Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 16 Dec 1998

Vol. 498 No. 5

Private Members' Business. - Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act, 1996: Motion.

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

I move:

That Dáil Éireann resolves that sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act, 1996 (No. 29 of 1996), shall continue in operation for the period ending on the 31st day of December, 2000.

The resolution before the House today seeks approval for the continuation in operation of those sections of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act, 1996 which relate essentially to the detention provisions in that Act.

Section 11 of the Act provides that each of sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 would cease to be in operation at the expiry of 12 months after the date of its commencement unless a resolution has been passed by each House of the Oireachtas resolving that it shall continue in operation. The Act, including the sections which are the subject of the resolution, was brought into operation with effect from 9 September 1996. The period of operation of the sections would therefore have expired on 8 September, 1997 unless appropriate resolutions were passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas before then.

One of my first parliamentary duties on being appointed Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in June 1997 was to move a similar resolution in this House. On that occasion the Act had been in operation for just under a year. Recognising the relatively short period for which the sections had been in operation at that time, it was considered that their continuation should again be reviewable within 18 months. It was decided therefore to continue them in operation until 31 December 1998. This would allow the House an opportunity to debate the appropriateness of the sections in combating drug-related crime after a further suitable interval. On this occasion it is proposed to continue them in operation for two years, that is until 31 December 2000.

It is important that Members of this House should have the opportunity to re-examine legislative provisions such as these to determine the need to retain them as weapons in the Garda's armoury. If at any stage it becomes clear that these provisions are no longer necessary, the mechanism is there for them to lapse. I regret that time has not yet come and that we must continue to employ the detention provisions of the 1996 Act. The effort to eliminate the menace which drugs pose to our society and to end their corrosive effects has involved a concerted effort on the part of the law enforcement agencies of the State in recent years. Legislation such as the 1996 Act is only part of the answer. Other aspects hinge on Garda operations. In this regard I mention some recent initiatives, all of which have yielded positive results.

The Garda National Drugs Unit was established in 1996 with the primary function of targeting major drug traffickers. In the period January to September, 1988 Garda operations and joint operations involving the Garda and the customs authorities have yielded significant drug seizures with a value of £70 million. In addition, there have been a number of significant seizures of heroin, amphetamines, cannabis and ecstasy in the Dublin region since September.

Operation Dóchas, which began in October 1996, has as a primary objective the making of substantial inroads into the drug problem in the city through the identification of the critical areas requiring action and the development of the necessary Garda resources to implement the operation in these areas. This strategy operates in all Dublin districts and involves the deployment of in excess of 500 uniformed and plainclothes gardaí. Uniformed gardaí adopt a high profile through foot patrols and mobile patrols, and are working with local communities, through community leaders and individual families. Backup is provided by specialist mobile units and other units. This operation has already resulted in an increase in the quantity of drugs seized and an increase in the arrests of those suspected of being involved in drugs. Since the commencement of Operation Dóchas, up to June 1998, more than 21,000 arrests have been made and 10,060 persons have been charged. In addition, drugs with a value of £7 million have been seized up to 30 September 1988. To ensure its effectiveness Operation Dóchas is subject to ongoing review as are all Garda operations. It will continue operating and will be revised as circumstances indicate or require.

Operation Mainstreet was initiated in April 1997 with the purpose of targeting those persons engaging in the supply of controlled substances, particularly heroin, in city centre areas. The operation has proved to be successful combining efforts from uniformed gardaí, the Divisional Drugs Unit and using the CCTV system. This operation is ongoing and has resulted in more than 2,000 searches and more than 200 arrests, up to June 1998 and, in the period January to September 1988, seizures of £915,000 worth of controlled substances.

Operation Cleanstreet which commenced in December 1997 targets on-street heroin dealers in the Dublin area. Undercover gardaí visit areas where suspected drug dealing is taking place and when approached they buy drugs with marked money from the drug pusher. When the undercover garda moves away, uniformed gardaí arrest the drug pusher for the purpose of a drug search and take the marked money and whatever other drugs he or she has from the pusher. When the drug which was purchased has been analysed the pusher is arrested and charged. Twelve undercover gardaí, two from each DMA Garda Division, are involved in this operation, co-ordinated by the Garda National Drugs Unit. To date almost 200 arrests have been made, 101 of which have been made since 10 September 1998.

These successes are to be applauded. However, while we must not become complacent and drop our guard in the fight against drug criminality, it is only right that we should keep our response under review. In this context I emphasise that the Government accepts fully that as, well as tackling the supply side, comprehensive measures need to be taken also in relation to the demand side. In this context I remind the House that a wide range of initiatives are under way in this regard, many of which arise in the context of the Government's strategy for dealing with social exclusion issues.

To return specifically to the resolution before the House and to assist Deputies regarding the sections of the 1996 Act which are the subject of the resolution, it might be of benefit if I were to outline the contents of those sections. Section 2 deals with powers of detention and permits the detention of a person suspected of having committed a drug trafficking offence for up to a maximum of seven days. The first 48 hours of this period may be authorised by a member of the Garda Síochána of specified rank. Thereafter, authority to detain the person up to the maximum of 7 days must be obtained from a judge of the Circuit Court or a judge of the District Court. In each case the authorisation may be granted where the court is satisfied the detention is necessary for the proper investigation of the offence concerned and the investigation is being conducted diligently and expeditiously.

Section 3 involves an amendment of the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence) Act, 1990 to allow for the taking of bodily samples in the case of a person detained under the Act. Section 4 permits the rearrest of a person previously detained under section 2 who has been released without being charged. The rearrest may be made only on the authority of a judge and only in cases where new information has come to the knowledge of the Garda Síochána since the person's release. Section 5 applies certain provisions of the Criminal Justice Act, 1984 to persons detained under section 2 of the Act, so that, for example, when there are no longer reasonable grounds for suspecting a detained person of having committed an offence he or she must be released. It also covers such matters as the provision of medical attention, access to a solicitor and the destruction of records where a detained person is not prosecuted or where he or she is acquitted.

Under section 6 the Minister may make regulations providing for the attendance of an officer of customs and excise at, and the participation of such an officer in, the questioning of persons detained under the provisions of the Act. The position regarding such regulations is that work is proceeding on the preparation of regulations under the section which will be the subject of consultation with the Minister for Finance and the Garda Authorities.

Section 11 also requires the Minister to prepare a report on the operation of the sections covering the period since the previous resolution. This report is required to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas before a resolution is passed by either House and must cover the period from the date of the ending of the previous report up to a date not more than 21 days before the moving of the resolution. Such a report has already been prepared covering the period from 28 June 1997 to 30 November 1998 and was laid before both Houses last week.

The report, based on information received from the Garda Authorities, shows that the number of persons detained under section 2 during the period in question, that is, between 28 June 1997 and 30 November 1998, was 708. Of these, 281 persons were detained for a period not exceeding six hours, which is the initial period of detention permitted under section 2; 272 for a period between six hours and 24 hours; 132 for a period between 24 hours and 48 hours; 13 for a period between 48 hours and 120 hours and 10 for a period between 120 hours and 168 hours. The number of persons detained under section 2 who were released without charge was 301. A total of 407 persons were charged following detention under section 2, of whom 105 were convicted. There are 301 cases still pending before the courts and one case was withdrawn.

The Garda authorities have indicated that the provisions of the legislation have proved beneficial to the force in the investigation of drug trafficking offences. I have no doubt but that they have played their part in the fight against drug trafficking and that their continued operation is essential to the future success of that fight. I commend the resolution to the House.

Mr. Higgins

(Mayo): I support the extension of the detention provisions of the Criminal Justice (Drugs Trafficking) Act, 1996. This legislation was introduced by Deputy Owen as Minister for Justice. The Criminal Assets Bureau was established in tandem with it, as were the introduction of powers of seizure of assets. These have proven to be the most potent instruments in tackling the drugs problem head on.

The details of the procedures are clear, specific and adequate — six hours initial detention, followed by 18 hours, 24 hours, 72 hours and a further final 48 hours, a total of seven days, with the authorisation of a superintendent, a chief superintendent or the District or Circuit Courts. This time last year we were in the middle of a furore when there was considerable misinterpretation of the provisions of the legislation, on the part of the Garda and judges. I do not know how this arose as the provisions are clear. I am glad these glitches have been ironed out. The legislation is now working effectively and its detail and provisions seem to be understood by all sides.

As a result of Deputy Owen's drugs trafficking legislation and the initiative of Deputy Quinn in establishing the Criminal Assets Bureau and the attendant legislation on the seizure of assets, the major drugs barons are on the run. Their empires are in tatters and are being dismantled. They are coming before the courts, or are in jail or exile.

I welcome a number of the initiatives announced by the Minister. We acknowledge success when there is success. However, the Minister and his colleagues have failed to deal with the crucial areas of drug use and drug pushing. All the indications are, irrespective of how we trot out impressive figures, that the drug problem is of crisis proportions. Independent studies have shown that 40 per cent of Irish 15 or 16 year olds admit to having used cannabis — a level unrivalled anywhere in Europe, even in Holland. There, where there is no prosecution for soft drug usage and where cannabis can be bought openly, only 14 per cent of school children experiment with drugs.

The Lisbon based EU drugs monitoring agency has confirmed that Ireland is one of only a handful of European countries where drug abuse among school children is rampant and on the increase. The number of addicts under 25 years old undergoing treatment is more than double the EU average. The number of drug-related deaths has increased sixfold in Ireland in the past decade. Ireland also has the youngest group of drug addicts seeking treatment. Two in three of those being treated for addiction are under 25 years old, compared with an EU average of approximately 29 years old.

The report confirms the prevalence of heroin among young adult users. Heroin is the main drug of three quarters of those seeking treatment. While we laud ourselves for high profile, spectacular, multi-million pound drugs seizures — I pay special tribute, as the Minister did, to the Garda national drugs unit and Customs officers — the reality is that what is being seized is only the tip of the iceberg. Drug prices are reasonably stable and drugs are readily available. Supplies are getting through to the domestic market and also for transit to Europe.

Ireland is in the unfortunate position of being a drugs entrepot. We have been identified as such because of our vast open coastline and our poor security. What is seized is important. I acknowledge, in terms of the gross figure given by the Minister, that on the surface it is an impressive multi-million pound seizure. However, it represents only a fraction of the amount which passes through our jurisdiction.

We have also failed miserably in tackling the socio-economic factors which have contributed to the pervasive drugs culture which sadly dominates huge tracts of urban Dublin and parts of Cork and Limerick. It is also becoming a growing reality in other cities, towns and villages. The real story in Ireland now is that if one wants drugs, they are obtainable in any part of Ireland, either urban or rural.

We have failed to put education programmes in place. The constantly decreasing age threshold points clearly to the need to introduce proper programmes for sixth class in primary schools. These programmes need to be continued throughout the post-primary sector. We have failed in terms of our inability to stop children dropping out of school. We have failed to target drugs blackspots with meaningful job opportunities. We have failed to lift people's horizons or to enable them to exploit and explore their talents and abilities in a meaningful way. We have failed in terms of housing policy. We have built huge ghettos where there are no jobs, no facilities, no green areas and no hope.

The main target group must be children and education is the key. Irrespective of how much resources are needed, they must be made available to try to protect the vulnerable. We need to ensure that no matter how low a pupil-teacher ratio is required to penetrate this areas with education, the resources will be applied. We need to ensure that every child who enters primary school will exit with some qualification.

An Action Programme for the Millennium is impressive in its commitment. It recognises that drugs is one of the root causes of crime in our society. It promises an integrated philosophy of prevention, education, detoxification and rehabilitation, ultimately leading to employment and reintegration into normal society. It is worth looking at those headings. Prevention — what has happened in terms of meaningful prevention on a national scale? Education — what education programmes are in place to alert every child in every school to the reality of drugs? Drugs are now available in every town, village and townland in the country. Detoxification — the Minister knows Mountjoy is literally infested with drugs. People come out as they go in. Rehabilitation is not even worthy of mention as there is none in our prison system.

The programme sounds good — it is acknowledged that two thirds of all crime in Dublin is committed by drug addicts. However, in terms of meeting the commitments given in the programme on a multi-faceted basis, it has been a hit and miss affair. The 1996 Garda report speaks for itself. For example, one heroin addict was responsible for 147 crimes. Sixty six per cent of crimes committed in Dublin — mainly minor crimes have been committed by heroin addicts. According to the last figure published by the Garda there are 4,105 heroin addicts in Dublin and 2,800 of those are acknowledged as having been involved in burglary and crime to feed their habit.

I acknowledge initiatives such as the Minister has introduced — Operation Mainstream and Operation Clean Stream. Deputy Owen as Minister introduced operation Dóchas. We have a hang-up about pilot projects and we go from one to another. We need a comprehensive programme, an all out war on drugs, as it has the most corrosive effect on society.

Summerhill in inner city Dublin is a very good example. Deputy Gregory is far more qualified than I to speak on this. The people there have taken the bull by the horns and have dealt with the problem themselves. They have co-operated with the Garda and have proved what can be achieved through a co-operative effort involving the community leading the battle and the Garda. If it can be done with inspiration, encouragement and resources in Summerhill, it can be done elsewhere.

I welcome the measure. Detention is crucially important in dealing with the problem. However, I think we are coming at it, not from the wrong end of the market as it is necessary to fight fire with fire, but we need much more resources at the other end of the market in terms of imaginative initiatives to deal with the root causes.

Dr. Upton

I will not be opposing the motion, even if I am uncomfortable with the fact that it is still necessary to have this type of legislation on the Statute Book. The drugs problem seems to be getting worse despite an Exchequer surplus and the fact that the Irish economy is the envy of our EU counterparts. I do not believe measures such as this can stop drugs from getting onto the streets or tearing families and communities to shreds. The drugs problem needs a multi-pronged approach which looks at individual users, the communities most affected by drugs and the legal system which deals with drug pushers and barons.

The drugs problem is inexorably linked to areas of disadvantage. In Dublin alone there are 13,000 addicts, most of whom are addicted to heroin and live in the poorest areas of the city. In my constituency there are huge problems in certain areas, particularly in parts of Dolphins Barn and Inchicore. Unless there is a very targeted investment in these areas to stamp out drugs, trafficking will continue while a market exists. Some of the flat complexes in these areas are not under constant surveillance. The letting policy is far from perfect and to some extent allows drug barons to flourish. To be fair to Dublin Corporation it has considerably — many might say radically — improved the management of these areas, but there is still scope for improvement.

During last summer people living in and adjacent to Fatima Mansions were subjected to several nights of shooting during which old people living on their own and young families lived in fear. As I understand it, some of these shoot outs, or demonstrations of fire power, were the result of turf wars between certain drug pushers and drug gangs. If this activity occurred in an affluent housing estate it would have become an issue and radical action would have been taken to resolve the problem. However, because it happened where it did, the story hardly got a line in the media, never mind priority attention.

We must start treating areas of disadvantage as a priority. It is not acceptable to ignore any longer the devastation drugs are causing to communities and families living there. In an ideal society if resources were evenly spread, Ireland's drug crisis would not have reached its current level. With an unprecedented amount of money in the Exchequer it is high time we started to address the causes of addiction, namely, bad housing, poor educational facilities, people dropping out of the education system, inadequate recreational resources and inadequate and pitiable employment opportunities. Addressing these issues should be part of a package to prevent people from taking up drugs in the first place. If that level of deprivation was removed the problem would not arise in the first place, or if it did, it would be very easy to contain and manage.

We must make key changes to ensure those who have entered the world of drug addiction can abandon their habit and break the cycle of moving in and out of prison without rehabilitation. Day in day out our courts are full of drug addicts who have committed offences, including possession of drugs. Our current system of handing down prison sentences to drug addicts is not working. The drugs court system, if properly resourced, could have much more progressive outcomes, with addicts moving away from their habit and sustaining a livelihood through paid employment. For this reason I welcome the announcement by the Minister that he intends pursuing this route, but unfortunately I still await progress on the matter.

As it stands, addicts are being sentenced and most do not receive treatment while in prison. Once released their habit continues and most end up in prison again and again. Furthermore, there is an urgent need to put in place court supervised treatment programmes for addicts who end up in prison. There is an urgent need for the introduction of methadone maintenance programmes in all our major prisons where drug abuse is widespread among inmates. The drug crisis in prisons is getting worse by the day. People on methadone maintenance in the community are arriving in prison and, due to lack of access to maintenance programmes, are returning to the use of hard drugs. People in prison should be entitled to the same opportunities of management, treatment and curbing of their addiction as in their community. It is a disgrace and a crime that prison inmates have almost unlimited access to illicit drugs and at the same time have no access to a sustained methadone programme.

The majority of inmates in Mountjoy are drug addicts. In most cases the crimes they have committed are drug related. By locking up drug addicts in an institution which offers no solution to their fundamental problem of drug addiction, we are failing to address the root cause of the problem. People are leaving Mountjoy in a more drug dependent state than when they arrive. This means many are back on the street once outside, using every possible means to support their habit. Before long they end up in prison again. A comprehensive methadone maintenance programme available to all prison inmates would help to significantly reduce the number leaving prison acutely dependent on drugs.

In my area the Garda has demonstrated a capacity to deal with the problem. In some areas there has been a huge reduction in the sale and use of drugs because of concerted efforts by the Garda. This is particularly true of Fatima Mansions in the recent past. The Garda has clearly demonstrated that if it has the resources and manpower it has the capacity to bring about a significant change. This is openly acknowledged by the communities living in the area.

Some of the seizures by the Garda in the past 12 months have been very significant if not spectacular. They are very alarming as they give an indication of the quantity of drugs available. Many communities are grateful to the Garda for the efforts and progress it has made.

Those of us who go to public meetings on drugs know that Garda spokespersons do not tire of saying that Garda activity will not solve the drug problem. Good progress is made when the Garda makes a seizure or an arrest, but the addiction remains and this must be tackled as it is fundamental. The problem we are facing is truly enormous. I wish this type of legislation was not necessary and that it was not necessary to renew it. Unfortunately, it is necessary and for that reason I support it.

Mr. Gregory

I have no real difficulty supporting the motion, although I think it is noteworthy that of the 708 persons detained, only ten had to be detained for a period anyway close to the full seven days. I am not terribly sure what this indicates, but it seems to suggest that section of the legislation was not as necessary as some of us thought. I supported it when the legislation was passing through the House. I understood the reason for the annual reviews was to see how necessary the provision was. I am not happy with the analysis of the experience over the past 12 months in that respect. Because of the seriousness of it, I support the motion.

I also agree with the Minister and other speakers in their recognition of the successes of the Garda, particularly the Garda National Drugs Unit, in recent months. It is welcome to see such huge amounts of heroin being seized, one of which was valued somewhere in the region of £20 million and was found in two cars on a car ferry coming from Liverpool. It is heartening to see that type of seizure being made and the people responsible being caught.

Unfortunately, the other side to that is that for years — certainly in response to all the questions I tabled in this House — it was always put to me that if seizures were small, then that was evidence the problem was under control. While I do not have a question or reply from which to quote, I assure the House that was the constant reply I received when I tried to draw attention to what I saw as a growing problem. If that is the case and small seizures indicate the problem is under control, then the logic of that argument is that seizures of £20 million indicate the problem is out of control. It certainly indicates the potential threat heroin and the people who deal in it pose mainly to Dublin but to other parts of the country as well. In spite of these seizures and perhaps even because of them, there is clearly no place for complacency.

I agree with Deputy Upton in that the measures which will deal with the heroin problem are not police or law and order measures but are measures which will tackle social disadvantage which is the gateway to heroin. The single most disappointing aspect of my attempt to represent my community and constituency in the Dáil has been my inability to convince the Minister for Education and Science that national schools in heroin task force areas should be treated differently from national schools in other areas.

It is particularly disappointing that at a time when a drugs awareness programme is being introduced in schools throughout heroin task force areas, teachers are being taken out of those schools. In the north inner city heroin task force area, I tried to draw attention to the fact that ten national schools lost teachers simply because they are treated on a national criteria of disadvantage or need. They are not treated on the basis of the special needs these areas have in terms of a major heroin problem and appalling levels of social disadvantage.

It is probably noteworthy that it was the previous Government which designated the heroin task force areas in the first place and which made the case very strongly that these areas needed special attention. The present Government says, superficially at least, that it supports that policy but, in practice, that is not the case. In the critical vital area of education, it is definitely not the case. If I was asked what I would do to try to deal with the heroin crisis in Dublin and where I would put resources, I say without even thinking, that I would put the resources into schools, preschools and national schools, in particular, specifically in the heroin task force areas. It is a matter of extreme regret to me that despite making that case at committee, in the media and privately and publicly with the Minister, I appear to be getting nowhere. This House will get nowhere with the heroin problem if it does not tackle it in that respect.

Two years ago a commitment was made to end waiting lists for treatment, but they continue to grow. We are at a stage where people who are addicted will not go for treatment because if they do so, they will be told there is a waiting list and that it is a waste of time. There is virtually no rehabilitation after care programmes available to people who are on methadone treatment despite the fact it is accepted practice that it is an essential mechanism in getting people who are in treatment back into the community over a period of time and off drugs on a permanent basis.

The only initiatives in relation to rehabilitation and after care of which I am aware, were initiated by the community to which some Deputies referred. The community in the north inner city initiated some pilot programmes which have proved to be extremely successful but only a handful of addicted people are able to attend. The resources are clearly not going where they are needed.

Recent research has shown that people addicted to heroin are more or less equally divided between young men and women. Young women who have young children are least likely to seek treatment and only do so at a very late stage when, in many cases, they are beyond help. The reason is that there are no facilities for mothers to get treatment. These issues must be addressed.

The situation in prisons was referred to. Recently, I raised the fact that when prisoners who are on methadone maintenance in prison it is sort of a reverse situation — come out, they cannot get treatment in treatment centres for whatever bureaucratic reasons. They come out of prison and go for methadone but are refused it because they are not on the list in the particular centre. They go back on the streets buying heroin from drug dealers. That is the cycle of which the health board, the prisons, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform are aware. They all say they are trying to do something about it. It is easy to organise it, but it is not being done. I do not know why it is not being done and perhaps the Minister will tell us.

I raise an issue which I have raised on many occasions and in so doing, I pay tribute to the communities who, like the Garda and others, had a huge part to play in stemming some of the tide of the heroin upsurge in recent years. Just as effectively as the Criminal Assets Bureau, they drove the heroin dealers out of this country. Those major drug dealers are based in Amsterdam. One of them who I named in this House I will not do so on this occasion as he is a well known individual and one of the leading heroin dealers supplying this country — is based in Amsterdam and continues his trade. Others are based in Manchester, Liverpool and London. While there has been co-operation between the Garda and European police forces, particularly the police in Britain, with some recent successes, the main heroin dealers are still based in places like Amsterdam and are living lives of luxury on the misery of the many victims they have left behind. I hope the Minister, through his European contacts, will seek to redress that.

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

I thank Deputies for their contributions to the debate. It is important that measures such as those contained in the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act, 1996, be kept under review and that Members should periodically have the opportunity to receive a report on the effectiveness of the provisions and express their opinions on them. Having listened to the views expressed, it is clear that Deputies also feel it is important there should be a debate on these issues at suitable intervals. There are a number of legislative provisions on the Statute Book which have as their objective the elimination of the menace of drug trafficking. Some of these are aimed specifically at tackling supply, but demand must also be targeted with a view to its reduction. This involves an integrated approach and this has been adopted by the Government.

It is sometimes forgotten that the Government has provided £30 million under the EU facilities fund. That is the Government putting its money where its mouth is. It has endeavoured, through the Minister of State with responsibility for this area, Deputy Flood, to tackle the problem head on and has been unafraid to do so. It is a difficult problem and complex to resolve but no one can doubt that the Minister of State is trying hard. The success of Garda operations, for which I am specifically responsible, such as Operations Dóchas, Main Street and Clean Street, as well as recent successes of joint action between the Garda and the customs service in making significant drugs seizures is evidence of a determined effort to eliminate the problem.

The solution to the problem does not lie in any one area. There is a need for an integrated and multi-faceted approach and legislation is only one element of that. The success of the 1996 Act can be gauged from the report on its operation between the 28 June 1997 and 30 November 1998, which has already been laid before the House. While it may be academic, it is a fact that the 1996 Act is a close replica of legislation I introduced to the House on behalf of Fianna Fáil in Opposition. The report shows that, during the period in question, 105 people were convicted in the courts and a further 301 cases are pending. From the information contained in the report based on material provided by the Garda, it is clear that sections of the Act have been used successfully in securing convictions against people trafficking in drugs. Regrettable though such measures may be, they are necessary if we are serious about ridding ourselves of the destructive potential posed by drug traffickers. If and when the threat they pose is eliminated, the provisions of the 1996 Act will no longer be necessary and the mechanism exists for these sections to expire. Deputies must be pleased with the Proceeds of Crime Act, 1996, which I also introduced to the House from the Opposition benches and which was accepted by the Government, however grudgingly. That Act has been spectacularly successful in terms of freezing illicit assets.

Specific reference was made to the issue of drugs in prison and it cannot be denied that it is a problem. Treatment for drug addicted prisoners is currently available in all prisons as part of the general medical service available to all inmates. Any offender willing to make an effort to stop abusing drugs and who shows the necessary commitment and motivation is supported by appropriate medical intervention and therapeutic counselling. Unfortunately, many offenders refuse to grasp the opportunities provided to address their addiction. During 1997, following medical assessment, approximately 1,650 inmates in Mountjoy Prison received the standard 14 day drug detoxification programme in the prison. That is not indicative of the Government ignoring the problem in the prisons; it is the opposite. The programme is operated by the medical personnel in the prison and is aimed at weaning addicts off drugs by means of gradually reducing dosages of substitutes, such as methadone.

More intensive treatment is available at the drug treatment unit which has been in operation in Mountjoy Prison health care unit since July 1996. That unit is modelled on similar hospital-based units in the community. More than 156 inmates have been admitted to the drugs treatment unit since it opened. A number of options are available for inmates who have completed the detoxification programme in the drug treatment unit. They can continue to serve their sentence in the general prison population, they can, if considered suitable, be granted temporary release to continue treatment with an outside agency, or they may transfer to the drug free unit at the training unit adjacent to Mountjoy Prison. This unit provides a sympathetic yet closely monitored setting in which prisoners coming to terms with their addiction and who have stable drug-free status can serve out their sentences in an environment free from the temptations and risks associated with illicit drugs. The regime in the drug free unit also provides inmates with valuable opportunities in the form of a wide range of work and training related activities to assist in the rehabilitation process.

The drug treatment unit has proved to be a success. The successful completion rate of the programme during the first 12 months of operation was 98 per cent. Of the 88 patients accepted to the programme in the first year, 36 had returned to drug use at the time of the review. A review of the first two years of operation has proved that prisoners who are motivated and given an opportunity to engage in a structured detoxification and rehabilitation programme and whose environment is made drug free through strict regulation of visits will successfully stay off illicit drugs. In addition, there are weekly Narcotics Anonymous meetings in the unit. Individual counselling is also available on request from the probation service and voluntary organisations such as Anna Liffey, Coolmine Therapeutic Community and the Merchant's Quay Project, which visit the prison regularly.

A number of measures have been introduced in recent years to curtail the smuggling in and use of illegal drugs in prisons. These include video surveillance, improved visiting and searching facilities, increased vigilance by staff and urine testing. It is intended to continue efforts to reduce the level of drug abuse in the prison system and to have a medical treatment programme and a secure drug free unit in every closed institution as soon as possible and where necessary. To this end, the Department has agreed a policy on substance abuse with the Eastern Health Board. A plan is being drawn up to implement the policy. In addition to examining the feasibility of providing a drug free area in each prison and increased detoxification facilities, it is intended to consider the development of further education and training courses suitable for addicts which could be devised in conjunction with an aftercare programme.

Progress in developing the drug treatment programme and drug free areas is greatly hampered by the old problem of overcrowding in committal prisons. This obstacle will be removed as the prison building programme progresses. The opening of the new women's prison at Mountjoy, a new male remand centre at Plover Hill and a new male prison in Portlaoise in 1999 will help alleviate the problem. Deputy Gregory said that only ten people were held for a period of between 120 and 160 hours for questioning may indicate the legislation was not as necessary as some people thought. I disagree. That number would appear to be relatively low in terms of the overall number of detentions but there are a limited number of cases where such detention is required. Unfortunately one could point to instances in the past where a successful conviction might have been obtained if the period of detention had been longer. Some 132 people were detained for a period of between 24 and 48 hours.

Prior to this legislation it was not possible to do that because the Criminal Justice Act did not allow it. Only in a case where firearms explosives were used, pursuant to the Offences Against the State Act, could a person be held for a period of 48 hours. The legislation is not only desirable but necessary and it has been effective. From my perspective and that of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform the struggle against drug use will continue unabated. Where legislative provisions are deemed necessary they will be provided. Resources are provided to the Garda Síochána and every effort I can make to tackle the terrible scourge in society will continue to be made. It must be recognised that legislation and law enforcement is only one aspect of the armour required in the struggle against drugs. I have never thought otherwise.

The need for an integrated and multi-faceted approach is recognised by the Government. In this respect not only has the Government been quick to move in the legislative area and in the law enforcement area as evidenced, it has also been quick to move in the other areas and is committed to battling this problem to the end.

Question put and agreed to.