe. Like many others I have stressed the significance of international co-operation in fighting the drugs menace, but there are other areas of crime which do not respect international borders. The convention cites, in addition to drug trafficking, trafficking in nuclear and radioactive substances, illegal immigrant smuggling, trade in human beings, motor vehicle crime and related money laundering activities. To that list other offences, including international pornography and child abuse, could be added.

It is often said we are living in an information age. The quick and efficient exchange of information is critical in our fight against crime. The Bill requires each member state to establish a national unit to facilitate the exchange of information between the respective forces of the union. Such a unit has been in place here since 1995, but I welcome its upgrading and placement on a formal footing. Much of the Bill is of a technical nature. The Garda Síochána Act, 1989 will be amended to ensure the same rights that apply to gardaí here will apply to gardaí working for Europol. The Data Protection Act, 1988 is also to be amended to ensure the rights of citizens already in place in Ireland will apply to information held by Europol.

Sections 16 and 17 relate to the composition of the Irish Europol unit. Section 16 assigns responsibility for its staffing to the Garda Commissioner. I call on the Minister for Justice, in conjunction with the Minister for Finance, to ensure the unit is adequately staffed. Dedicated and special units were established in the past, but because of a lack of political will sufficient resources were not allocated to enable them perform their functions effectively. It is not sufficient just to set up a special unit, there must be a clear commitment to provide adequate staffing and funding levels. I have long been of the view that the establishment of a specialist anti-crime unit is the way forward in regard to policing particular problems.

The experience of the Criminal Assets Bureau has strengthened my views on this matter, but such units are of little use if they are not adequately staffed. We might have had greater success against the drug barons if more officers had been employed in specialist anti-drug units earlier than they were. We should regard as a priority the need to build on the success to date of the Criminal Assets Bureau. From my contacts with gardaí involved in the fight against drugs there is great potential for extending the role of a multi-disciplinary unit such as that one. It would be extremely helpful at a lower level in the hierarchy of criminals to use the expertise of Revenue or Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs when the homes of suspected drug dealers are raided by gardaí. It is not unusual for the gardaí not to come across evidence in relation to substances that may be found on the premises, but often they may find £30,000 hidden in the home. It is difficult for the gardaí to act on that.

If the Garda had access to the Criminal Assets Bureau and its expertise in revenue and social welfare it would be possible to close the net on many of those involved at a lower level in the trade. Up to recently only a derisory number of gardaí, less than 2 per cent, worked in the Drugs Squad despite the fact that everybody admitted that up to 80 per cent of our crime was drugs related. That problem has been addressed by means of Operation Dóchas. It is not enough to have a unit, it must be adequately staffed and its staffing levels must be commensurate with the scale of the problem or crime being dealt with.

Section 17 is important in that it ensures the continuation of the multifaceted approach to crime resolution. The criminal underworld no longer adheres to old demarcation lines and methods and neither can we if we are to be successful. This Bill represents a reasonable start to a European wide campaign against organised crime. I have no doubt that, in time, we may need to go further.

The adoption of the Schengen Agreement and the single currency will help make organised crime much more mobile. Many supporters of the EU and further European integration lament the lack of support among the public for their campaigns. It is in the fight against drugs and their social implications that the Union, if successful, will make a considerable impact.

In 1996 the rainbow Government made the fight against drugs a key issue during its Presidency of the EU, acknowledging the huge public concern Europewide about the drugs issue. This Bill is a start.

I wish to comment on the remarks made by the Minister for Justice yesterday and last week where he effectively accepted that zero tolerance was nothing more than a convenient election slogan. It would seem, given his tenure in the Department of Justice in the past few months, there is a realisation that the crime issue is extremely complex and requires more than simply hollow election slogans. The first test of zero tolerance since the House resumed after the general election was in relation to the Ansbacher accounts. We were told yesterday the Minister would not stand for crime of any kind, particularly in the drugs and fraud areas. Here we had prima facie evidence of the existence of a slush fund, £38 million stashed away. All the indications from the McCracken tribunal were that this was a major tax scam.

It is possible to identify the people involved, to find out exactly who put money into that account and the purpose of that account. We had an opportunity to do that when agreeing the terms of reference for the Moriarty tribunal. The Government opposed attempts by the Opposition to include the Ansbacher accounts. There is no greater evidence that the whole notion of zero tolerance is absolutely and utterly dead so far as the Government is concerned. If zero tolerance is to mean anything it should have been applied to that obvious area which has come to light where there are serious concerns about a large sum of money which has all the signs of being a major fraud, yet the Government backed down. It is difficult to take the Minister seriously when he talks about zero tolerance.

In regard to the proposals by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to which he referred last evening, I welcome the fact that we will have additional prison spaces but I am concerned the Minister has not indicated the role of the prisons. If we continue to provide more prison spaces we will never come to terms with the crime problem. The Minister has made no utterance yet about the rehabilitative role of prisons and what he believes prisons should do for people who have become involved in crime and who have been accused and sentenced to terms of imprisonment. That is most unfortunate because that whole area needs urgent examination, particularly in relation to the operation of Mountjoy Prison. I am disappointed at the Minister's response to date in this area. There is serious overcrowding in Mountjoy Prison. There is also a serious problem of drug abuse. More than 60 per cent of prisoners in Mountjoy have an addiction problem, yet there is no treatment facility there for those who want to tackle it. We as a State, and certainly the Minister in the Department of Justice, should regard this as a priority. The main problem of the majority of prisoners in Mountjoy Prison is that they have a serious addiction problem and we simply ignore that by our refusal to introduce proper treatment facilities which recognise the nature of the problem and the nature of our crime problem, particularly in the Dublin area. We cannot continue to keep our heads in the sand. I call on the Minister to introduce the full range of drug treatment facilities and services into Mountjoy Prison as a matter of urgency to start to come to grips with the drugs crime problem, and the Eastern Health Board, as the agency which has responsibility for providing drug treatment in the community, is the obvious agency to do that within Mountjoy. We have seen how that approach worked successfully in the education area where the vocational education committee provide a service on an agency basis. It is essential that the Eastern Health Board be brought in to do the same. We can no longer shirk this responsibility. Those of us who have been involved in the drugs area and who have examined the question of drug treatment simply cannot understand why this is being ignored by the Department of Justice. Unless we tackle that problem at its roots, what we are saying to people is that if they commit a crime they will be given a certain amount of time in Mountjoy, while there they can continue with their habit and that we are not prepared to assist them in any way to beat that habit, and when we let them out on early release they can continue with their lives of crime. We are not providing any means by which people can break the cycle of drug addiction and criminal activity, and that is a disgrace.

Much progress has been made on the drugs front at community level over the past year or so. That has been mainly as a result of the establishment of local task forces to deal with this problem at community level in a multi-disciplinary way, with communities drawing up locally designed action plans which meet local needs for tackling the problem locally. That work is extremely worthwhile. I call on the Minister to restate the Government's commitment to providing the necessary funding at local level. The Government should not for a moment underestimate the resources which will be necessary to turn the tide on the drugs culture which needs to be tackled on many different fronts. Housing conditions, lack of educational opportunity, lack of recreational facilities, lack of empowerment at community level, lack of good quality community policing and lack of opportunities generally for people to develop as community leaders are all aspects that need urgent attention. I hope the Government will restate the commitment already stated by the previous Government to continue to fund this whole area.

Much work is being done by the task forces. There are two task forces in my constituency, in Finglas and in Ballymun. I am a member of the local drugs task force in Ballymun and am very aware of the very high quality of the work being done at local level. However, in trying desperately to do things at local level, communities regularly come up against obstacles over which they have no power or control. One example is the slowness of the justice system in dealing with anti-social tenants in local authority estates.

I ask the Minister to look at the possibility of putting in place a special system to fast-track applications. A large number of eviction orders are pending. It is very demoralising for communities which are trying desperately to rid their areas of drug dealers when they are informed by Dublin Corporation that it can take six to nine months to have a case heard, that the decision will be appealed and result in a further delay of up to six months. In the meantime the drug dealers continue to live in the community terrorising their neighbours. There is a need for the State to step in and support the excellent work being done at community level and provide the strong arm communities need.

I welcome the Bill which is a further step along the way to coming to grips with the international dimension of the drugs problem. The Minister needs to address quickly the problem in urban areas. It is a growing problem in rural areas. We cannot ignore the strong link between drugs and rising crime levels. To date, from his utterances in the past three months and from much of what he had to say when in Opposition, the Minister has shown no great appreciation of this. I would welcome the opportunity to take him to some of the communities in Dublin which have been ravaged by drugs. Listening to him one would get the impression that the solution lies in the provision of extra prison places and legislation. While there is a need for extra prison places and legislation, many aspects of the problem remain to be dealt with as a matter of urgency.

Mr. Haughey

I welcome the Minister's comments on this Bill and the range of issues that come within his portfolio. He outlined his aims and objectives, his legislative programme and the measures he proposes to take to tackle crime and the drugs problem in particular. He also outlined what was meant by the concept of zero tolerance Irish style to which I will return later.

Crime continues to dominate our proceedings. The drugs problem in particular is of major concern to citizens. There is a view that we are making some progress but citizens still want us to implement vigorously all of the measures necessary to tackle the problem. I wish the Minister well. He made a landmark speech.

I take issue with Deputy Shortall who said that the Minister who comes from Caherciveen has shown no appreciation of the urban dimension of the drugs problem. He has attended many lively public meetings in north Dublin with which I am familiar, particularly one organised by the inner city organisation, Network. He is familiar with the urban nature of the drugs problem and just because he is from Cahirciveen does not mean Deputy Shortall should rush to the conclusion that he is not familiar with the problems of drugs in the Dublin area.

Ms McManus

That is not what she said.

Mr. Haughey

I welcome the Bill which enables the establishment of a European police office. It activates Title VI of the Treaty on European Union and facilitates co-operation in preventing unlawful drug trafficking, trafficking in nuclear and radioactive substances, illegal immigrant smuggling, trade and traffic in human beings, motor vehicle crime, money laundering activities and related criminal offences.

The setting up of a European police office is another important step and enhances the process of European integration to which this country is totally committed. It is a process from which we have all benefited in so many different ways. Next year Ireland will again be asked to demonstrate this ongoing commitment to the ideal of European Union when a referendum will take place on the provisions of the Amsterdam Treaty. I am confident the outcome of this vote will be a positive one.

Another gigantic step in European integration is just around the corner in 1999 and concerns EMU and the single currency. It seems obvious at this stage that businesses and ordinary citizens are not fully aware of what is involved in EMU and the establishment of a single currency. The Government should do everything possible to highlight this important change, which is less than two years away, including initiating much more debate on what is involved.

Recent surveys indicate the Oireachtas and the corporate sector are not getting the message of EMU and a single currency across. It represents a major change in how we operate economically and a high profile national debate is long overdue. We need much more information from various Government Departments and the semi-State sector to highlight exactly will happen in 1999.

This Bill formalises further the co-operation between police forces of the European Union's member states. During the lifetime of the last Dáil I was privileged to be part of a delegation from the Joint Oireachtas Committee on European Affairs which visited the European Drugs Unit in the Hague. I was delighted to have the opportunity to meet members of the Garda Síochána working there. It was a great pleasure to witness the respect shown to those Irish participants in the European Drugs Unit and the high regard in which they were held. Their commitment and dedication was obvious and they operated in a very efficient manner, although this is not generally appreciated here at home. We can be proud of our participation to date in the European Drugs Unit, which has been operating on an informal basis. As a member state we have been playing a full and active role in that organisation.

There is no doubt that, in an Irish context, the main benefit of this Bill relates to unlawful drug trafficking and the reduction of the supply of drugs entering the country. We are a small island nation with an extensive coastline and it is difficult to secure our boundaries against the importation of illegal drugs. All crime, especially drug trafficking, goes beyond national boundaries. As the Minister said, national boundaries provide a cover for those involved in illegal drug trafficking. There is no doubt that greater co-operation between member states and other countries outside the European Union will be a major step in reducing the illegal importation of drugs.

The drugs problem is still a major issue for communities in the Dublin area and throughout the country. Entire neighbourhoods have been and continue to be subjected to intolerable conditions because of the menace of drugs. It was only with the tragic murder of Veronica Guerin that all of us, particularly the previous Government, took notice of this serious problem and introduced a series of measures to deal with it. One of the most important Bills introduced by the Minister when he was spokesperson for justice dealt with the confiscation of assets. We can see the benefits of that legislation now.

It is difficult not to ask why nothing was done about this problem in the early 1980s when people were dying. It is also difficult not to come to the conclusion that because it was confined to certain inner city areas nothing needed to be done. I am delighted that at this late stage society has decided to make this problem its top priority. The fabric of our society has been put at risk by the increasing use of drugs, particularly by young people. Now that we have started to tackle the problem, I hope we continue to introduce legislation and other measures to put the drug suppliers behind bars.

I agree with Deputy Shortall that one of the key factors which has awakened Ireland to the drugs problem is the demand from local communities to do something about it so that their children are protected. I congratulate them on the initiatives they have taken in Dublin and in other urban centres. These communities have now been brought on board at an official level as local drugs task forces draw up plans to fight the problem. I was happy to attend the launch last Monday of the north inner city drugs task force and to see their plans to rid their communities of the drugs problem.

It is marvellous that the members of the community have been officially included. I am glad they have been asked by the State agencies, Departments and other parties to give their views and play an active role as we will all benefit from their wisdom and experience of the drugs problem. That has been one of the major successes of the past year and will continue to be so when the plans of the various local drug task forces are put into operation.

I welcome the commitment given in the Programme for Government to adopt a multifaceted approach. The issue of social inclusion must be placed at the top of the political agenda. Despite the fact that this Bill deals with the supply of drugs, there is no doubt that understanding the demand for drugs and people's reasons for becoming drug addicts will form a major part of the solution. Agencies involved in dealing with issues relating to poverty, employment, sport and recreation, training and education must come together to reduce the demand for drugs and rid our communities of this problem.

The National Drug Strategy Team is in place and, in that context, I welcome the roles that will be played by the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation, Deputy McDaid and the Minister of State, Deputy Flood. They will play a major role in providing young people with worthwhile alternative activities. The Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation will play an important part in dispersing national lottery funds and drawing up general policy to reduce the demand for drugs throughout the community. Many of the ad hoc voluntary organisations involved in this area have struggled for years to deal with long waiting lists, etc. The role they play must be given increased recognition through the provision of financial assistance.

Operation Dóchas has been successful because gardaí are now actively involved in dealing with the drugs problem. Community policing is a reality and members of the force are working on the ground to resolve the problem. However, it took a great deal of time to recognise the value of community policing in the fight against drugs. People want to see gardaí on the beat getting to know the members of the community. If we did nothing else during the lifetime of this Dáil but beef up the community policing scheme and ensure the continuation of Operation Dóchas, we will have done worthwhile work to improve community life in Dublin city.

I was sorry to learn of the resignation of Assistant Garda Commissioner, Tom King, whose work was central to this issue and who was never afraid to offer his views, often in a hard-hitting way, on how to deal with the problem of drugs. I believe his wisdom will be missed by the communities of north Dublin. I do not know his reasons for resigning; I am sure they are of a personal nature. However, I hope his resignation is not a symptom of a wider problem regarding pay and conditions in the Garda Síochána. He has done much good work on the drugs problem in the city and I wish him well in the future.

Estate management has been referred to. It is a relatively new concept and I welcome the role played by the former Minister of State, Deputy McManus, in coming to grips with it. For years it was talked about at local authority level but no real commitment was given at managerial level to tackle the issues involved and put people in charge of actively managing their estates. The concept needs to be developed further.

I acknowledge the role played by Dublin Corporation. In the past year, since the tragic murder of Veronica Guerin, it has appointed estate management officers for many of the flats schemes in the city. These are very committed people who are getting to know their communities, organising meetings and contributing their knowledge on how to run committees. I have seen the benefit of this.

As this Bill has a European dimension, I take this opportunity to commend the work of EURAD, Europe Against Drugs, and the role it has played, albeit at a voluntary level, throughout the member states, in tackling this problem. Gráinne Kelly has addressed various Oireachtas committees in the past and her work is well known. I commend her and her organisation on the stand they are taking on calls for the legalisation of certain drugs which would be a mistake, judging from the experience of other member states. The contribution which EURAD has made to the national debate is important on the question of dispensing methadone, which is a practical and urgent response to the problem. However, we also need to look beyond that and to recognise it is not the ideal solution. We need to debate how treatment should be administered.

I was delighted with the Minister's speech last night when he outlined what he considers to be zero tolerance, adapted to Irish needs. There is no doubt that we cannot import these theories lock, stock and barrel from other countries. They have to be adapted to our situation. The Minister clearly demonstrated his commitment to zero tolerance of drug related crime and is responding to the Irish manifestation of this problem. I have no doubt he is extremely committed to tackling the drugs menace and I wish him well in his endeavours.

Ms McManus

Everyone in this House recognises that the globalisation of modern crime demands a global response. We need to respond effectively and flexibly to deal with emerging as well as existing crime. It is clear that criminals, particularly those involved in drug trafficking, are operating across national boundaries. We are all familiar with the pattern; the dealer from Crumlin escapes to Malaga or Amsterdam and the overseas trafficker enters Ireland via our coastline.

The internationalisation of crime and its money making capacity is part of the modern Irish experience and as such this Bill is of great relevance. However, while it covers a wide range of crimes, child abduction has been excluded. This is surprising as it is a transboundary crime with which we are not unfamiliar. Because of its extremely distressing nature, there should be a specific reference to it in the Bill.

We have a major terrorism problem and an extensive coastline, but in general we have a reputation of being a good clearing ground for drugs en route to Europe. We also have an increasing immigrant smuggling problem. It makes sense, therefore, for us to take a lead in expanding co-operation on crime at EU level, but Europol can only be as good as the resources put into it. The Minister did not deal comprehensively with the question of resources or staffing. Will he outline his intentions regarding the local unit and the international agency in terms of staffing and resources? He is well known for his comments about his commitment to fighting crime, but it is by his actions he will be judged. He has made great play of his policy on zero tolerance which has been exposed as a sham. It was used cynically during the election campaign to play on people's fears, but abandoned when the Government was established. That is a disturbing feature of the Minister's view of crime. He misled people on his view. As soon as he was in a position to put in place a zero tolerance policy, with which many people including the Garda Commissioner did not agree, he failed to do so.

This Bill is a glaring example of his abandonment of such policy. The source and destination of the proceeds of crime is covered in the Bill and there is a welcome emphasis on money laundering. However, a few weeks ago the House voted down a proposal from Democratic Left to investigate the £38 million Ansbacher account, the existence of which was revealed by the McCracken tribunal. We do not know from where that money came or why it was lodged in that account, but we know that an effective bulwark against criminality is to send out a clear message that anyone suspected of using financial institutions or commercial companies for illegal purposes will be fully investigated. This presented us with an opportunity to investigate money that is hidden away possibly as a tax scam or for even more serious purposes.

The McCracken tribunal opened a window and the Ansbacher account was revealed, but the Minister closed the shutter rather than accept that the only option in terms of public accountability was to investigate the matter. The abandonment of the policy of zero tolerance was manifest in the way Deputies from Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats voted down an investigation into the Ansbacher accounts.

We are now debating this Bill and the complex nature of our response to crime at an international level. Deputies have also spoken about our response at national and local level. The aim of the response is to protect Europe's citizens from the big bosses of the criminal world. This is an objective worthy of our support.

However, in the move to transnational information gathering we must ensure that Europe's citizens are also protected from the big brother of the computer world. In that context we need to look at some of the provisions of this Bill in terms of protecting individual rights.

My party will support the Bill. We welcome its provisions. We endorse the need to enable police forces in member states to collate and exchange information. However, aspects of the Bill give rise to concern. The text of the convention upon which the Bill is based is notable for the number of references to rights of individuals, but it does not refer in an adequate way to any corresponding means of enforcing these rights. While the convention insists that only lawful data may be held it does not provide for adequate machinery for investigating how or why unlawful data may be entered.

Under articles 8.1(1) and (2), data can be stored not only on persons suspected of having committed an offence but also on persons who it is believed will commit offences. This is a potentially wideranging power. Under article 19, the provision for a right to access by persons to data held on them is problematic. Access can be refused on wide grounds and in that event the authorities will not even tell the inquirer if they hold data on him or her. There is a right to have data corrected, but if the inquirer cannot access the data it will be impossible to know whether it needs correcting or not.

Article 38 provides for compensation for damage caused by legal or factual errors in data held or under processes, for example, in cases of wrongful arrest, harassment, etc. However, any claim must be taken under the law of the country where the event occurred. Laws vary widely across the EU member states and many different legal standards will therefore apply in terms of compensation. For example, an Irish citizen may be in difficulties in another country where standards are different.

I am mystified that the terms of the Europol Convention appear to conflict with the Data Protection Act. Under this Act controllers must rightly respond to a request for access by an individual to information held on him within 21 days. However, under the convention that term is extended to three months. Will the Minister explain why this is and what it means?

The position of immigrants and asylum seekers has become tenuous across the EU, including our own society. It is right that illegal immigrant smuggling is specifically mentioned in the Europol Convention. It is a transboundary crime which concerns us all. Those who profit from human misery and who cash in on the illegal transportation of asylum seekers deserve to be punished under law.

However, at a time when racism and xenophobia are on the increase it is important that the Europol Convention protects immigrants and does not become another brick in the wall of "Fortress Europe". It is a matter of how this information is going to be used. For example, given the preventative nature of article 8.2 it is conceivable that an immigrant who is a legitimate resident in a EU member state could be caught up in the Europol net on the grounds that at some future date he or she may seek to bring in relatives without sanction.

There is much concern regarding the issue of asylum seekers. I am sure Deputies have, like myself, received much correspondence relating to the Refugee Act. Members of society are inquiring about the implementation of the Act and our position with regard to our international obligations. The debates today in the media and the situation of our emigrants in America remind us that we have international responsibilities and that we cannot close the door or delay processes in a way that creates problems which in turn have an impact in creating further fears and xenophobia.

One simple measure which the Minister could and should take immediately is to make provision for legal aid for asylum seekers in view of the effective collapse of the Irish Refugee Council's legal service, which is closing down today because it does not have the resources to continue. The Minister has a responsibility in this regard and he must act to deal with it. Some time ago he made a welcome decision to employ extra staff to process applications because of the backlog. However, he should broaden the base of individuals eligible for these positions. Has he done so yet? His decision to accept applications from retired gardaí and civil servants was a blunder and the unions rightly challenged it. We need people of the highest calibre to process applications from asylum seekers. While many retired gardaí and civil servants have sterling qualities they are not the only people who can take on this task. To exclude others is ridiculous.

To be effective at combating crime what happens at international level must be matched by what is happening at local level. When tackling drug trafficking or organised crime, co-operation on the street is as important, if not more so, than co-operation across nations. With regard to the drug crisis, especially that affecting Irish urban communities, a failure of trust between gardaí and communities created fertile ground in the past for criminal activities. The growing recognition by the gardaí that local communities have an important role to play was long overdue.

I would also like to pay tribute to the Assistant Garda Commissioner, Tom King, whose record in this regard is inspirational. I regret that he is leaving the Garda Síochána. It is important that we know not the personal reasons but the factors that may have led to that decision. He will be a loss to the force and to the wider community. His contribution was significant. His departure should reinforce the message that partnership is the only way forward in the war against drugs.

I pay tribute to the work of the previous Government. The then Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Rabbitte, took a leading role in establishing the structures and the forms of co-operation, leading from the local community level through to involvement by the then Taoiseach, in the fight against drugs. It was a transforming approach and it transformed the work at local community level. While the work is not yet finished, it ensured that confidence was instilled in communities who had no confidence that anybody beyond their own members was listening, paying attention and willing to act and contribute to ensure that the menace was overcome. Certainly in the areas of estate management it will take a long time for satisfactory standards to be put in place, not merely in the case of local authorities but within local communities.

I appreciate the points made by the previous speaker on sport and recreation and the welcome approach adopted by the previous Government to ensure sufficient funding for recreational purposes but we should not lose sight of the fact that many people who succumb to drugs are young. They need more than just the sports field; they need work and a sense of their own value and worth. They need family connections and a place in society where they can contribute so that at the end of every day they feel that what they have done is of value to them and those around them, not an easy objective. Many young people remain alienated, outside the economic prosperity many of us have enjoyed. At the end of the day it is they who are primarily at risk from drug barons who seek to destroy and make money out of them.

I hope that fight will continue. In that respect I am very glad the Minister of State at the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation, Deputy Flood, has been given responsibility for the Government's drugs strategy. He has the requisite commitment, interest and experience on the ground, representing the area he does, to ensure progress is made.

The question of accountability needs to be addressed in this Bill. The European Convention was not submitted to the European Parliament even though at the time an undertaking was given that the European Parliament would be consulted as part of the process of drawing up the convention, which underlines the lack of democratic control. It is a matter of concern to me that many decisions continue to be taken behind closed doors. The European Parliament, whose Members are democratically elected and whose debates are conducted openly, does not form an important part of decision-making in many areas, including this one. It is my understanding that Europol will not be accountable to the European Parliament, as it should be. An accounting process should be established whereby, at the very least, Europol would have to report and be answerable to the European Parliament whenever changes are proposed in its remit or any of its features or operations have to be dealt with. This would ensure the European Parliament, as the democratic voice of the European Union, would have a say in any such decisions.

If we are serious about our commitment to this type of international co-operation, we need to set an example in this House. An annual report from the national unit should be laid before this House so that Members can ascertain precisely the effect of that unit.

It is an important measure with great potential for good but it also carries certain dangers which need to be acknowledged. We must at all times protect the innocent as well as seeking out the guilty. Open democratic accountability is our best insurance to attain that objective. It will also allow us to ensure that Europol is working effectively to combat crime in all its manifestations and ensure that we deal with issues at international level while at all times ensuring that the system is accountable at local level.

Ms Hanafin

Ba mhaith liom cúig noimead a thabhairt do Teachta Gregory.

Acting Chairperson (Miss Coughlan)

We must obtain the agreement of the House to allow the sharing of time. Is it agreed to allow Deputy Gregory five minutes? Agreed.

Ms Hanafin

Is Teachta Dála me don cheantar Dún Laoghaire, ceantar a théann ó chuan go sliabh. Ní dún í a thuilleadh ach áit ailteach oscailte. Trid an chuan tagann agus imíonn milliún seacht gcéad duine chuile bliain. Tagann turasóireacht, gnó agus cairdeas, ach chomh maith leis sin tagann drugaí, coirpigh agus sceimhlitheoirí. Tá eolas ag tabhairt ag na Gardaí anseo, agus ag na hÚdaráis Custaim a chabharódh le húdaráis na hEorpa. Tá eolas ann a chabhródh le húdaráis agus muintír na hÉireann leis sinn a chosaint ó chboirpigh an domhain. Ní dóigh liom, agus mé ag fáiltiú roimh bunadh Europol, go bhfuil áit níos fearr in Éirinn mar shuíomh don choiste naisiúnta ná Dún Laoghaire féin. Molaim sin don Aire.

Thirty years ago it would have been difficult for any Member of this House to envisage the need for a Bill such as this when crime, in so far as it existed, was sporadic, local and disorganised. The laws which then governed our criminal justice system, for the most part, had been formulated in the 18th century carried over unchanged after independence. They remained unchanged because, by and large, they were adequate to deal with the level of crime which persisted but over the past 30 years that picture has changed utterly. We can no longer describe crime as sporadic, in some areas it has become virtually endemic. It is no longer possible to describe it as local, it has become national and, in many instances, international. It is no longer possible to describe crime as disorganised. The greatest criminal damage in this country is caused by organised criminal conspiracies which have transcended national boundaries and have become truly global in their dimensions.

Many factors contributed to the change which has come about — industrialisation and economic prosperity having brought with them a fracturing of traditional urban and rural communities. People left the land and small towns and villages in rural areas to flock to the cities. In turn, the cities expanded by growing into vast, sprawling suburbs. The sense of extended family and community which for centuries had been a part of Irish life diminished and, in some instances, was lost altogether.

This social change coincided with the opening up of horizons which occurred in the early 1960s with the arrival of television. With the benefit of hindsight it is clear that television is a medium of extraordinary influence which could have been used far more wisely than has been the case. There can be no doubt that we have surrendered vast sections of it to crass commercialism while its educational potential has been relegated to a guilty afterthought. Television exposed people who, in many instances were displaced from their traditional community, to the vision of a lifestyle which was largely illusory. The quest for that lifestyle and to acquire material possessions have taken a social toll. It is all the more regrettable that it was into this social cauldron that violence resulting from political unrest in the North of Ireland spilled. Images of men with guns became commonplace, death by gunshot was no longer something confined to the images of foreign countries contained on the small screen; it had left the realm of the cowboy and Hollywood screen. It was real, here, happening on the streets on this island.

Inevitably the thin boundary, if one exists, between political violence and criminal violence dissolved. Paramilitaries turned to bank robberies to fund their activities and, in some instances, their lifestyles. People were shot and some died. It became a reality of everyday life in the mid-1970s. There can be no doubt but that Governments throughout the 1970s were well-intentioned so far as crime was concerned. But with the very considerable advantage of hindsight it is possible to see that the body politic was preoccupied with politically motivated crime to the virtual exclusion of all other categories. Such law reform as occurred in the criminal justice system in the 1970s was directed almost exclusively at paramilitary crime.

The Criminal Law Act, 1976 and the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Act of that year were firmly focused on paramilitary violence, the amendments applied to the offences of burglary and robbery by the latter Act, though worthwhile, having the appearance of legislative afterthought. While Government and Legislature focused on paramilitaries, the slow trickle of drugs became a flood. It had been unthinkable that Ireland could succumb to heroin in the same manner as other countries, but the unthinkable became the reality. Heroin found a foothold among the socially excluded, young men and women who appeared to have been beached by the rising tide of prosperity. A generation of young men and women found themselves, through no fault of their own or their families, excluded from mainstream society by reason of educational disadvantage and unemployment. Many of those addicts have since died. All have suffered and their families and communities have suffered.

They were the real victims of the first contacts between criminal elements in Ireland, on the Continent and in the United States of America. These contacts developed for two reasons: the importation of arms and of drugs. Such criminal laws and resources as were available to the Garda were wholly inadequate to deal with this new international dimension to Irish crime. In this vacuum, criminal organisations flourished and continued to do so for over a decade. It is for history to judge how Governments reacted and the verdict of history may well be harsh. Our task is to assess the nature and extent of crime as it now exists and to perceive the direction in which the problem will grow unless it is curbed. If we can succeed in severing the links forged between Irish criminals and their continental counterparts, we will succeed in dramatically lessening the incidence of crime in Ireland.

It is for that reason I support this Bill. It recognises the reality of the new Europe and that the partial dismantling of national borders and the creation of a single market has facilitated the potential growth of international crime. Its passage through the Oireachtas would enable Ireland to ratify the 1995 Europol Convention and its related Protocols. In the age of information technology, Europol represents a merger between the best and the brightest in countercriminal intelligence and computers. It will facilitate the storage, retrieval and analysis of vast quantities of information to the detriment of the criminal. Brick upon brick, it will play a vital part in crushing criminal empires. It will result in the availability and collation of information leading to the conviction of international gangsters and the confiscation of their assets. Each member state will not alone send liaison officers to Europol, but will also establish national units which will be a centralised focus point for the dissemination and retrieval of information. Information is the key to cracking organised international criminal gangs. Crimefighting in the future will depend on information and innovation. Our task is twofold: to facilitate the Garda and other European police forces in acquiring the information they need and to provide the necessary innovation to overcome problems which may at first appear insuperable.

In this, we can point to recent successes. We have every right to be proud of the initiatives we have taken in the fight against crime. The Proceeds of Crime Act, 1996, is a testament to what can occur when a democratic Parliament functions in the manner in which it was intended. The Act resulted from a Bill introduced by the now Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in his then position of Fianna Fáil spokesperson on Justice. It was accepted by the then Government, which proposed a number of drafting modifications on Committee Stage. In the past year, the weapon of that Act has been wielded with fierce effectiveness by the officers of the Criminal Assets Bureau. It has resulted in the seizure of millions of pounds of assets illicitly obtained in this country and abroad. The Act recently withstood a constitutional challenge in the High Court where Ms Justice Catherine McGuinness upheld its constitutionality. The organised criminal gangsters, who for so long believed themselves to be untouchable, have been viciously manhandled in their quest for wealth by the operation of this Act. It is a testament to what can occur when the people's representatives act with resolve and vision.

The exact same vision is involved in Europol. The ratification will result in a communal pooling of information on organised crime by police forces in the European Union. The use of sophisticated computer analysis techniques will enable police forces to broaden their knowledge of the members, associates and modus operandi of international gangs. Once the convention has been ratified and is in force, Europol will concern itself with specific categories of serious crimes. Its remit specifically includes illicit drug trafficking, trafficking in nuclear and radioactive substances, smuggling illegal immigrants, motor vehicle crime, trafficking in human beings and money laundering activities associated with any of these activities. The initial task of Europol is to collect, collate and disseminate information and intelligence. The time has already arrived when strong consideration must be given to extending the task of Europol in the operational arena. International crime requires an international police force capable of conducting transnational surveillance and pursuit. I am aware this issue is to be dealt with in the Amsterdam Treaty agreed by the member states last June and due to be signed tomorrow, but it will require further action by member states before that can become a reality. I commend it to the Minister as an objective worthy of active pursuit during his term of office.

To be effective, a criminal justice policy must be coherent and comprehensive. It must set policy objectives and spell out how it proposes to go about achieving them. Fianna Fáil did just that in our policy paper Leading the Fight Against Crime, published last March and significantly in advance of the general election. Given the ongoing nature of the debate on that policy, it is worthwhile recalling what Fianna Fáil proposed. We stated:

Fianna Fáil will encourage a policy of zero tolerance. This will reflect the following principles: that no crime, no matter how small, is insignificant; certain crimes will not be overlooked because they are not important; tolerance of small crimes creates a climate where big crimes flourish; there is a certain connection between lesser and more serious crimes: and that toleration of lesser crimes or violations sends the wrong signal to the average law-abiding citizen that the Gardaí and the Government are ineffective.

This is the policy which is being relentlessly criticised. It appears that many who criticise it have not bothered to read it, let alone propose a viable alternative. The greatest critics of zero tolerance are the advocates of "Nero" tolerance, those who would fiddle while Rome burns.

Mr. Gregory

Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil do Theachta Hanafin as ucht cúpla nóiméad a thabhairt dom. Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an mBille seo. I welcome this Bill in the few moments available to me because it is critical for two reasons. Most of the drugs which come into this country come through European countries. The drug which causes most social destruction in Dublin, heroin, comes largely through Turkey, Europe and British cities such as Manchester, Liverpool and London. For that reason, it is critical that there be maximum co-operation between the police forces in Europe, Britain and this country.

There is another reason, which is almost a reverse of the first, in that most of our main drug dealers, for a variety of reasons, have moved their bases to Europe, mainly in Amsterdam but also in Manchester and London. If we are to deal effectively with the supply of drugs in this State we must pursue those main drug dealers and we can only do that with the co-operation of European police forces. It was a cause of great public disquiet that these people — who were known by names like "the Penguin", whose real name was George Mitchell, and "the Footballer", whose real name was Derek Dunne — operated openly here. It is a matter of amazement that these same people can now operate openly from bases in Europe. One hopes that the measures contained in this Bill and elsewhere will ensure that they are not just defeated on the home front but will be attacked in their new bases in Amsterdam, Manchester and London. They are now investing in Britain and Europe the millions they have gained from the misery of their victims in Ireland. If we are to follow those assets, it is essential that there be co-operation with the police forces and states involved.

I congratulate the Criminal Assets Bureau on its recent activities. The involvement of the Revenue Commissioners, the Garda, the Department of Social Welfare and other sources of expertise was sought by me and others for a number of years in this House. I could never understand why successive Governments did not take this action much sooner. The bureau has now been established and is working successfully. It appears that it is reaching the people who control drug dealing — those who are not involved directly, but make it possible indirectly. Drug dealing is a multi-million pound business. The drug dealers I mentioned and the others who are household names were petty criminals up to four or five years ago. They had no expertise or particular knowledge of high finance, big business or the investment of money. To launder their money, to invest in a legitimate business and to make their operation work, it was essential that they had the involvement of professional financial and legal expertise. It is my hope — and there are indications that this is beginning to happen — that the Criminal Assets Bureau will reach the experts that were and are involved.

In other countries, because of the lucrative nature of drug dealing, even political and police circles have been corrupted by the wealth available, and it is quite possible that this has also happened here. None of that could be uncovered without the activities of the Criminal Assets Bureau. I hope it has all the resources it needs to get to the top people. We thought until now that the drug barons were at the top of the drug business but they are not — it is the people who make the business work for the drug barons who are at the top. They have the expertise to launder money and invest it in legitimate businesses. It is essential to destroy their operations because if we do not, other people will turn into barons. For every baron who is put behind bars another will take his place.

I pay tribute to the communities who have been struggling valiantly against drug pushers in the last few years, particularly in Dublin. Their work should be built upon and perhaps new structures can be developed to harness the positive energy they have displayed. These structures could include police/community councils. It is only through the maximum amount of co-operation between the community and the police that one can effectively deal with and eradicate drug dealers from these communities. We must also remember that a drug like heroin is rooted in social disadvantage. The areas of Dublin where heroin is a major problem are all socially disadvantaged and, unless this House and the various Government Departments address that fundamental issue, we will never root out the horrible problem of heroin addiction.

Mr. Deasy

It is a disgraceful reflection on the procedures of this House that the person who is most competent to speak on this Bill, who has the best knowledge of the drugs problem in Ireland, in particular in Dublin — that is, Deputy Gregory — is only allocated five minutes. It is extraordinary that our procedures are so stifling. We need to hear people who are familiar with what is happening on the streets and that should be borne in mind when legislation is framed and procedures are drawn up.

The magnitude of this problem is beyond the comprehension of most of us. It has been a culture shock to discover the extent of the wealth of drug barons, their activities, the assassinations, the ease with which they have escaped, and the number of supposedly respectable people involved in the crime-ridden drug society. The problem is so huge and intimidating, and there have been so many assassinations in recent years, that people are terrified. We do not realise the depth and scale of the corruption — we are only beginning to scratch its surface.

This legislation, which concerns co-operation with law enforcement agencies throughout the EU, is to be welcomed because it is long overdue. Our system to tackle the problem has been astoundingly slow to come into operation. Reference has been made to the Criminal Assets Bureau, which has mounted the single most successful operation to combat crime.

The process was set in motion by the murder of Veronica Guerin. The machinery started to move after that terrible crime — the problem was long there and we suspected as much but no one was willing to tackle it. The buck stops in this House, with the legislators, the Government of the day, the Minister for Justice, and the Garda Síochána. It was rather as if we preferred to feel it did not exist, which is why we are so late in tackling this huge problem. I have no doubt that Dublin, and perhaps the rest of the country, is a network of gangs and gangsters who have the place carved up and who are operating on the same basis as the Mafia in Italy, the gangsters of old in Chicago or current gangs in New York, Washington and other major cities. The gangs are organised to that extent.

Gangland assassinations, a feature of life up to a year ago and which saw 15 people being shot in drug related incidents, have ended because the Garda have taken action. They are beginning to get to grips with the problem. Initially the situation was so overwhelming that, like the rest of us, the Garda could not comprehend its vastness. The evidence of corruption now surfacing is considerable. There are many people in comfortable, senior positions who may well be involved in this corruption. Some people, when they see hugely wealthy drug barons getting away with almost everything and in a position to order people to be killed at will, may decide it is wiser to stay on the side of the criminal and benefit from ill-gotten gains rather than stand up to the criminal. There is a serious threat of a breakdown in democracy when such a situation develops. I do not think I am overstating the case when I say there are business people, solicitors, accountants and people in key positions collaborating with gangsters, drug barons and racketeers.

The Minister's statement made no reference to extradition and I would like the Minister of State to bring this to the attention of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform for whom I have high regard. Extradition from Canada and South Africa was mentioned in the context of Europe drawing up extradition treaties with these countries, but what is the position regarding extradition from Britain and other member states of the EU? Some gangsters whose nicknames we know, including the Penguin, the Footballer and the Monk, are living in EU countries such as Britain, Holland and Spain. Why is it not possible to extradite these people to stand trial for crimes for which the Garda have ample evidence to secure convictions? Why are there no extradition treaties allowing the return of the godfathers? That is inexplicable. We know where these people are living. There are former IRA and INLA members in Amsterdam worth tens or, perhaps, hundreds of millions of pounds co-ordinating the drugs business. They are supervising and directing the importation of shiploads of drugs into Ireland and other EU countries. The authorities know where these people live. Why can they not be brought back to Ireland to stand trial? I do not understand why this is not possible and neither do the public. Drugs will continue to be a major problem here until those people are put behind bars for a long time. They are untouchable under current legislation.

As Deputy Gregory said, when the drug barons leave their network in Ireland is maintained. There are people ready to step into their shoes and take over the activities. The bosses are abroad but there are plenty of people here to sustain the network. Why are we not implementing extradition laws? Do extradition treaties exist and if so why are they not being implemented?

The magnitude of the problem is such that the Garda were shocked when they began their investigations following the death of Veronica Guerin at the number of gangs, the financial resources and weapons at their disposal and the ruthlessness of their activities. I wonder whether there are moles in the security services who have undermined the good work of our law enforcement agencies. Are the attempts to solve the drug and crime problems being undermined by inside information being leaked to the godfathers? It would be interesting to know the true story regarding the consignment of cannabis intercepted at Urlingford, County Kilkenny. How is it that tonnes of cannabis were intercepted while nobody was arrested? Obviously inside information was being passed on. A mole tipped them off. Such activity is much more prevalent than people are prepared to admit. Gangsters can only be defeated if we have honourable men tackling the problem. We have many honourable men but there are some dishonourable people in key positions who are tipping off criminals.

Why should the Garda alone be charged with solving the problem? Other agencies should be involved. Al Capone was not arrested on the basis of murder or racketeering. He was caught and imprisoned because he did not pay his taxes thus bringing his violent career to an end. He was caught by the revenue agencies, not by the police. Have we the vision to defeat criminals? We have sufficient resources, but it is a matter of applying them. The Criminal Assets Bureau, which has been very successful, is one effective manner of challenging crime. However, we should not become complacent. Many of the criminal structures established by godfathers who now live outside the country still exist. Who knows how high collaboration with these people goes? Does it go as far as the Judiciary? Probably not, but it may. It does in Italy with the Mafia and in America, so why do we think it is not happening here? We are too polite, but the problem will not be solved unless the finger is put on the sore spot.

It is a shame that people like Deputy Gregory do not get a greater opportunity to voice their opinion on these matters as they deal with the public in areas which are drug ridden. We should have specific crime committees in this House to subpoena people and question them. We are only at a halfway house and have not brought all the instruments of State into operation, which is what I ask for today. There should be no complacency. Let us follow up on what has been done to date. I have no criticism of this or the previous Minister who have done an excellent job.

The magnitude of the crime problem, particularly in relation to drugs, is so great that it is beyond our understanding. The Minister said the wealth and influence of some of these people is greater than that of some countries. How about that? These are Irish people who can kill at will and buy people off. They are supposed to be legitimate, above board and in positions of influence and trust. I have no doubt such activities occur everyday.

The Bill refers to other items besides co-operation to deal with the drug problem, which is by far the greatest problem and is very relevant to us at present. The Minister said Europol has been set up to combat trafficking in nuclear and radioactive substances. That is a matter of considerable significance which should not be underestimated. In the past few days I read in a newspaper that small nuclear weapons had been stolen in the former Soviet Union. Perhaps Iraq or Arab terrorists such as Hamas will use them in a city in America. It was said they were capable of killing up to 100,000 people. There is a need for Europol to ensure the weaponry, particularly nuclear weapons, of the former Soviet Union are carefully guarded and do not get into the hands of terrorists who would be delighted to kill 100,000 Americans in the one go. Such weapons will do the maximum damage and it is a frightening thought.

The Minister referred to the problem of illegal immigration networks which we are beginning to witness through a flood of refugees into this country. They are called refugees but they are illegal immigrants. They are coming from countries which have been liberated from communism and from Africa. They are causing a serious problem and let us not underestimate it or be carried away by the need to give people a fair deal. We can be overgenerous. We do not have the capacity to absorb tens of thousands of people from countries in central and eastern Europe and Africa. These people should stay in their own countries and attempt to build them now they have been liberated from communism. We do not have the resources and should not have to suffer the thievery and crime created as a result of their presence, whether it is social welfare fraud, murder or other serious crimes.

I have been flooded with letters asking us to implement the Refugee Act. We can be overgenerous and we must call a halt. Yesterday in my constituency five people from Romania were intercepted. They had smuggled themselves across in a container truck. In England a couple of days ago 48 people who had come across from France in a truck were caught. We must stem that flow; we cannot allow it to continue unabated.

The Minister said the Europol drugs unit, the EDU, is extending its activities to deal with the paedophile problem, which is huge one worldwide. He referred to a specific case in Belgium last year and earlier this year where a paedophile ring was uncovered. That paedophile ring echoes much of what I have spoken about. It was not only ordinary people who were involved but senior police officers, politicians and eminent business people. In perverted activities such as drugs abuse, profit making or the sexual abuse of youngsters, people at any level may be involved. Proportionately, one would probably find more from the upper than the lower strata of society involved because they have the money, brains, influence and access to corridors of power. Our society may be riddled with corruption and we may not be as aware as we should be of that, although every day a new case comes to light.

I am not entirely in favour of drawing up a register of paedophiles, which is being done on the Continent and in Britain, because with modern technology a six year old child can access different codes on the Internet. It would be great to have a register but if it fell into the wrong hands, the problem could be multiplied. People in high places are deeply involved in these activities which gives all the more rise for concern. I hope this debate will lead to further progress in our attempt to defeat criminals, especially drug barons and their associates, many of whom appear to be respectable members of society.

Mr. Killeen

Fáiltím an Bille seo agus an díospóireacht a bhaineann leis. Ar an gcéad dul síos, traoslaím leis an Aire agus an Aire Stáit as na postanna nua atá acu. Tá obair fíordheacair agus fíorthábhachtach le déanamh acu insan troid i gcoinne na scéimhleitheoirí de gach sórt.

As many speakers and Minister have said, the background to the Bill is the problem of organised crime and the massive resources available to these criminals and the manner in which they have deployed these resources. In setting the background, it is useful to recognise the perception outside the House that politicians have been ineffective and perhaps poorly focused. There is even a belief in some circles that they have been complicit and more interested in point scoring and grabbing cheap headlines than in dealing with the problems. A couple of high profile crimes such as the murders of Veronica Guerin and Detective McCabe brought it into sharp focus. It is time the Oireachtas faced up to the serious implications of this growing perception among the public, law-abiding citizens and those involved in criminality. It is encouraging to note that the Criminal Assets Bureau, which is such a short time in existence, has been so successful and it proves that no matter how great the problem may seem, if it is addressed it can be dealt with adequately. This Bill is extremely important as is the programme of action set out by the Minister in his speech.

I am delighted the Minister intends to provide 1,000 more prison spaces within two years and 12,000 gardaí within five years; that the courts and Prison Service will have agency status; that there will be serious Garda operational initiatives on an ongoing basis and that he has promised a great deal of legislation. A criminal justice Bill is due this year and a juvenile justice is Bill in the pipeline, in addition to a child pornography Bill, an amendment of the Criminal Insanity Act and enabling legislation referring to international war crimes tribunals and for the ratification of the UN convention on the use of torture.

It is sometimes very easy to fault the provision of prison spaces. Whatever action is taken by this Minister, the Government and the agencies at their disposal, it is inevitable that its success will create a need for more prison spaces. Unless they are provided, the revolving door system, which has allowed criminals to scoff at the Garda, will continue unabated. I am delighted the Minister is providing extra prison spaces and that he is committing State resources to the fight against crime.

There is no doubt the Garda has been overextended in many areas and that additional numbers will be very welcome. It will be interesting to see how the courts and the Prison Service operate when they have agency status. I presume that will involve legislation, which will make for an interesting debate in the House.

The Minister also promised extradition treaties with Canada and South Africa. Deputy Deasy made a very telling point in that it seems some key international drug traffickers are being harboured in countries with which we would previously have understood we had excellent extradition treaties. There are serious questions about why that is continuing.

There is, of course, a need to review criminal law issues generally. However, the best possible response from the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, to the criticism that he is going soft on zero tolerance is the Bill and the raft of other legislation and other measures which he promised the House yesterday. His intentions in that regard deserve support rather than begrudgery.

It is interesting that this Bill has been in the pipeline since December 1991. It appears to have been ratified at a convention on 26 July 1995. There were subsequent Protocols in July 1996 and June 1997. However, it is worrying it has taken since December 1991 — almost six years — for the intention in relation to Europol to become a reality in terms of legislation. I do not think this State, which is small in European terms, is particularly to blame. However, I believe there has been a certain tardiness and laxity in dealing with these issues.

One would wonder whether the entire affair has been treated with the urgency which it warrants at EU level, particularly by certain states. I note in that regard particularly the German paedophile cases in 1996 and the massive drug smuggling operations which have been known about internationally for several years. It will be interesting to see how quickly we see some movement arising from the new provisions of the Amsterdam Treaty of June 1997.

It is interesting that it was found politically necessary in 1993 to set up the European Drugs Unit in response to international happenings at that time. However, it is important to consider the very limited scope of the powers of that operation, which reflected thinking at that time on the battle against crime in Europe. We wonder if the vision reflected in the Amsterdam Treaty in June and in this legislation and legislation elsewhere in Europe is sufficient to address the reality of the years 1997 to 1999 or if it is merely a late and inadequate response to the problem.

The vision which the Minister enunciated yesterday of an updated response to international criminal activity is most welcome. However, will it be adequate in two or four years' time? Have we a policy unit at EU level which will constantly update, for example, lists of crimes and the various necessary responses? I know the Minister indicated that articles 2 and 43.3 enable the Justice and Home Affairs Council to expand the list of crimes, but is there an adequate system in place? Equally importantly, can the council, in whatever action it takes, call on sufficient resources?

I make this point in the context of the changing perception and reality of international criminality. One of the key requirements in the EU fight against crime will be the flexibility to respond to crime in the embryo stage rather than when it has become the fully operational monster which it is at this time.

In that context, it seems extraordinary that Ireland is only the second European state to ratify the convention. For once, the UK, which is frequently accused of being a bad European, is first in the field. Another 13 countries have still to deal with this convention, which does not come properly into force until the last state has dealt with it. We need to be watchful of any tardiness at European level. This matter is of such importance that it should not be allowed to wait on the back burner while the kind of activities being discussed in the House are continuing apace.

Deputy Deasy referred to previous tardiness and Deputy Gregory referred to the speed at which some criminals moved from being involved in small scale activities to being major criminals. Would it not be appropriate to formulate a response which would cut off the development of these people when they are much less powerful? As the Minister said, some of them have at their disposal resources greater than those of some of the countries in which they operate. It is important that the corruption, white collar crime and other crimes associated with this criminality be pursued, regardless of the importance of the people involved and who might suffer as a result.

As the Minister said, there is a changing perception of our role as a small island nation. Our extensive coastline is exposed to drug trafficking. We need to ask what European resources could or should be deployed to improve surveillance along the coast. I am reminded of a statement by the former Minister for Health, Deputy Noonan, to the effect that the Loran C radio navigation system proposed for Ireland and a number of other European countries — it is very contentious in my county — would be of use in dealing with drug trafficking. The former Minister was mistaken in that regard because the system merely serves to pinpoint locations for people who are on the high seas or land and can in no way be used for surveillance of these people.

A number of speakers have mentioned the strong case for addressing the causes of crime. There is reason to be disappointed and worried about the role of education, social services, housing, community policing and other related issues in preventing the growth of crime. People will believe that politicians are serious about crime when they allocate resources to attack the social conditions which provide an environment conducive to crime, as well as dealing with the results of those conditions. More often than not, these conditions produce victims of crime more than criminals. They create a milieu in which criminals can survive, expand their operations and become more profitable. Just as Europol will draw together the various countries and agencies in the EU, there must also be a concerted effort in the State to bring together the various arms of Government to formulate an effective long-term plan to address the root causes of many of these problems.

The smuggling of illegal immigrants was mentioned. A case came to light in the south-east this week and there was a case in Devon, England last week in which a large number of people were involved. Such activity has many negative effects and among the worst is that it undermines gravely the situation of genuine refugees who ought to be supported and helped by us in escaping the regimes in their own countries. Many refugees are what might be termed "economic refugees" and present a problem which we must face, addressing the humanitarian and commonsense elements of the problem. The problems presented to communities and at national level are considerable and must be addressed.

The unavailability of Irish labour for certain low paid jobs entices employers to hire illegal immigrants. They are prepared to work for less and, in some instances, it would appear that despite the number of people unemployed there is nobody available for particular jobs. With imaginative proposals it should be possible to match the available jobs and some of our unemployed. Ultimately, the cheapest and most effective way to deal with the problem of illegal immigrants in employment in Ireland is by ensuring that available jobs are attractive and give sufficient remuneration to Irish people. There is not another system or level of policing which can deal with foreigners being taken into the country illegally in sealed containers. It is foolish to expect a police force to deal with such a traffic.

The background to the legislation is the level of resources available to organised crime and the ability of criminals to purchase the legal expertise to exploit differences in legal systems to benefit from the recent easing of regulations at national boundaries, and to resort to murder and other tactics of intimidation. Such activity sets them apart from ordinary people and makes them difficult to tackle. One must wonder whether the various EU police forces are competent to carry out their roles under Europol in their own countries. There have been disturbing failures in relation to paedophile cases in Belgium in the past.

The role of the liaison officers will be crucial to the success of the legislation and it is important that sufficient resources will be available to them, the national units under them and the various police forces in the member states. Liaison with Interpol was mentioned and I presume that will take place at European rather than national level. I will be interested to hear the Minister's response to the various technical aspects raised, such as those related to the data protection legislation.

With regard to zero tolerance, we should consider whether there are stupid or archaic items of legislation on the Statute Book which create credibility difficulties for the Garda in their implementation. There would be mixed views on whether the licensing laws, for example, create more trouble than they are worth or whether some traffic matters might best be dealt with by means other than Garda involvement. Perhaps matters such as gun or dog licensing could be dealt with more effectively without the involvement of police time and resources. We tend to forget that some items of the volume of legislation passed by this House over the years may impinge on Garda resources. It might be useful to have an audit of such legislation with a view to freeing up Garda resources to deal with more important matters.

I welcome this Bill and the Minister's commitment to future legislation to take concrete practical action to increase police numbers and prison spaces. I wish him well in his tasks.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue)

I thank the Deputies who contributed to the debate and the general welcome given to the Bill. This is the first occasion on which a Bill concerning a convention drawn up within the structures provided for in Title VI of the Treaty on European Union has been introduced in the Oireachtas. I am pleased to be associated with the Bill since it marks a new, strengthened statutory approach to law enforcement co-operation between us and our EU partners.

Today's criminal organisations do not confine their activities to one country and national measures are no longer sufficient on their own to stem the tide of illegal drug trafficking and other forms of pernicious organised crime. A joint strategy at European level encompassing the exchange of tactical and strategic information on organised criminals is a crucial weapon in the fight against what I would describe as a modern-day scourge.

The convention has its legal base in Title VI of the Treaty on European Union which establishes the framework for co-operation among the EU member states in the fields of justice and home affairs. Article K.1 (9) of Title VI lists as one of the areas of common interest

police co-operation for the purposes of preventing and combating terrorism, unlawful drug trafficking and other serious forms of international crime, including if necessary certain aspects of customs co-operation, in connection with the organisation of a Union-wide system for exchanging information within a European Police Office (Europol).

Under article K.3.2 the Council may draw up various instruments, not least conventions, which it shall recommend for adoption to the member states in accordance with their constitutional requirements. I say "not least" because the various instruments capable of being drawn up under article K.3.2 conventions are by far the most legally binding on member states. The same article states that such conventions may stipulate, as the Protocol to the Europol Convention stipulates, that the "Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction to interpret their provisions and to rule on any disputes regarding their application" thus ensuring uniform interpretation of their provisions.

Early ratification of the convention by Ireland will send a clear signal to our EU partners of the importance we attach to co-operation in the fight against drugs and organised crime. It is only fitting that the convention should be ratified by us without delay since successive European Councils have underlined the need to step up the fight against organised crime in this context and, as a practical step in so doing, have ordered the ratification of the convention at the earliest possible date. In June this year the Amsterdam European Council stressed the key role played by Europol in the fight against organised crime and reiterated the priority it attached to ratification by member states of the convention and its Protocols before the end of 1997.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.