Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 18 Nov 1997

Vol. 482 No. 8

Private Members' Business. - Crime Policy: Motion.

(Mayo): I wish to share time with Deputy Perry.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

(Mayo): I move:

That Dáil Éireann, recognising the abandonment of the former Fianna Fáil zero tolerance crime policy and the unequivocal commitments to introduce a series of new policies with a view to achieving an immediate and dramatic reduction in crime levels, expresses its serious concern at the recent alarming number of murders and assaults and deplores the failure of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to

—unveil any new crime prevention policies since taking office;

—finalise his submission to the Taoiseach in order to enable the report of the strategic management initiative on the Garda to be published, debated and implemented;

—put an end to the costly and self-defeating revolving door system of token imprisonment;

—adequately resource the overburdened Probation and Welfare Service in order to enable it to prevent and divert crime and guarantee supervision of convicted persons placed in its care;

—introduce a comprehensive drug treatment and therapy programme for women prisoners who are drug addicts; and,

—introduce effective prison programmes and post-release programmes for sex offenders, and, calls on the Minister to finalise within two weeks his submission on the strategic management initiative on the Garda, to guarantee that there will be no further closures of Garda stations or reduction in Garda hours or numbers and to place on record his policy objectives in crime reduction, the operation of the prison system, the resourcing of the Probation and Welfare Service and implementation of treatment programmes for drug and sex offenders.

The Government has now been almost five months in office. One of its most notable features has been the total transformation of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donoghue, who for two and a half years in Opposition, day in, day out, in the Dáil, the newspapers, on radio and television, railed against probably the finest Minister for Justice this country has seen. Deputy Owen inherited a situation where criminals strutted their stuff with an arrogance and contempt for law and order; where the Garda Commissioner admitted that the general public had lost a fair degree of confidence in the Garda Síochána to do the job they were paid to do; where the laws of the land often protected the criminal rather than the innocent victims of their actions; where millions of pounds, the proceeds of crime, were either stashed away untouched in banks and financial institutions inside or outside the country or laundered untraced through a variety of legitimate and respectable business outlets and ventures; where the overflowing prison population had almost institutionalised the revolving door practice of here today, gone tomorrow. Thanks to the dogged determination and vision of the Minister's predecessor, in just two and a half years the largest, erstwhile, most untouchable criminal gangs are now behind bars, on the run, in exile or the subject of extradition proceedings, their empires crumbling in tatters. Thanks to the leadership and freshness of approach of the new Garda Commissioner appointed by the Rainbow Government, again on the recommendation of the Minister's predecessor, morale within the Garda has soared and, most importantly, public confidence in the force restored.

The almost automatic right to bail, irrespective of the likelihood of reoffending, is now at an end. The Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Bill 1996, introduced by the Minister's predecessor, means that the shield of the right to silence has been abolished allowing a court to make its deduction if a defendant refuses to answer legitimate questions. The Criminal Assets Bureau Bill, 1996, introduced by the same Rainbow Government has hit the managers of crime where it hurts most by seizing and impounding their assets.

Five hundred new Garda were recruited in 1996, a new Garda Drugs Unit established and £5.5 million provided for the new helicopter and fixed wing 'plane promised by the Fianna Fáil Minister for Justice, Mr. Gerry Collins, in 1981. In addition, 200 civilians were recruited to undertake secretarial work to enable a corresponding number of desk-bound Garda to fight crime and an additional 24 judges appointed to the courts to speed up the administration of justice.

Yet, while all those measures were being brought on stream, Deputy John O'Donoghue, then in Opposition, ranted and raved from the Opposition benches — every administrative hitch, every systems failure being laid firmly at the feet of the then Minister, Deputy Owen. Virtually every bank raid, murder and assault was interpreted as a personal reflection on the politically culpable Minister for Justice. The initiatives undertaken, legislative and administrative, which struck at the very heart of criminal activity, were ridiculed and derided by him. Even the Courts and Court Officers Bill was wrong because, it was contended, its provisions would strip the Minister and her Department of their powers and functions.

Where has this hot-gospeling Minister gone to? Where has the Deputy John O'Donoghue of yesteryear, the prophet of doom, gone? Where has the reforming zealot, Deputy John O'Donoghue, gone to? What has happened to the visionary who had all the answers when on this side of the House? He appears to have lapsed into silence and become invisible since crossing the floor of the Chamber. Where are the dynamic policy initiatives he promised would roll from his so-called reservoir of research as soon as he became Minister for Justice?

The Minister's performance has been abysmal. Every item of legislation produced to date, or promised on the Minister's pre-Christmas legislative list, has been inherited from his predecessor, Deputy Owen, such as the Courts and Court Officers Bill, the Prisons Service Bill, the International Commercial Arbitration Bill, the Europol Bill, the Children Bill and the Child Pornography Bill. Even the latest initiative announced this evening on the Criminal Justice Bill, long promised and overdue, on which he will be holding a press conference in due course, was flushed out because of this motion.

I have availed of the opportunity to re-examine some of the clear commitments Deputy O'Donoghue undertook to honour and implement if and when he became Minister for Justice. One of Fianna Fáil's first priorities would be the restructuring of the Garda. Under the Rainbow Coalition Government's strategic management initiative a review group produced a detailed report recommending new laws covering the questioning and detention of suspects and a major overhaul and restructuring of the Garda Síochána, which has been with the Taoiseach for the past five months. Yet, as he informed the House in the course of Question Time last week, it cannot be published, debated or implemented because the Minister for Justice and his Department have failed to complete their submissions on the issues that go to the core of his responsibilities.

The Minister also promised there would be a specialist, organised crime unit established by Fianna Fáil in Government but, to date, there has been no such move. In addition, the Minister promised the establishment of a specialist squad to investigate what he described as "complicated murders", of which there has been no mention or action taken thereon to date.

In an article published in The Irish Times of 11 March 1997, the then Deputy John O'Donoghue was reported as saying that Fianna Fáil would suspend a pub licence for three months if drugs were sold on the premises and, if that happened on more than three occasions in five years, the licence would be forfeited unless the owner established that everything possible had been done to prevent the sale of drugs on the premises. It was a modest, worthwhile, fundamental and yet commendable proposal and yet not a single syllable seems to have been spoken about it since.

We were told that Fianna Fáil in Government would adopt a preventative approach to the drugs problem and create a drug court system to replace the revolving door, yet the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, in dealing with the problem recently in Galway while launching a very meritorious report, did not mention the long promised drug court system. What is the current status of the proposal? Is it to go ahead? If so, when?

The Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats joint Programme for Government promised a custodial detention centre would be established for convicted addicts and remand prisoners who are addicted, with all other prisons to be drug free. I cannot recall a single utterance from the Minister or any member of Government as to what is happening to this proposal. Will the Minister clarify the position? Is it to go ahead? If so, when? Where is it to be constructed? What will it cost? How many drug addicted prisoners will it accommodate?

The Programme for Government is quite specific about another commitment — to enable gardaí to concentrate on crime control a community warden service will be recruited by local authorities to relieve their workload. There is silence and no attempt to elaborate on a clear commitment penned a mere five months ago. If the proposal is to go ahead, will the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform tell us when it will go ahead? What exactly will this community warden scheme do? Have the local authorities been consulted about it or do they know anything about it?

There was another clear commitment, that temporary accommodation would be provided immediately to deal with the immediate prison space crisis. July, August, September and October have all come and gone and November has almost expired and yet not alone is there no sign of the promised immediate temporary spaces but 50 prisoners are released from Mountjoy Prison every day to make space for incoming prisoners.

The Governor of Mountjoy Prison was hauled before the courts because he allowed to go free on 25 August a prisoner who was sentenced in April to 11 months for larceny and who received another 22 month sentence in June. This made a mockery of the gardaí, whose vigilance and police efforts led to the arrest and charge, and the courts, which imposed the sentence. The Governor, of course, was exonerated. It is not Governor Lonergan's fault that the prisoners must sleep on mattresses in padded cells, the prison library and the recreational hall. It is not his fault there are 60 women prisoners crowded into accommodation built for 40. It is the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and not Governor Lonergan who should have been in the dock because prisoners are released not on the say so of the Governor of Mountjoy Prison or any prison governor but on the specific sanction of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

The Minister should be in the dock and with him should be his colleagues in the Progressive Democrats who delivered zero prison spaces in the three and a half years they were in Government together between 1989 and 1992. In the subsequent period from 1992 to 1994, a portion of which Deputy O'Donoghue spent as a Minister of State, Fianna Fáil delivered a grand total of 57 prison spaces. Compare this to the additional 30 places at St. Patrick's institution, 38 at Mountjoy Prison health unit, 40 at Castlerea, 100 at the Curragh and 48 at Wheatfield Prison under the former Minister, Deputy Nora Owen.

When the Rainbow Coalition left office construction was already well under way for 800 further prison places. Meanwhile the door keeps revolving and the crisis continues. There is no sign of the immediate temporary accommodation promised so unequivocally by Deputy O'Donoghue in Opposition just a few months ago. Are we still talking about erecting emergency short-term accommodation? Are we talking about leasing or utilising some State or privately owned available buildings? Are we admitting that the scheme of emergency temporary accommodation has been abandoned?

Of all the abandoned promises, the most widely heralded, the zero tolerance proposal, must certainly rank as the greatest confidence trick for many a long day. Minister O'Donoghue's promise of a crime-free Utopia, with a blitz on all crimes both major and minor, was never a realisable proposition. Even though the Garda Commissioner rightly warned that the imposition of a New York severe policing regime here would mean arresting and prosecuting every offender, result in mountains of paper work, the choking of our already overcrowded prisons and the rupture of the vital relationship between police and community, Minister O'Donoghue stuck to his guns. In Government it would be zero tolerance New York style or nothing.

Mr. George Maybury, General Secretary of the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors, warned that zero tolerance, if applied literally, would damage the advisory discretion of gardaí when dealing with juveniles as well as the juvenile liaison system which has saved many young people from a life of misery. He warned that conviction at such a tender age would effectively end any chance of a public service job or a visa to enter the United States. Yet Minister O'Donoghue ploughed ahead. Even though he was warned time and again, he continued to insist on the zero tolerance philosophy he espoused in Opposition and which was proudly proclaimed in the joint programme for Government which states: "We will adopt a zero tolerance policy towards crime, including white-collar crime". There were to be no "ifs", "buts" or "maybes".

The greatest fraud since de Valera was to drain the Shannon.

(Mayo): When Minister O'Donoghue emerged from his summer sabbatical on 4 September, he seemed to have jettisoned zero tolerance except for the drug trafficking and serious criminal element. That is superfluous because while we may have lacked the necessary legislative clout to deal with drug traffickers and others up to the time the legislative programme of former Minister, Deputy Owen, came into effect, including the establishment of the Criminal Assets Bureau, there was never any question of tolerating the activities of drug traffickers, etc. The Minister seems to have piggybacked on the measures introduced by his predecessor while, at the same time, promises solemnly entered into when in Opposition a mere five months ago have been abandoned or allowed to languish.

The past few years have seen a slight but welcome reduction in the number of murders after a spate of gangland murders in 1994 and 1995 in particular. Unfortunately, murder is again on the increase as witnessed by the tragic happenings of the past three weeks. One of the features of some of these murders was the use of legally held weapons. It is extraordinary that in order to qualify to drive a motor vehicle, one must be aged 17 years. One must first obtain a provisional licence during which one develops, hopefully, the necessary driving skills. One then applies, after a specified probationary period, to do a driving test before a full driving licence can issue, yet one can obtain a legal firearm at 16 years of age without any training requirement or test of competence.

The Firearms Act, 1925, places an unfair burden on the State and on the Garda in that any refusal to issue a licence or a certificate must be accompanied by a reason for same. That calls into question the justifiable negative instincts which tell a garda that he should not issue a licence. It compromises the discretion of a garda to refuse a licence. I urge the Minister to re-examine as a matter of urgency the Firearms Act, 1925, particularly section 8 which sets down the exclusions and one's disentitlement to hold a firearms certificate rather than the stipulations and qualifications which should be necessary. Far tighter controls should operate on the issue of firearms. I urge the Minister to consider amending the legislation on the basis that henceforth licence holders should be bona fide members of gun clubs and should be sponsored by a minimum of two responsible people. Licence holders should be obliged to produce a medical report every three years as to their fitness, mental stability and suitability to hold a firearms certificate. Weapons should be rarely licensed for non-games purposes, except perhaps for vermin control confined to the precincts of one's land.

The current position is that a major disaster is waiting to happen. I do not want to send out unnecessary danger signals about a repeat of Dunblane, but all one need do is take account of the number of legally held firearms in circulation. For example, in l995 195,000 licences were issued, yet the National Association of Regional Game Councils has only 22,000 members. Admittedly, some of them have more than one firearm, but even allowing for some members holding a second firearm somewhere in the region of 165,000 firearms are held by non-aligned persons. They are not members of an NARGC and the majority of them are not members of sporting clubs involved in target practice, clay pigeon shooting, etc. We should seriously consider the need to introduce liability insurance for those issued with a firearms certificate.

I alluded to the 265 additional prison spaces provided by the former Minister, Deputy Owen, and the 800 places under construction. With a properly managed sentencing policy that provision should be more than adequate to deal with the problem of overcrowding in our prisons. It should give the Minister vital time and space within which to reflect on whether additional prison spaces, other than the aforementioned, are necessary, if additional expenditure on prisons represents good value for money and if there are viable, workable alternatives to the existing prison regime.

The prison programme is costing £46,140 per annum per prisoner and, according to the l997 Estimates, will cost approximately £105.3 million in l997. I note the commitment to provide additional prison places at a capital cost of £220 million. Instead of deterring or rehabilitating criminals our prisons have become universities of crime and, as someone said recently, they have become expensive ways of making bad people worse. All one has to do is to consider the alarming recidivism rate of 70 per cent. The prison system deals with a turnover of 10,000 inmates per annum at a whopping cost of £105.3 million, yet the probation and welfare service deals with an annual turnover of 5,000 offenders with a meagre budget of £12 million in l996 which was increased to £14 million in l997. The Minister may say its budget has been increased by 22 to 25 per cent but that increase has been on the capital side and covers the opening of new offices and new welfare and probation outlets in the city. Admittedly they are badly needed, but what additional money is being allocated for personnel to provide additional probation and welfare services? The capital cost of a prisoner is £46,140 per annum while the capital cost of an offender under the probation and welfare service is £2,800. Yet the probation and welfare service, which sets out in its agenda to prevent and divert crime, to intervene before crime becomes habitual and to rehabilitate and reintegrate offenders back into society, has become the Cinderella of the service.

Is the Minister aware of how under-resourced the service is, with a maximum of 200 probation and welfare officers dealing with 5,000 offenders? Is he aware that each probation officer deals with 20 reports and 60 offenders simultaneously, a workload which is double that of their UK counterparts, that because of their huge workload, offenders put into their care by the courts remain totally unsupervised in many cases and that because of the impossible burden placed upon them, vital background reports in respect of family law cases are no longer available to the courts from the probation and welfare service, leaving the judge and the competing solicitors to sort out family law difficulties without crucial and up to date assessments?

There has been no proper analysis of crime or proper comparison between the efficacy of prison as against the success of the probation and welfare service. We have never examined the crucial issue of what turns a ten year old into a hardened criminal two years before he leaves primary school. Prison has a role and has to be an option for offences against the person and serious offences against property. It should, however, be the last rather then the first or only option. There has been no proper evaluation of whether the prison system works or whether capital punishment works. There has been no proper assessment or co-ordination of the various statistics which emerge in the annual reports of the Garda Síochána, the prison service and the probation and welfare service. High level technology and computerisation are used in producing three sets of statistics from three different arms of the criminal justice system and yet there is no liaison, interaction or co-ordination between them.

I have examined, for example, the 1997 Estimate for the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and from a budget of almost £1,000 million there is not a single pound allocated to criminal research. There is no criminology department either inside or outside our universities. We simply plough blindly ahead pouring millions of pounds into so-called accepted solutions, the values and merits of which are open to serious question.

Nobody seems to have addressed the fact that 80 per cent of offences are drug related and that this is where the proportionate concentration of effort and resources should go. Nobody seems to have assessed the fact that the bulk of offenders, particularly those involved in drug related offences, come from a handful of identifiable communities where imaginative socio-economic programmes involving the probation and welfare service would have a major impact. The Minister and Department seem oblivious to a major problem which is on their doorstep and which will shortly burst at the seams with a vengeance.

There are 250 sex offenders in prison and the number increases daily. Only ten are undergoing treatment programmes. There is a nightmare scenario in prospect. Hundreds of sex offenders, including paedophiles, will be released into society in due course having had no treatment, having been shunned by society, their families and employers, with no home to go to and, in most cases, with virtually no job prospects. What arrangements are being put in place to cope with this inevitable mass exodus?

Last week the various churches commemorated the 150th anniversary of the Great Famine. Just as the Famine blighted our history in the 19th century and TB was the scourge of the first half of the 20th century, the drug epidemic will undoubtedly be remembered as the plague of the last decade of this century. What was essentially a Dublin and Cork problem 15 years ago is now a sad reality in every town and almost every village. It is the subject of numerous surveys and studies in order to determine its causes, extent and consequences. Major offensives were undertaken by the rainbow Government in order to seize assets and smash the drug cartels.

I commend the National Drugs Unit for its success to date. Seizures such as the £8 million cannabis haul two weeks ago and the £3 million haul last week are bound to have an impact. Nevertheless, supplies continue to get through. Former Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, chaired an interdepartmental group which produced a very fine report at the end of April entitled "Dealing with the Nightmare of Drug Use and the Intervention in south inner city Dublin". Its recommendations provided a clear blueprint for the incoming Government, yet no action followed.

The Minister continues to talk about a co-ordinated approach to the problem involving the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Education and Science and Health and Children. Has he consulted with his colleagues the Minister for Health and Children and the Minister for Education and Science in order to work out a co-ordinated, integrated strategy? This is the obvious road to go but will we travel it? Unless a sustained, enlightened and properly resourced multifaceted approach is adopted the problem will continue to grow and the trail of destruction and misery will get longer.

The Minister is on record as acknowledging, particularly during his time in Opposition, that our prisons are infested with drugs. On 11 March this year he asked why there was a drugs-free unit in Mountjoy prison. The reason he gave was that we were admitting we were unable to control the supply of drugs in a State institution. In the same breath, the Minister promised a new drugs treatment unit when Fianna Fáil took up office. Let us be frank and honest; the former Minister for Justice, Deputy Owen, was responsible for introducing the first ever systematic drug treatment programme in Mountjoy prison. Thanks to her initiative that drug-free zone now exists. Unfortunately, there is no such group programme in the women's prison in which all the prisoners are drug addicts and there is only one welfare officer. I call on the Minister to respond to the desperate need for a drugs unit in the women's prison, not something piecemeal but a proper drugs therapy programme. Such a programme is necessary in order that every drug addicted prisoner, without exception, can have access to it. Is it not the sad reality that, having been supplied with drugs from outside the prison, women prisoners must pay for that supply as soon as they are released? They end up re-offending almost on the day of their release to pay for the drug supplies and the vicious cycle begins all over again.

Members of the House will be aware that this is the time of year when the unfortunate splurge of attacks against elderly people in rural Ireland commences. "Operation Shannon" and other police activities have had an impact in reducing the scale of such attacks. However, many of the perpetrators of these foul deeds are still at large and may well be preparing to strike again. There is no doubt that the policy of denuding rural Ireland of its network of Garda stations has left a vacuum which has been ruthlessly exploited by such criminals.

I welcome greater Garda mobilisation. It is good to see the Garda being provided with the necessary technology to do its job. However, nothing can replace the physical presence of the Garda in an area where a member of the force knows the local community and vice versa. That is crucial and fundamental to good policing. On 4 February 1997 the Minister gave a commitment that, when in office, he would end what he described as efforts to "close down some Garda stations by stealth". He further committed Fianna Fáil to a policy which would end the closure of rural Garda stations while expanding rural policing through increased recruitment. I call on the Minister to honour that pledge and inform the House this evening that there will be no further closures of rural Garda stations during his period in office.

I look forward to the debate and to hearing the views of Members from all sides of the House. This debate is important at this juncture. While the economic success of the Celtic tiger and the largesse it bestows has put us on the world map of successful economies, there exists a deeply corrosive crime issue which must be tackled in an enlightened and systematic way by building on the policies which proved so successful during the regime of the Fine Gael, Labour and Democratic Left Government from 1994 to 1997. I look forward to hearing how exactly the Minister proposes to do this.

Any person irrespective of their age, gender or status can fall victim of a crime. When that happens, people are entitled to be treated with sympathy and respect. Our criminal justice system does not leave it to individuals to vindicate their rights; it is done on their behalf by the State. This is where the initial problem often lies because, if this is not done efficiently and sympathetically, the victim can be left disillusioned with the system of justice.

Victims should have the right to be treated with compassion and respect for their dignity at all times and should be provided with such services and necessities as might be reasonably required by them in restoring their dignity immediately after the commission of an offence and for a reasonable time thereafter. To achieve this it is essential all agencies involved with victims take the necessary steps to minimise the trauma and hardship that may be involved. This places a heavy burden of responsibility on the media, the Garda Síochána, the legal profession, the courts, the caring professions and other agencies.

A victim of crime is defined as a person or persons who have suffered harm of any kind, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their capacity to function within the community, through acts or omissions which are in breach of the criminal law. It includes where appropriate the immediate family or dependants of such persons or any persons who suffer from harm in assisting such persons.

The media should ensure the victim's privacy is not needlessly violated and the trauma is not increased by insensitive reporting of the circumstances of the crime. They should always exercise proper restraint and consideration towards victims. Photographs should never be published without the permission of the victim or, if applicable, the family of the deceased.

Prosecuting authorities should advise victims of the outcome of applications for bail and of the conditions attached thereto relevant to the victims. The courts should be allowed to refuse bail in circumstances where victims' witnesses are likely to be intimidated or who fear for their personal safety. Victims are entitled to have their need or perceived need for physical protection considered during a hearing in respect of bail for the accused prior to, during or after the trial, where such need or perceived need has been brought to the attention of the prosecuting authorities. The elderly and the handicapped suffer more as a result of crime and are most vulnerable. Landlords, proprietors of homes, hostels or institutions and all persons working therein have a particular responsibility towards these people and should report any irregularity, injury or abuse coming to their notice.

Crime was a major issue in the general election campaign but little or no attention was paid to businesses which were victims of crime. A joint survey recently conducted by the Small Firms Association and the Irish security industry showed that 41 per cent of small companies had been victims of crime in the previous year. The major sources of crime were vandalism and burglary of goods and cash. The total annual cost of such crime was estimated at £124 million. Even more worrying was the fact that each small company spent more than £2,000 on crime prevention, representing a cost to small businesses of £320 million. In total, business crime cost small companies more than £400 million. The Government must make the elimination of business crime a major priority.

The present scheme for compensation of victims of crime is wholly inadequate. No compensation is paid for pain and suffering, delays in dealing with claims under the scheme are unacceptable and the scheme is not user friendly. Simplified application forms could be made available in local Garda stations. The present scheme should be expanded to permit some form of compensation for pain and suffering. This could be funded from a central restitution fund which could be financed by revenue from court fines, moneys recovered from legal activities and moneys recovered from compensation orders made against convicted offenders.

In all cases the courts should make compensation orders against offenders. Even if the offenders have little or no means, they should be required to apply such means as they acquire at a later stage towards satisfaction of an outstanding compensation order. Incentives to encourage compliance with compensation orders could be introduced, such as a percentage reduction for early payment. Indeed, a similar incentive could be introduced to encourage early payment of fines and reduce the considerable amount of Garda time which is expended in this area.

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:

—notes the determination of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to pursue a policy of zero tolerance against those who are engaged in criminality which interferes with the right of citizens to live their lives in peace, free of the fear of criminal intrusion, including the criminal trafficking in drugs which causes so much human misery especially to the young;

—welcomes the plans of the Minister to increase the strength of An Garda Síochána to 12,000 within the lifetime of the Government;

—supports the measures which are being taken by the Minister to provide 1,000 prison spaces within the next two years;

—welcomes provision of resources for the introduction of a formal witness security programme;

—notes that ongoing discussions are taking place with the Eastern Health Board with a view to expanding the range of drug treatment services available in Mountjoy female prison;

—confirms the continuation of individual counselling for sentenced sex offenders and the expansion in dedicated sex offender treatment programmes within the prison system;

—endorses the recent decision taken by the Minister to establish a review group to examine the Probation and Welfare Service;

—commends the decision of the Minister to establish a crime forum and a crime council in order to assist in the ongoing formulation and integration of crime policy with wider social policy;

—welcomes the announcement by the Minister that he will publish, in 1998, the first ever White Paper on crime in the history of the State;

—welcomes the Government's commitment to publish the Criminal Justice Bill;

—welcomes the Government's publication of the Courts Service Bill, 1997;

—notes that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is in the process of preparing a discussion document on sexual offences including the possibility of a register of sex offenders;

—welcomes the passing by both Houses of the Oireachtas of the Europol Bill; and

—notes that Government decisions on the Garda SMI report are imminent.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to set out for the House in some detail the Government's programme to deal with crime. This is a programme designed to address the root causes of crime, to bring about a meaningful, sustained and long-term reduction in the level of crime and to confront the habitual criminal head on. It is not a knee-jerk response to the problem. On the contrary, it is the result of a great deal of consideration about the nature of crime in Ireland today and of the factors that cause much of it.

The programme recognises that the various State agencies involved in the fight against crime are part of the same apparatus. They should be regarded as the engine of the criminal justice system —an integrated system in which it is my job to chart the overall direction and to ensure that each part dovetails with the next to provide an efficient, effective and focused service to the public.

Put simply, it is for Government to lay down the broad lines of crime policy and it is for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to ensure that this policy is implemented in an effective and cohesive way. In this regard, the implementation of an integrated crime policy requires first a clear and determined focus on tackling those engaged in criminal activity — that strategy is zero tolerance — second, a determination that the law enforcement agencies will be properly equipped and resourced to deal with crime and that they will work with each other and with other relevant agencies in a cohesive manner, and third, a commitment to address the causes of crime so that yesterday's mistakes become the learning experience through which we can avoid tomorrow's problems.

As I stated, the implementation of an integrated crime policy requires a clear and determined focus on tackling those engaged in criminal activity. This is the zero tolerance strategy. Let me assure the House the zero tolerance strategy has not been abandoned, much as Deputy Higgins would like people to believe that. The strategy is being implemented. The Government set out clearly what it intends to do to meet the challenge of crime. Let us be clear about that and not pretend otherwise. The programme comprises a mix of practical action and legislative change targeted specifically at criminal elements in the community, including those who seek to profit from the deadly trade in illegal drugs whether as financiers, importers, suppliers or pushers. The programme is directed towards assisting the Garda Síochána with resources to strengthen its operational hand. It will be accompanied by changes in legislation which will increase the State's statutory armoury to take on and put out of business those who organise themselves for the purpose of crime.

Everyone in this House will agree that we cannot tolerate a state of affairs in which lives are destroyed and communities blighted by those who import, distribute and peddle drugs. Zero tolerance is the only answer to such evil and, as such, deserves the full support of this House. Whatever about the full support of the House, it is getting the full support of the community.

I am pleased to be able to inform the House that the Government today approved the text of the Criminal Justice Bill, 1997, which I will publish tomorrow and on which I have been working throughout the summer. The fact that this major criminal law reform measure is being introduced so early in the lifetime of this Government is clear practical evidence of the Government's policy of zero tolerance of crime, particularly but not exclusively drug trafficking. The Bill contains a series of strong measures which are, regrettably, all too necessary as a response to those who inflict such harm on our community. Given the obvious importance of this measure, it is appropriate in the course of this debate to give the House details of what the Bill will contain. Under the main provisions of the Bill persons trafficking in drugs to the value of £10,000 or more will face mandatory minimum sentences of ten years. That commitment was given prior to the election when in Opposition and will be lived up to. Trials will take place more quickly through the abolition of preliminary examinations. Courts will automatically initiate an inquiry into the assets of people convicted of drug trafficking offences with a view to confiscating those assets. That was a commitment given in Opposition and during the election and is being lived up to. Gardaí will have to spend less time in court through the extension of the type of evidence which can be given by certificate. I do not have to repeat what I have already said about commitments. The rules relating to a court taking into account guilty pleas are being placed on a clear statutory basis.

With regard to some of Deputy Jim Higgins's remarks about the initiatives of Deputy Owen, the Proceeds of Crime Act, 1996, was enacted by this House on my initiative as Opposition spokesperson. It enables the courts to freeze assets where they are satisfied they represent the proceeds of crime. The most recent statistics available indicate that under the Proceeds of Crime Act, 1996, the Criminal Assets Bureau has obtained 20 interim orders for assets in excess of £2 million and 12 interlocutory orders for assets in excess of £1.3 million. Revenue officers of the bureau have investigated, assessed and made demands for payment of income tax with interest to the value of £8.2 million on persons suspected of criminal activity. The bureau has also assessed social welfare overpayments of £150,000. The bureau has proven in the short time it has been in place to be very effective in denying drug dealers and organised criminals the benefits of their activities and has seriously disrupted the activities of criminal gangs. I welcome Deputy Jim Higgins's acknowledgement of that because the Criminal Assets Bureau was a consequence of the Proceeds of Crime Act, 1996, without which the bureau would have been largely redundant.

The House will be aware of recent high profile cases reported in the media which have shown a ruthless level of criminal organisation, most notably in the areas of drug trafficking and money laundering. These cases have demonstrated the need to have available, if required, a special system of witness security to enable prosecutions to be taken. Therefore, I have authorised a formal witness security programme to be put in place by the Garda Síochána. This is a powerful new tool in the fight against serious and organised crime. It affords the criminal justice system the opportunity of obtaining the best evidence from first hand witnesses who are willing to testify in court.

No crime policy can succeed if the Garda does not have the required resources in terms of personnel and equipment to do its job and the Government is delivering on those resources. During the term of office of the previous Minister, natural wastage outstripped recruitment in the force. This meant there were fewer people in the Garda Síochána subsequent to the forced retirement of the previous Minister for Justice than there were when she came to office. Those are the facts.

(Mayo): Some 600 last year, 200 released from desk jobs.

No interruptions, please.

Natural wastage outstripped recruitment in the force which led to a depletion in its numbers in the period of office of the previous Minister for Justice. The programme for Government provides for additional recruitment over and above future recruitment levels agreed by the previous Government with a view to bringing the total strength to 12,000. This additional recruitment will commence early in the new year with accelerated recruitment from the 1997 recruitment competition.

These gardaí will have the very best equipment. Last week I had the privilege of launching into service nine Isuzu high powered, high specification four wheel drive vehicles. They are the first in a batch of 20 such vehicles, the remainder of which will be delivered and brought into service in the next few weeks. The total cost of supplying and equipping these vehicles is £500,000. The vehicles are equipped with a sophisticated array of equipment and each of them has communications facilities and roof markings to facilitate operations in conjunction with the Garda air support unit. It is essential the Garda be equipped with the latest state of the art policing technology to meet the challenge of modern day crime head on and to face down the criminal elements in the community. Technology does not come cheap and that the Book of Estimates for 1998 shows an unprecedented 10 per cent increase in the Justice, Equality and Law Reform Votes is proof, if any were required, of the Goverment's commitment in this area.

I strongly refute any suggestion that this Government has been associated with or has an agenda for the closure of Garda stations or reducing policing services to the public. The rural community policing programme has received some attention in the media as of late arising from a review of its operation being conducted by the Garda Commissioner. Unfortunately, there has been some misunderstanding over the years concerning the objectives of this scheme. Regrettably, the rural community policing scheme is synonymous in the minds of some with the closure of Garda stations. It was never designed to close rural Garda stations. It may have been the position under the last Minister that rural Garda stations were set to close but——

(Mayo): They were not.

I give a commitment that this Government will not close one rural Garda station.

(Mayo): I will hold the Minister to that commitment.

Rural community policing is aimed at providing a better service by allowing gardaí spend more time on active operational duties in their districts including, in particular, visits to the elderly, while at the same time providing for station opening hours which actually suit local community needs. The fact that there will be a considerable number of gardaí available following the completion of the recruitment programme will mean we will be able to ensure that there are more gardaí in rural communities.

The scheme has been operating in 14 Garda districts since 1991. The Garda Commissioner is evaluating the operation of the scheme and reviewing previous proposals for its extension. He has recently indicated to me that he is considering certain modifications to the scheme with a view to enhancing its operational effectiveness. However, I would like to emphasise that no decisions concerning an extension of the scheme have been taken and no such decisions can be taken until proposals are received from the Garda Commissioner.

The Garda SMI report was submitted to the former Taoiseach and it has been accepted from the outset, and I accept, that it was to be brought to Government by the Taoiseach's Department. However, it would have been folly to bring forward a report of this kind to Government and seek to have it published and implemented without taking account of the reality that the Garda were seriously dissatisfied over pay. It clearly made a considerable amount of sense to address pay and SMI implementation at the same time. A basis has now been found for doing this.

I have recently announced the appointment of a new Deputy State Pathologist who will take up her appointment on 5 January 1998. That appointment represents a significant breakthrough in the provision of a properly resourced State pathology service which is an essential requirement for the Garda in investigating deaths which occur in suspicious circumstances. I vigorously campaigned for such an appointment in Opposition and now, in Government, I am pleased to be in a position to deliver on this matter.

Is she going to Cork?

The Government, recognising the urgent need for a significant increase in prison accommodation, is proceeding, as a matter of high priority and as rapidly as is feasible, with a major prison building programme. The programme will have delivered in excess of 1,070 additional places within the first two years of this Government being in office. In the slightly longer term the provision of a total of 2,000 additional places is planned within the five year term of this Government. These planned additional places will represent an increase of, approximately, 45 per cent in the current prison accommodation level within the first two years of the life of the Government and a planned increase of, in excess of, 80 per cent over the full five year period from mid-1997.

Construction of the new wing at Limerick Prison is now virtually complete and it will provide 55 additional places, together with the necessary range of prisoner support facilities. Completion of construction works for the new main prison at Castlerea, so often cancelled by the Rainbow Coalition——

(Mayo): We started it.

——will provide 137 prison places and is due to be opened in February next year. The new remand prison beside Wheatfield, which will provide 400 places and the new female prison beside Mountjoy, which will have 80 places, are under construction and are due for completion later next year. A major stand alone prison planned for Portlaoise will provide an additional 400 places, including 40 places in a special segregation unit. Planning for this new prison, which is being procured on a client-led design, build and finance basis, is being advanced rapidly. Invitations to tender will issue before the end of this year. Construction is planned to commence in March 1998 and to be completed within 15 months. Planning for the remaining places, to be provided under the Government's prison building programmes has now commenced. The necessary capital funding for the building programme will be provided, commencing with a provision of more than £45 million for 1998. When Deputy Owen was Minister for Justice I predicted she would never be Minister to pay the bill for extra prison places. Those words were prophetic.

The Mountjoy drug treatment facility has been in operation for some time at the male prison's health care unit. This facility provides for humane detoxification and a therapy programme. The unit is the first of its kind in a prison environment in this State and it is modelled on similar hospital based units in the community. While there is not a dedicated unit for drug treatment in Mountjoy Female Prison, detoxification programmes are available to appropriate prisoners. In the female prison especially, detoxification programmes tend to be specifically tailored to meet the clinical needs of the individual prisoner.

My Department is currently examining the feasibility of further expanding the range of treatment options available to prisoners, including those prisoners in Mountjoy Female Prison. Where inmates have completed the detoxification programme they can continue to serve their sentence in the general prison population or, if they are considered suitable, they can be granted temporary release to continue treatment with an outside agency or they can opt for a transfer to the drug free unit.

The position with regard to female prisoners is unsatisfactory. This is due, to a large extent, to the overcrowding in Mountjoy Female Prison. This issue is under continuous review between officials of my Department and the Eastern Health Board. I hope interim solutions will emerge. In any event I am satisfied this issue can be resolved in the context of the move to the new purpose built women's prison I mentioned earlier.

There are currently approximately 280 persons in custody for sex offences. These offenders represent a growing proportion of the prison population. The increasing number of sex offenders has outstripped our ability to put effective programmes in place for them.

There are currently two forms of therapeutic intervention available to sex offenders within the present system, both aimed at enabling such offenders gain some measure of control over their offending behaviour. The first is individual counselling from the Department's clinical psychology service or from the probation and welfare service. This service is available in all prisons with the temporary exception of the Curragh, which is awaiting the provision of both services. The second is an intensive offence focused group work programme available only in Arbour Hill Prison. Both forms of treatment are voluntary. Offenders are encouraged to avail of these services but they are neither compelled to attend, nor do they receive any extra concessions for attending.

The first structured psychological treatment programme was established in Arbour Hill in 1994. The aim of the programme is to reduce sexual victimisation in society. The aim is not to effect a cure, but to reduce the probability of offenders re-offending on release.

There are a number of important issues that need to be addressed if treatment programmes for sex offenders are to continue to develop. Approximately 60 sex offenders are released each year, a large number of whom would not be candidates for the treatment programme due to disinterest or because they are serving short sentences. However, the number of offenders being processed annually through the programme needs to be increased. A significant first step would be to double the number of treatment places available annually from ten to 20, thus ensuring sufficient treatment places for about one third of sex offenders leaving the prison system annually.

Now that the programme has been firmly established in Arbour Hill, it is imperative that a comprehensive research project is initiated to evaluate its efficacy and that of any future expansion of the programme, including its contribution, if any, to a reduction in recidivism. Negotiations have reached an advanced stage with the Department of Psychology, University College, Dublin, to undertake such a study over a four year period and my Department will approach the Department of Finance for approval to commence this study later this year.

It is proposed to introduce new and different programmes for offenders in both Arbour Hill and Cork prisons in the future. These programmes will target offenders on protection, including sex offenders. They will be run by multi-disciplinary teams, including prison officers. Such structured interpersonal work with offenders represents a significant development of the role of the prison officer and a new and challenging development within the prison service. These programmes will be up and running in early 1998.

I will also be publishing a discussion document on sexual offences early in the new year which will address a range of issues relating to these heinous crimes, including the possibility of establishing a register of sex offenders.

I am fully committed to developing a balanced criminal justice system. As I have already stated, we are making tremendous progress on developing the prisons system, as evidenced by the huge investment by the Government in providing more prison places and better facilities. We must also look at the non custodial side of the system. I take this opportunity to say the Government has now decided to establish an expert group to examine the Probation and Welfare Service. The group, which will be chaired by a distinguished businessman, will examine the role of that service having regard to recent and current developments, the needs of the service and its organisational status. The membership of the group will be fairly broadly based and with relevant experience. The group will make recommendations and report to me within four months.

I am aware the Probation and Welfare Service is currently operating under great pressure and that the demands being placed on it are constantly increasing. I look forward to receiving the group's report which I hope will make recommendations which will be a blueprint to guide the service into the new millennium.

In the meantime, I am pleased to say I have been able to secure adequate financial allocation in the 1998 Estimates to enable the service develop three new probation centres next year. I recently opened a new probation centre for the North Clondalkin Probation Project, which was built at a cost of approximately £700,000 and was funded by my Department. I support and welcome the development of projects such as this which represent a joint approach by the official agencies and local communities in the fight against crime.

There must also be a commitment to address the causes of crime so that, as I have already said, yesterday's mistakes become the learning experience through which we can avoid tomorrow's problems. I restate that this Government recognises the importance of examining, identifying and tackling the fundamental causes of crime. It is an essential and vital part of the Government's approach to crime.

It has long been recognised that the population of our prisons is not representative of all sections of society. Many of the people who go to prison come from the same backgrounds, the same areas and, indeed, sometimes from the same families. We must intervene in the cycle that seems to condemn certain of our citizens to a life of crime and punishment. This will not be easy. However, I can state that this Government is determined to address the causes of social exclusion, which is one of the Taoiseach's priorities. The establishment of the interdepartmental policy committee on local development is another tangible expression of the Government's sincerity in its approach to the problem of social exclusion.

I have already made known my desire to encourage a greater contribution from the community to the public debate on crime. There is a fundamental need for the community as a whole to contribute to the debate on the fight against crime. In order to encourage and facilitate that debate, I have decided to set up a crime forum early next year. What I have in mind is an open and public debate between all sectors of society — individuals and groups, including experts, from here and abroad — on the reality of crime, its causes and remedies.

My hope is that the forum will assist the community in contributing to the formation of crime policy and the establishment of a permanent community based crime council. Its deliberations will also be taken into account in the drafting of a White Paper on crime which I intend to publish in 1998. I am confident that the community in general will not only welcome this opportunity but also make good use of it to influence the criminal justice system. I will be making an announcement shortly concerning the composition of the forum and the details of venue etc.

It has been recognised that the causes of crime and disorder in many urban areas today are multifaceted, requiring a solution which not only addresses the crime aspect of the problem but also a wide range of socio-economic issues. It is not sufficient simply to rely on law enforcement to solve all problems. I am also concerned with individual communities and earlier today I approved a grant of £80,000 for the ongoing funding of the KEY Project in west Tallaght which is aimed at diverting juveniles from crime. It is the sort of measure which will improve the quality of life for those involved in the project and those living in the area where it operates. It will also show long-term benefits in the years to come as a result of keeping "at risk juveniles" on the right side of the law.

Particularly aware of the problems in inner city Dublin, I recently announced the setting up of the NICKOL — North Inner City Keeps on Learning — project and made available £50,000 to this end. This brings to 12 the number of community based, multiagency initiatives which my Department funds in areas of disadvantage in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford and Dundalk. I am determined to develop and expand the network of these schemes throughout the country.

When I took up office as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform I developed a clear strategy and a range of priority issues which I wanted to address. With the publishing of the Criminal Justice Bill I will have taken another significant step in moving that strategy forward. There are a number of other developments moving forward, such as the launch of a freephone service to assist the public in reporting crime on a confidential and reward basis and the establishment of the formal witness security programme which I have already mentioned.

I have set out in detail what this Government is doing about crime. It is an impressive, well thought out and focused programme by any standards —the implementation of zero tolerance, recruitment of more gardaí; more prison spaces to end the so-called revolving door in Irish jails; continued action against organised crime; tough legislation aimed at drug dealers; a process of public consultation through the crime forum; the setting up of a crime council; publication of a White Paper on crime and measures to tackle the causes of crime. The programme can be summed up in one word: action.

There is no substance to the Opposition motion. I am implementing an effective and cohesive crime policy. I have a clear and determined focus on tackling those who are engaged in criminal activity. That strategy is zero tolerance. I am determined that the law enforcement agencies will be properly structured, equipped and resourced to deal with crime, and that they will work with each other, and with other relevant agencies, in a cohesive manner. I am glad to have had the opportunity to rebut the misstatements, misconceptions, and, regretfully, untruths which have been perpetrated here and elsewhere by the Opposition.

(Mayo): What untruths?

Listening to the tangled and misconceived web being woven, it struck me that while I was busy this summer preparing important legislation in the fight against crime, Deputy Higgins and his colleagues were fighting the last election.

(Mayo): The Minister was like Shergar or Lord Lucan — he disappeared.

I need hardly remind the Deputy that this is a case of vox populi. The count has been done. We are here and the Deputy is sitting opposite because that was the people's verdict. I did not cancel the building of the prison in Castlerea. It was Deputy Quinn, when he was Minister for Finance.

(Mayo): We built it.

I did not fail to delist Judge Dominic Lynch as a member of the Special Criminal Court, thereby causing severe disruption and difficulty in the most sensitive court in the country.

(Mayo): What about the McCracken tribunal judgment?

It was Deputy Owen, the then Minister for Justice. I did not ignore warning after warning from the Opposition. It was the Government of which Deputy Higgins was Chief Whip, of which Deputy Quinn was Minister for Finance and of which Deputy Owen was Minister for Justice. If, at the end, certain initiatives were taken by that Administration, I humbly suggest, and there is ample evidence to support this, that they came not from that Government but from the Opposition.

(Mayo): What has happened since?

Throughout the term of office of this Government, the same vigour, commitment and enlightenment which was a feature of Fianna Fáil's role in Opposition will be brought to bear on the fight against crime from the Government benches. If people want to distract from and distort the present policy, I can do little about that. The final test of whether the strategy was or was not implemented will be this: whether the people, following the completion of the term of office of this Government, feel safer in their homes. I will end the revolving door system. I will have sufficient gardaí on the streets and sufficient technology available to them, and will continue to introduce the legislation required to tackle modern crime. Because of those measures, their answer will be a resounding yes, unlike the fate faced ultimately and ineluctably by the last Government.

Deputy Healy-Rae is the fate of this Government.

The people will ensure that the Opposition will remain where it belongs and that we will remain over here.

(Mayo): Deputy Healy-Rae is the man keeping the Government in power.

I urge the House to support the measures that I am now putting in place and I commend the amendment to the House.

One of the interesting features of the present Dáil is the effective disappearance of the Minister for Justice.

Does the Deputy read the newspapers?

Here is a Minister who for two and a half years was up and down like a jack-in-the-box telling us what we should do and what legislation we should introduce. Effectively, he has disappeared in the past four or five weeks. As the crime figures began to spiral again and many of the problems which the Minister excoriated from the Opposition benches continued to fester, he was nowhere to be found. I raised a question with the Taoiseach last week on the joyriding plague in my and Deputy Ardagh's constituency. I asked him why the Minister was not implementing the Road Traffic Act, 1994, in so far as it refers to his Department. There was no answer.

I would have liked the Minister close by yesterday when I emerged from my constituency clinic to discover my car had been broken into and valuables worth £300 taken. Like many victims of crime, I was upset and annoyed because I spent the next three hours phoning insurance companies and garages so I could be mobile to continue my work. I felt the fierce annoyance and anger of all victims of crime. Since the Minister took office, the glib rhetoric we heard when he was in Opposition has not been translated into reality. So far he has been a failure in his Ministry.

Over his two and a half years in Opposition, the Minister outlined what zero tolerance was supposed to mean. The policing style of pursuing all transgressions used by the recently re-elected Mayor of New York, Mayor Giuliani, a forthcoming Presidential candidate of the Republican Party, was to be followed. However, in a recent article in The Irish Times, Fintan O'Toole wrote of the population in New York who no-one is too bothered about because they only come out at night. So far they have been corralled in certain areas of the city.

The Minister had a glib approach to this area when he was on the Opposition benches. Since he went across the floor, as was highlighted in an interview he gave about two months ago, he has given himself complete discretion on the concept of zero tolerance, which was ill thought out and badly explained in the first place. As a poll taken before the general election showed, crime remains one of the two areas people fear the most. This has not changed. In the outrageous neglect of many areas of my city and other urban areas, the Minister's party has contributed to the crimewave and its causes, especially in the 1980s.

Our late, lamented colleague, Michael McDowell, conducted a major survey about a year ago which uncovered an explosion of crime in the southern suburbs of our city. This has not changed dramatically, if at all, since the Minister took office. The policy of my party, while I have been in public life, has been as expressed by the British Labour Party — tough on crime and the causes of crime. The Labour Party councillors on Dublin City Council and the four county councils put together a policy document in that regard six or seven years ago because we felt that, for so many years the Minister's party and it has to be said, sometimes also the conservative party on this side of the floor, Fine Gael, grossly neglected the social and economic conditions of my city.

Dissension already?

That is the new Quinn line.

Studies have shown again and again that there is a direct correlation — for example, the recent report from the research unit in the Garda college — between the victims of drug abuse and serious crime, and social deprivation and lack of educational attainment. It is a massive area which the majority in this House has refused to face over the years.

For many years, a Fianna Fáil Taoiseach represented my area. Now, once again, we have a Fianna Fáil Taoiseach who sees himself as the embodiment of many of the best qualities of Dublin, particularly the north side. Yet, at the same time, there has been an outrageous refusal to put resources into Dublin while taking a cheap way out with very poor public housing. In areas of my constituency and in the north west area of the city, I am sure Deputy Carey will agree, we took a cheap and easy way of providing public housing without the slightest concern for the development of a civic society including schools, third level colleges and all the other resources needed.

The correlation between deprivation and crime levels has been clearly demonstrated. For example, the area in which I live, Dublin 17, together with Dublin 10, has the lowest levels of third level take up. Over the years we have also had a significant crime problem. I pay tribute to the former Minister for Education, Niamh Bhreathnach, who began to target resources through the disadvantaged areas and early start programmes at children born into massive social deprivation.

As Deputy Gregory has said, the two large conservative parties in this House were content over the years to let the drug problem fester and grow. They allowed certain areas of the city to become almost no go areas for general policing up to the time of the rainbow Government. It took Veronica Guerin's murder and the movement of the drug culture into middle class estates before the bulk of conservative Deputies began to give a damn about what was happening in many parts of our city.

Over the years we have heard many pious words but getting to the root of the problem has been difficult. In the mid 1980s when the crime wave in Dublin was equally bad, there was a refusal by Fine Gael, who proposed this motion, to enter into any kind of social partnership. When we came up with community programmes on the north side of the city and sought action to deal with the scourge of joyriding, we did not get any support and neither did the trade union movement. I have always regarded so-called joyriding as a very serious crime. Only a few months ago one of my constituents was ejected through the back window of a car on Raheny Road after being attacked by a gang of four criminals in a stolen car. I pleaded with the Minister to have the Road Traffic Act, 1994 enforced. On joyriding, senior members of the Garda Síochána constantly told us we needed new legislation. However, I always felt the legislation was good enough but it was not being implemented. Now it has to be implemented and the Minister is responsible for making sure it is.

Similarly, the problem of wandering horses was not taken seriously by Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael. They were not prepared to put resources into genuine equestrian sports for young people, and it took four and a half years to put any serious legislation into place. However, it is still not being implemented. We are supposedly on the stocks, supposedly taking action, but vandalism and crime on open spaces and parks in Dublin has very often been related to people who have outrageously abused horses, and this has not been taken seriously by the conservative parties in this House.

Worst of all has been the neglect of the horrendous drug problem. Over the years Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have washed their hands of the problem because it did not affect them. It was confined to very small areas of this city, and those areas were forgotten about. My colleague, Deputy Tony Gregory, was right when he said it took action by the people themselves, the awful murder of a member of the Garda Síochána and of Veronica Guerin for this House to respond in any way. Recent research by Sergeant Éamon Keogh of the Garda Research Unit indicates that, with 66 per cent of serious crime being committed in the Dublin Metropolitan Area, the connection between drug abuse and serious crime is obvious. At any time of the day 3,000 or 4,000 heroin addicts might be seeking money for their next fix. What happened to me yesterday was possibly related to that awful reality.

I pay tribute to colleagues who brought forward legislation in recent years on the partnership front, in education and in other areas to put resources into the more deprived areas of this city and take action which was utterly essential to deal with white collar crime. Our new party leader, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, is to be congratulated for pursuing the Criminal Assets Bureau issue. It must be remembered that it was not just politicians like those in the Deputy's party who were against this. I remember being castigated two years ago by the editor of The Irish Times for my stand on hot money and dirty money. It has now become acceptable to want accountability and transparency in major financial developments in this State, but only two years ago our leading journal seemed to be bitterly opposed to it. Things have changed. Earlier today I tried to raise, by way of Priority Question, the issue of Mr. Carroll of Zoe Developments and the death of a worker on a building site in Dublin, but the Ceann Comhairle would not allow it. Such a horrendous event sometimes does not seem to attract the requisite punishment in our current political system.

The Labour Party has had a consistent view on crime over the years. We want to be tough on crime. We have supported all the legislation. I am pleased that at long last the Minister is bringing forward his Criminal Justice Bill. At the same time we have to be tough on the causes of crime because, if we are not, this problem will go on year after year and people who live in the affected areas will continue to suffer.

I refer to the rise in the rate of homicides. I asked the Minister's predecessor about this and was not happy with the response I received as I felt the Garda and Department of Justice statisticians were to some extent massaging the figures to make it look as if the incredible rise in the number of murders over the past four or five years was something else. The most disturbing aspect is the rise in the number of gangland killings and the fact that the conviction rate has been falling since the early 1990s. Many people are disturbed by the rise in the number of young women who have been murdered in deplorable circumstances. I, and other Deputies, want the Minister to take decisive action in this area.

I raised the Firearms Acts with the Taoiseach last week. Will the Minister examine this matter? People are often astonished when they realise there are so many legally held guns in Ireland. Concerns have been raised at a number of Labour Party meetings in regard to the ease with which an individual can get his or her hands on a gun, particularly those with major psychological problems.

I commend the element of the motion which calls for urgent early action on the report of the strategic management initiative on the Garda. I support Fine Gael very much in that regard. In general, the Garda has served us well over the years but resources at its disposal have often been poor. I am always struck by the correlation between the number of gardaí in Dublin, approximately 4,000, and the high rate of crime, 60 to 70 per cent, in that region. Has the Minister reflected on this since we spoke about it a number of years ago when he was in Opposition? Why is the level of manpower not increased in more problematic areas?

I commend the Garda and the outgoing Deputy Commissioner on Operation Dóchas and community policing. It has worked extraordinarily well as the Garda has devoted itself to liaising closely with community groups, youth groups, football clubs, etc. The big problem is manpower. When there is a crisis in a station, they are removed from such policing and assigned to the crisis of the day. If there is an incident in Malahide, which is in my constituency, Coolock gardaí effectively disappear. The efficiency and utilisation of the force needs to be examined. For example, most of the crime in my area occurs between 6 p.m. and 2 a.m. Should the vast bulk of manpower be deployed at that time? They probably should as the people of Dublin North-East could look after themselves between 3 a.m. and 5 p.m. Critical times, such as the early hours of darkness and closing time, need to be examined.

I welcome the continuing improvements in Garda education and the role being played by the new air wing. The new helicopter has made an impressive debut and contributed to cornering certain criminals who carried out vicious anti-social activities over recent weeks. Although worries were expressed about it, the vast bulk of citizens find the presence of the Garda in the air as well as on the ground reassuring. We want them on the streets and on motorbikes. I was struck by the number of police in New York on motorbikes and horses. Will the Minister look at this area?

I welcome the extra resources for the prison service and pay tribute to the former Minister, Deputy Owen, in that regard. We are a long way from the rehabilitative prison service required, as Deputy Shortall stated last week. When I visit Mountjoy I am amazed at the overcrowding and other problems with which Governor Lonergan has to deal. The prison is designed to cater for approximately 500 prisoners, yet between 5,000-6,000 prisoners pass through it each year.

I welcome the measures being taken to improve the prison. However, the benefits of the extra 80 places in the women's prison are overestimated as they will not improve conditions for the vast bulk of prisoners. Everyone wants prisoners who have committed assaults and serious crimes to be seen to serve their sentence. I wish to share my time with Deputy Shortall.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share