I propose to share time with the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea.
Brutal Killing in Limerick: Statements.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
This House has spent a considerable amount of time this week discussing the brutal killing of Shane Geoghegan. It is right that we should mark our horror and revulsion at the outrage that has taken place. We want to show solidarity with Shane's family and friends, and stand as one with the people of Limerick and throughout Ireland in their sense of shock and grief at what has taken place. Above all, whatever political differences divide this House, we are united in sending a clear message to the perpetrators of this evil deed and others like them that no resources will be spared in hunting them down and bringing them to justice.
The bleak events of last Sunday in Limerick highlight starkly the threat posed by members of criminal gangs. I propose to set out some of the measures the Government has taken, and will continue to take, to address this threat. I wish to make clear at the outset that the Government will rule nothing out that is reasonable and consistent with the rule of law in tackling these gangs. Deputies on all sides of the House have made specific suggestions during the course of this week and I have no doubt more will do so today. I will examine all these suggestions with an open mind. However, it does no service to anybody to pretend there is a magic solution to this type of problem which simply requires some particular action on the part of the Government. Were that the case, we would have done so long ago, as would Administrations in many other countries where problems with gangland crime are far more severe and of longer duration than in this State. This is not a counsel of despair. Rather, I seek merely to reinforce what I have said to the House before, that the fight against gangland crime will be long and must be waged relentlessly.
In the wake of the tragedy that took place at the weekend, it is difficult to talk of the successes which the men and women of the Garda Síochána have had in counteracting organised crime. However, in fairness to those who daily put their lives on the line to protect the community, it is right to point out their many successes. There were 27 murders involving a firearm in 2006, and this was reduced to 18 in 2007. This year, homicide offences have dropped by more than a half in the third quarter and by almost a half year-on-year.
Of course, these statistics represent a completely unacceptable level of killings and do nothing to detract from the awfulness of what happened at the weekend. However, as Minister with responsibility for the Garda Síochána, I would be failing in my duty were I not to recognise the improvements which the untiring work of the Garda Síochána has brought about. Through the efforts of gardaí, there are many people in prison who are paying the price for their involvement in gangland activities. If anything, the callous nature of the killing last weekend has reinforced the determination of all members of the force to pursue relentlessly for as long as it takes every person involved in organised crime. I have no doubt they will have the full support of every Member in so doing.
Section 20 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 provides for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to determine and, from time to time, revise the policing priorities of the Garda Síochána. I have finalised those priorities for 2009 and they will go to the Cabinet next week for noting. The small number of policing priorities I have set will clearly reflect the paramount importance and absolute priority of "targeting serious crime, in particular organised, gun and drug related crime".
Members will understand why I do not want to go into any detail about the intensive Garda investigation taking place into the death of Shane Geoghegan. Many lines of inquiry are being pursued and the Commissioner is keeping me regularly briefed. I spoke to him again before coming into the House. He has indicated that he has all the tools he requires to deal with the situation. The Government relies on his professional assessment of the situation, but we have made clear that we will act immediately if anything else is needed by way of resources or legislation.
I will not detain the House for long with a litany of the vast range of measures introduced in recent years to tackle the problem of serious crime. However, it is incumbent on me, in order to put the debate in context, to mention some of them. Recent years have seen a great increase in the number of gardaí. Over the course of 2008 and 2009, the attested strength of the force will have increased by 1,100. In the last year alone, there has been a 12% increase in Garda numbers in Limerick city, and a 40% increase since 2003. In the last 21 months, the number of civilians employed by the Garda Síochána has increased by 59% to 2,038, including an increase of 20% so far this year. From the start of this year to the end of 2009, the attested strength of the force will have grown by more than 1,100 to almost 14,900, an increase of 8%. More than 1 million additional rostered hours will be available next year arising from the increase in the strength of the force. These are not new initiatives to be announced but rather concrete new resources to be deployed in the fight against crime.
Operation Anvil, which was commenced in 2005 in the Dublin metropolitan region and extended nationwide during 2006, specifically targets serious and organised criminal activity. I secured a ring-fenced budget of €20 million for 2008, increasing to €21 million for 2009, despite the overall budgetary situation. The budget for the Criminal Assets Bureau, which has proved invaluable in going after those involved in gun crime, will increase by 20% next year. In the preparation of my Department's Estimates, I directed that frontline policing be given absolute priority, and that is what has been achieved. This has inevitably led to reductions in funding for some other bodies under my Department's aegis, but I make no apology for that. Funding must follow our priorities. There is no more fundamental human right to which all our citizens are equally entitled than the protection of their lives and property from those who break the law.
I can disclose to the House updated figures for Operation Anvil which I received from the Garda Commissioners yesterday. In the period up to 2 November, in the Dublin metropolitan region, Operation Anvil resulted in more than 120 arrests for murder, the seizure of 1,192 firearms, 59,235 drug searches, the seizure of 21,351 vehicles, the implementation of 102,000 checkpoints and €31.6 million worth of property recovered. Outside Dublin, 23,346 arrests were made and 983 firearms seized. These figures are a good indication of the relentless and comprehensive nature of the activities being undertaken by the Garda. We have also made an unprecedented investment in equipment and technology for the force.
Substantial changes have been made to the criminal law. While the Criminal Justice Acts 2006 and 2007 did not receive unanimous support in the House, nobody will dispute that they were a genuine attempt to take any and all legislative action open to the Government to counteract the problem of gangland crime. It is against this background that calls for further changes in the law must be viewed. I reiterate that we will take any action by legislation or otherwise open to us to tackle the problem of gangland crime. On the other hand, it would be a disservice to the people we represent to engage in legislative acts of delusion for the sake of being seen to do something. We must bear in mind the fundamental point that we simply cannot legislate away the need for evidence.
This brings me to some of the suggestions that have been made by Members opposite and by people outside the House in terms of changes we might usefully make to our laws. I emphasise that I do not in any way question the good faith of those making the suggestions. In many cases, I do not have any difficulty with the principle of what is being proposed. However, serious difficulties arise in regard to their implementation.
Calls have been made, for instance, for the greater use of the Special Criminal Court. This court can be, and has been, used in dealing with gang members charged with offences unrelated to paramilitary activity. The Director of Public Prosecutions has the power to direct that any trial take place in the Special Criminal Court where he is satisfied that the ordinary courts are insufficient to secure the effective administration of justice. It is also a matter of public record that many cases involving gang members have taken place successfully in the ordinary courts, including drugs and firearms cases. Convictions against gang members from Limerick for murder have been secured in the ordinary courts.
The use of the Special Criminal Court has also been mentioned in the context of using opinion evidence from a chief superintendent in regard to a person's participation in a gang. I do not dispute the superficial attractiveness of that proposal, but all the advice available to me is that it could bring with it insuperable problems. Leaving aside the fact that, of their nature, gangs do not have the same type of organised structures as paramilitary organisations and so membership is much more difficult to establish, the courts have already held that such opinion evidence is not conclusive and, in practice, the courts have tended to disregard such evidence if the accused denies such membership on oath — which would be bound to happen in the case of persons accused of participating in gangs. The situation is even more fraught with difficulty if such evidence were to be used in ordinary courts where there are juries because of its prejudicial effect, thus, to put it mildly, raising grave doubts about its constitutionality in terms of the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the right to a fair trial.
The Garda Commissioner has already expressed the view that the laws are adequate for the Garda to tackle the issues being confronted at present. That does not mean, of course, that either he or I have a closed mind on taking forward measured changes in the law as part of the process of keeping our general criminal law under review. That will include legislation on surveillance and DNA.
Only those brutal enough to murder Shane Geoghegan could fail to be moved by the scenes of deep and dignified grief at his funeral in Limerick yesterday. We can expect nothing we say here today to assuage that grief in any way. However, his family and friends have whatever small consolation they can take from the fact that every Member of this House, on behalf of the people we represent, is determined that his death will not be forgotten and that we will do everything we can to help prevent such tragedies happening in the future. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam.
The brutal and callous murder of Shane Geoghegan has horrified and appalled every right thinking person across the country, but especially in Limerick. Our city has had to endure several cruel and horrific incidents perpetrated by a small number of people who continue to show contempt for the value of human life. Shane's killing and the pain this has inflicted on his family, friends and sporting colleagues remind us of the wanton killing these people are prepared to perpetrate in our community.
The united and clear message we must send from this House today is that this murder, and the other crimes and violence we have seen, will be met with the full force of the law, within the law. As both the Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform have previously indicated, significant legislative proposals have been enacted with the support of the House in every effort to provide, at the request of Garda, whatever powers it deems fit. This will continue. It is essential we build on the successes the Garda has secured in its fight against crime in Limerick. The Garda has doubled and redoubled its efforts in combating the criminals. The Government and the Garda Commissioner are putting the manpower, assets, supports and resources in place on a demand-led basis.
This House cannot let the impression be given that the State is not collectively working to tackle the situation in Limerick. Significant Garda resources have been put into Limerick. In the past five years the number of gardaí in Limerick has increased by almost half. Since 2003 there have been 32 murders in Limerick, 16 of them gangland connected and 16 that were not. The gardaí have detected ten of the 16 gangland murders and 14 of the 16 non-gangland murders. This is an impressive detection rate by any yardstick. There is, and has been, 24 hours per day, seven days per week covert and overt surveillance in Limerick on a constant basis over the past number of years as part of Operation Anvil. Divisional 24-hour armed patrols, supported by the regional support unit established in September and the emergency response unit, supplement regular Garda patrols. Patrols are also augmented by the deployment of personnel from outside the division as required.
The Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform have assured the Garda Commissioner that any additional assistance needed, whether legislative or by way of resources, to deal with the Limerick criminal gangs, will be forthcoming. The Garda Síochána continues to undertake a range of investigations and operations to curb organised criminal activity in the general Limerick area, concentrating on depriving the criminals of the profits of their criminality. This includes activity by local detective units in conjunction with locally based divisional asset profilers and the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB.
Last May, the Garda Síochána carried out a variety of searches as part of Operation Platinum, following which the Criminal Assets Bureau sought a number of court orders. Notwithstanding the current economic climate there is a 20% increase in funding for CAB this year. As well as a high and unceasing level of frontline activity, community policing is a very important part of the Garda response, and such units have been increased in strength in Limerick. In addition, CCTV cameras are now working constantly in the city centre and in some of the major estates in Limerick.
The Garda Commissioner met with the investigating team in Limerick last Tuesday and has set out how the Garda will continue to deal with this threat and, specifically, with those who perpetrated the heinous murder of Shane Geoghegan. The perpetrators of this crime, and those who protect and shield them, will not prevail. The action we are taking, both through the criminal justice system and the range of social, community and educational supports we are putting in place via the regeneration programme, will succeed. We are absolutely determined that those who murdered Shane Geoghegan will be caught and put behind bars. Whatever differences we may have in this House, we can at least be united in this goal.
I wish to share time with Deputies Noonan and O'Donnell. It is with great sorrow that I stand in the House following the brutal murder of Shane Geoghegan last Sunday. I express my deepest sympathy and that of the Fine Gael Party to the Geoghegan family — his parents, Tom and Mary, his brother, Anthony, and his fiancée, Jenna Barry.
In the aftermath of Shane's murder the people of Limerick and beyond have made their voices heard. Their message is clear — they have declared that enough is enough of the terrorism visited upon their city by a handful of evil criminals, whose acts of brutality know no bounds. Today, I am reminded of the grotesque killing of Donna Cleary in March 2006. Her murder was described as a watershed and reform was promised to root out the handful of gangland criminals who are able to get away with murder. Those of us who work in the criminal justice area and who are familiar with the law know that we have a severely dysfunctional criminal justice system. However, it is not until a brutal murder takes place that the public is reminded of the serious inadequacies that hamper the prevention and detection of crime and the pursuit of justice.
I wish to make four points. The first relates to convictions. There have been 130 gangland murders in the past 11 years, but only 14 convictions. Of the 161 gun murders in the State over the past ten years there have been a mere 22 convictions. The Government has attempted to highlight the fact that of the 16 feud-related killings in the past five years, charges are due in ten of these cases and investigations are "live" in six others. In other words, not one person has been charged in the 16 gang-related murders that have taken place since 2003. It is in this context that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has decided to slash the funding for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, to such an extent that the director has said his office will not be able to function next year. Where is the deterrent to gangsters to cease killing enemies and innocents if conviction is a remote possibility? This question must be addressed by the Minister and the Taoiseach.
My second point relates to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, which requires urgent attention. The Minister said today that the law provides for trial without jury when it is considered necessary. Why is this option not used by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions in gangland cases? This is a serious matter that requires attention and answers.
The third major dysfunction that must be addressed relates to bench warrants. Following the murder of Donna Cleary, my party leader, Deputy Enda Kenny, drew attention to the fact that there had been a failure to act on two bench warrants for the arrest of her suspected killer. This revelation caused outrage and revulsion. However, two years later almost 30,000 bench warrants remain outstanding. Yesterday, in a truly bizarre development, Mr. Gerard Dundon, a leading member of a gang thought to be responsible for much of the mayhem in Limerick, turned himself in to the Garda. A bench warrant for his arrest had not been executed. How many other leading criminals are continuing to terrorise their neighbourhoods and communities while bench warrants for their arrest lie gathering dust? What is the real reason for the failure to execute bench warrants?
The fourth point relates to the Criminal Justice Act 2007 in respect of the right to silence, which both Ministers have mentioned. Inferences can be drawn from using the right to silence. A full year after the implementation of the law it was ruled on by the courts for the first time yesterday. Why did it take over a year for legislative provisions, which we were told by the former Minister, former Deputy Michael McDowell, would deal with the right to silence, to be tested in the court? Where are the ministerial regulations and when were they introduced?
The bottom line is that there is something rotten in our criminal justice system and this rot needs to be stopped before more innocent people are murdered. Shane Geoghegan's murder was an abomination. Such words as "watershed" and "turning point" are thrown around all too often in the House and outside. I submit this slaughter must be the catalyst to bring about real, lasting change. Conviction rates, bench warrants, trial without jury and the full application of the law are just four issues I highlight. The Minister and the Government will have abdicated their responsibility if they fail to act urgently on these and other issues.
Mr. Shane Geoghegan was a decent, law-abiding young man with a love of sport and he was an inspiration to his younger club members. He was both popular and respected. I wish to again sympathise with his mother Mary, his father Tom, his brother Anthony, his fianceé Jenna and his extended family.
Everyone in Limerick can name the principal gang members involved. Everyone knows that they organise the drugs trade, not only in Limerick but much further afield, that they are very well armed and financed, and move through the city with impunity. I am confident the Garda in Limerick will solve Mr. Shane Geoghegan's murder. The record of the Garda in Limerick is very good. It has solved almost all the gang murders in the city, ten out of 14 according to the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea. The total number solved is 16 cases out of 130, and so ten out of 14 solved cases is a good batting average for the Garda in Limerick. However, it is no longer sufficient for the Government to measure success in terms of the numbers of murders solved.
These people are a threat to society. The Dáil must acknowledge that threat and resolve to defeat it. We must acknowledge that known, high profile gangsters have the freedom of our cities, that this is obscene and that it must stop. The issue is no longer whether the perpetrators of a particular murder are brought to court and convicted, although that is important. The issue now is that known gang members must be arrested, charged and imprisoned for criminal activities before they get the opportunity to kill again.
When the IRA and the INLA threatened the security of the State, we acted and defeated the threat. When Ms Veronica Guerin was murdered we acted and defeated the threat. We must now act again and defeat the threat from the drug cartels which threaten the lives and well-being of our youth. The corpus of criminal legislation is not sufficient at present to convict gang members for routine criminal activity. The law must be changed and on several occasions this week I suggested changes which should be considered.
The Government intends to introduce the covert surveillance Bill, which is welcome. While information gathered by the Garda in the course of surveillance may be used to catch criminals, it cannot be used as evidence in court. I hope the proposed Bill will enable information gathered in this way to be used as evidence.
When members of the IRA refused to recognise the courts, the sworn testimony of a chief superintendent of the Garda, claiming a person was a member of the IRA, was a very effective way of putting such people in jail. When the courts gave equal weight to a statement of rebuttal by the accused the measure lost its effectiveness, as the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform stated. A similar provision regarding membership of criminal gangs, enshrined in law, has never been used to prosecute a person in the State, but a redrafted law along similar lines has potential. A redrafted law enabling a senior garda to swear that an individual was involved in the sale and distribution of drugs overcomes the difficulties of defining what constitutes a gang and confusing families with gangs, and all the attendant impossible definitions. However, if the law was changed in this way such information should be admissible as evidence, even when rebutted by the accused. I do not believe such evidence should be sufficient to convict on its own, but if corroborated by further evidence, it should be sufficient to convict. Will the Minister explore this possibility?
The House learned, following the murder of Ms Veronica Guerin, that it was possible to introduce legislation overnight which had been considered impossible until then. What had been impossible for years was made possible in just 48 hours. The Criminal Assets Bureau legislation resulted from such an instance and it is one of the most effective tools to deal with criminals. For years, the legal advice was such measures were not possible for constitutional reasons.
These events require an immediate response because we have reached a watershed and people expect a response. The procedures governing the Garda interrogation of suspects should be amended also. Gang members are instructed on how to resist questioning. At interview, they put their heads down and pretend to go sleep. It is their rest period. Longer interrogation periods should be allowed and a video recording of interrogation should be sufficient. At present there is a requirement to support the video recording by a written question and answer record of the interrogation. When a garda stops to write down the questions and answers, the flow of the interrogation ceases and the accused, well trained in these matters, has the opportunity to make another facile excuse, or not answer at all.
As always, the fight against crime must be led by the Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform of the day. I urge the Minister to introduce the necessary changes, as his predecessors have done. He should take up the challenge and defeat the threat. If the Minister does so, I have no doubt he will have the unanimous support of the Dáil.
I welcome this emergency debate. Yesterday in Limerick, I attended what was probably the saddest funeral I was ever at, and I never again want to attend another funeral like it in Limerick. This is only possible if the Government tackles head-on the criminal gangs in Limerick. Legislation, extra resources and action are necessary to enable this.
A small group of ruthless individuals are causing havoc in the city. A Garda commissioner said yesterday there were some 40 gangland criminals in custody in Ireland, which shows the depth of the problem. At the funeral yesterday, Fr. Jim Maher encapsulated the mood. He said that Shane's death would mark a turning point leading to a greater intensification of the existing efforts of so many, to short circuit the cycle of violence and confine it to history.
The intensification must take two routes, that is, extra resources and extra legislation. While we must all work together as the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea remarked, the power lies with the Government to initiate legislation and introduce it. The Opposition can agree to it but the Government must first take action.
I commend the work of the Garda Síochána in Limerick and its crime detection rate. However, there have been 32 murders in Limerick since 2003, 16 of which were gang related. This is 32 murders too many. The issue is not detection, but rather prevention. Emergency legislation is required. Recently the Government introduced emergency legislation to provide for a bank guarantee scheme. No one lost their lives in that instance, but people are losing their lives at the moment and I regard emergency legislation to deal with gangland crime as a good deal more necessary. We should be discussing legislation today.
I sought an emergency debate on gangland crime in Limerick on 9 April last. The Ceann Comhairle will remember it was granted by way of an Adjournment debate, following the death of Mr. Mark Moloney. Since then, there have been further murders including the death of Mr. Shane Geoghegan. His family are in mourning, but our job is to discuss the resources and legislation that must be introduced to ensure this never happens again. I suggested several straightforward measures in the Adjournment debate on 11 November. The Minister indicated he would address these and he has done so, but he has not provided any concrete suggestions.
I called for the appointment of a Garda commissioner in Limerick with the sole remit of leading an Operation Anvil type system to tackle gangland crime in Limerick, including 24 hour surveillance of the criminals. We must track their every movement. We must establish a specific CAB unit in Limerick. There are people involved in this work already but we seek a better resourced unit. I called on the Minister to provide a second judge for the Circuit Criminal Court to speed up the legal process. I welcome the introduction of the covert surveillance Bill and that the Special Criminal Court ruled yesterday on restrictions to the right to silence. Membership of a gang should be a criminal offence. We face a situation where people's lives are under threat on the streets of Limerick. That requires an emergency response. The Government must look at using the Special Criminal Court to ensure that these criminal gangs can be dealt with. Furthermore, I want the Government to facilitate gardaí going into court to obtain exclusion orders. I also believe we should block mobile phones in and out of Limerick Prison, because they are being used to direct operations.
We need action from the Government. I want to see the Government coming before the Dáil with emergency legislation that ensures this can be dealt with, and that the memory of Shane Geoghegan would be respected in this fashion.
I wish to share time with Deputy Jan O'Sullivan. I would like to start by extending my heart-felt condolences to the family of Shane Geoghegan. His premature death in this latest gruesome murder is an obscenity that cannot be tolerated in a civilised society. This may be the latest murder of an innocent bystander in the mayhem of gangland feuding, but it is not the first. The fact that a law-abiding citizen can be shot down in the vicinity of his own home has shocked the country.
The nature of crime has changed dramatically in this country over recent decades. Driving that change is the hugely lucrative illegal drugs trade. Drugs trafficking has led to the emergence of ruthless criminal gangs who are prepared to kill at will. We have seen murder levels not experienced since the civil war. There have been 161 gun murders in the past decade, but only 22 convictions. The other statistics are very interesting, and no doubt a solid indicator of Garda resolve, but the reality is 22 convictions from 161 gun murders. We ought to be agreed on two objectives. First, we must get the criminal gangs off our streets. Second, we must prevent a new generation of youth being manipulated into criminality. We are failing in both objectives.
The principal cause of the mayhem being acted out on our streets every single weekend is the wealth to be gained from the illegal drugs trade. Drug pushing and drugs misuse are now endemic in every city, town and village in Ireland. The criminal feuding gangs that struggle for control of turf have no regard for society or human life. While lucrative profits are to be made from supplying the demand for drugs, the crime bosses will continue to meet that demand and in the process poison thousands of young people. They are prepared to direct the use of whatever level of violence is necessary to protect their profits, and they have a high probability of getting away with it. The proof is that there have been 161 murders in the last decade and only 22 convictions.
When we are promised that no stone will be left unturned in the search to put the killers of Shane Geoghegan behind bars, all of us in this House wish that effort speedy success. However, it is somewhat to miss the point. What people want is that such crime should be prevented from taking place to the greatest extent possible. It was for this reason that last November, on behalf of the Labour Party, I published two Bills to combat serious crime. The Witness Protection Programme Bill 2007 is designed to place that programme on a full statutory basis, under proper and independent oversight. The Garda Síochána (Powers of Surveillance) Bill 2007, which has escaped the Minister's notice, would provide the Garda Síochána with appropriate powers to undertake electronic surveillance of criminal suspects. I was amazed that the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform responded to the publication of the Labour Party Bill to make admissible evidence gathered in this fashion by stating "By using bugged and intercepted conversations as evidence in prosecutions, the force ran the risk of alerting criminals to Garda investigative techniques". The ongoing slaughter in our cities and in our estates has clearly caused the Government to change its mind and I welcome that.
The fact is that modern crime needs modern responses and the Garda must be given the appropriate powers to enable them not just to detect crime and put those responsible behind bars, but also — to the greatest extent possible — prevent crime from taking place. Most people will be surprised to learn that the Garda Síochána currently has no legal powers to undertake electronic surveillance of criminal suspects, although those powers form a central part of the anti-crime armoury of most countries. The Labour Party Bill would give the force additional powers of surveillance, including aural and visual surveillance, the interception of communications, the recording of conversations without the knowledge of the parties and the surveillance of data equipment. It also includes appropriate safeguards, including a requirement that the surveillance would only be authorised in respect of serious crime by a District Court for long-term surveillance, or a garda not below the rank of chief superintendent for shorter term operations. In this respect, I welcome the statement by Garda Commissioner Fachtna Murphy at this morning's Committee of Public Accounts, when he said he would welcome the enactment of such legislation.
The Labour Party is willing to allow the Government amend our Bill if it better serves the purpose of protecting our citizens and putting the criminal gangs out of commission. The Labour Party does not approach the crisis now confronting our society in the confrontational and partisan way that the Fianna Fáil Party did when it was in Opposition. However, the very bona fides of this Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform are called into question again today, when one reads the cynically misleading explanation he gave for undermining the Human Rights Commission and for effectively destroying the core competencies of the Equality Authority. The House will recall that the Government singled out those two agencies early in the year for a merger. When the attempt at merging these two bodies, one in Dublin and one in Roscrea, had to be abandoned, the Minister drastically cut the funding to both.
The 43% cut and its decentralisation to Roscrea will effectively kill off the Equality Authority as we have known it. This has been in contemplation since September 2007, when the entire board was replaced. Whatever the vindictive motivation for the destruction of the core competencies of the Equality Authority, it is sick making to read in this morning's Irish Independent that the Minister is attempting to justify the destruction of the Equality Authority by the new claim that he is “diverting” the funding saved to “the frontline fight against crime”. This post-hoc rationalisation is even more cynical when one realises that the destruction of the Equality Authority and the constraining of the Human Rights Commission will save only buttons, since the staff must be absorbed elsewhere in the public service and the 15 staff in post in Roscrea have been recruited from outside the Equality Authority. Threadbare “make it up as you go along”post-hoc rationalisations will do nothing to assist the frontline fight against crime.
The public mood is to assent to measures in the present crisis that people would not otherwise tolerate. The frequency and viciousness of gangland feuding is a challenge to the Garda Síochána and a challenge to society itself. The first test for any Government is the protection of its citizens. People cannot feel safe in several parts of the country, either on the streets or in their homes. The tragedy that has befallen the Geoghegan family has already been the burden of families of other innocent victims. The name of Shane Geoghegan is to be added to those of Eddie Ward, Anthony Campbell, Donna Cleary, Darren Coughlan, Sean Pollard and Brian Fitzgerald — all earlier victims of the drug barons who run the criminal gangs. A couple of weeks ago in Tallaght, a young man with no connection to or involvement with criminality, as attested to publicly by the Garda, was shot in the face in his own home at 6.30 a.m. and is still fighting for his life.
This cannot go on. There must come a tipping point where the State asserts its democratic mandate and asserts decent values. I hope the shocking murder of Shane Geoghegan will be such a tipping point. The people are saying that enough is enough. It is the Government's duty to put the gangs out of business. It is the Government's task to respond to new community-led initiatives to reduce the demand for drugs. It is the Government's responsibility to provide adequate policing which is appropriately resourced and equipped. In the most recent figures he has given to me, the Minister reveals that he has allocated 552 gardaí to Limerick — every single one of them is apparently needed — but only 248 to Tallaght, an urban area of similar population and no less complex in terms of policing requirements.
Tragically, more gardaí could not save Shane Geoghegan, but too few gardaí elsewhere invite repetition of the casual killings now all too commonplace.
The title of this debate is stark: statements on the killing of Shane Geoghegan. I do not think anybody who knew Shane Geoghegan could have expected that he would feature as the centre of a Dáil debate, but sadly he has. He was killed despite the fact he was going about his ordinary business. He was not known to the gardaí, which is a phrase used frequently concerning some people who are killed. Shane was an ordinary decent citizen and he is sadly mourned by his mother Mary, father Tom, brother Anthony, girlfriend Jenna and his many relations and friends, including his clubmates in Garryowen rugby club. I wish to extend my sympathy to all of those people. I attended his funeral yesterday and the words on everybody's lips were "Please do something". I ask the Minister to do something. The House is united in asking that something should be done to protect all the other citizens who could have been Shane Geoghegan in that situation going about their business. The gardaí know who the perpetrators are, they know what they have done and what they are doing. People want us to do whatever is necessary to smash these gangs, take away their power and put them behind bars where they belong.
Many suggestions have been made by the Government and Opposition, but whatever the problems are they need to be solved. Is it the case, as Deputy Charles Flanagan suggested, that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions does not have enough money? If that is the reason why the Central Criminal Court is not used more often in such cases, although I do not know if that is so, then let us find the money needed for the DPP's office.
It is the Special Criminal Court.
Let us find the will to introduce the surveillance legislation quickly, rather than sometime next year, which seems to be the suggestion. Last year, Deputy Rabbitte published legislation which the Minister could use now. We offer it to him freely, but we cannot wait any longer for such legislation. If the Garda Síochána can use camera evidence in court, surely that will be effective in putting these criminals away.
Other measures could be taken also. For example, it has been suggested that the Criminal Assets Bureau needs more resources. Perhaps it should be able to go after assets that are less than the minimum value currently stipulated in the legislation. I am told that guys roll up to the labour exchange in 4x4 cars. If that is the case, we should put resources into the Criminal Assets Bureau to go after them by hitting their pockets. We must pursue them in whatever way we can.
The drug problem is about supply and demand. These guys are making a lot of money, which is why they are guarding their power. That is also why they are able to protect themselves but, sadly, we are unable to protect people like Shane Geoghegan. Many heroin addicts on the streets of Limerick and other cities want to get off drugs, yet the gangs will do anything to keep them on drugs, including dropping free drugs through their letter-boxes. Many people work for these gangs to feed the habits of addicts. The Minister should therefore address the demand side of the issue also. He should ensure that if young addicts require detox treatment they will be catered for. They should be able to get the urgent treatment they need immediately. There are very good services in various areas that help addicts who are coming off drugs. To my knowledge, however, there is an absence of an immediate service to cater for drug users who have decided they want to quit. People are addressing this issue at the moment in Limerick and I urge that that side of the problem be dealt with also.
The overall message that must emanate from this House is that we are determined to treat this matter with urgency. I am not sure that sense of urgency is evident in everyone on the Government side, although it is among those who represent the Limerick area because they know what it is like.
Every measure that can be taken should be taken. We must ensure, as my colleague Deputy Rabbitte said, that this is a tipping point. No family should ever again have to go through what the Geoghegan family is going through this week and will have to go through for the rest of their lives.
Ba mhaith liom, mar aon le gach duine sa Teach, mo chomhbhrón a chású le clann agus cairde Shane Geoghegan. Ba mhaith liom an deis a úsáid freisin chun mo chomhbhrón a chású le clanna Donna Cleary, Anthony Campbell, Brian Fitzgerald, Seán Poland, Darren Coughlan, Eddie Ward agus na daoine neamhurchóideacha eile a maraíodh go brúidiúlach nó a gortaíodh go dona in ionsaithe le blianta beaga anuas, in ionsaithe na gangland thugs a luaigh cainteoirí romham.
As a society we owe it to these victims not only to deliver justice in their individual cases, but also to do everything in our power to prevent further barbaric killings, such as those witnessed last week. The Government must waste no time in deploying every available resource to catch and prosecute Shane Geoghegan's killer. The community in Limerick and throughout the State has had enough of these gangs operating with impunity. On many occasions in this Chamber I have called on the Government to usher in a new phase in the fight against serious crime, particularly drug-related crime. Such a phase would see the Garda Síochána properly equipped and resourced to meet the challenge. This phase would take gardaí out from behind their desks and onto the streets. It would target the drugs crisis, which is the main cause of gangland crime. Those involved in so-called recreational drug use are culpable in the death of Shane Geoghegan. That is a message for all of society.
I wish to outline a range of practical and effective measures which, if introduced, could significantly help to tackle gangland crime. For far too long, Governments have got away with duping the nation into believing that they are responding to crime. The modus operandi of previous Governments has been to announce often unnecessary legislative proposals every time the crime situation puts them under public and media pressure. The bulk of this legislation has either simply restated existing offences under common law or introduced provisions that have not been employed because they are simply unworkable. It is time to break with tradition and take practical action instead.
Beginning with Limerick and then expanding to the situation nationwide, I wish to outline a series of steps that would significantly boost the ability of An Garda Síochána and the DPP successfully to investigate, prosecute and convict the perpetrators of serious gangland crime, in addition to reducing violent crime in our society. Thankfully, in the wake of the latest atrocity, the Taoiseach and Garda Commissioner have agreed with Sinn Féin that, in the main, sufficient legislation exists. What is sorely needed is the incriminating information that may be known to family members or associates of those involved in the killing of Shane Geoghegan and/or known to members of the wider community. That would lead to a conviction and therefore the prevention of future gangland murders.
Many good people in Limerick, and elsewhere, understandably fear reporting serious criminals to the Garda Síochána. In Limerick, and in my area, one factor contributing to this fear of reporting is the real prospect that one's name might be heard by criminals who use radio scanners to listen to Garda communications. The use of scanners in Limerick has become so prevalent that the Garda radio frequency has become known as radio ga ga. The introduction of secure digital radio for gardaí in Limerick would address this small problem. Secure digital radio is to be rolled out in the Dublin metropolitan region early in 2009. Limerick is not scheduled to receive this new technology, which is a good crime-fighting measure, until 2010, at the earliest. This is not acceptable given that serious crime in Limerick is at least on a par with serious crime in pockets of the capital. The roll-out of secure digital radio to Limerick must be brought forward in line with Dublin.
Another measure that has been rolled out in Dublin already, but which Limerick has been left waiting for, is the "dial to stop drug dealing" initiative, the confidential non-Garda telephone line. In the case of a Dublin district, the Garda confirmed yesterday that of 450 calls received since the new telephone line was highlighted, a total of 141 informative reports were generated, which led to a significant number of arrests and a major drugs seizure. This inexpensive, hugely beneficial initiative could be rolled out in Limerick almost instantaneously. The telephone line was first successfully piloted in Blanchardstown in 2006 and I have since called for it to be rolled out across the country. Why are Limerick and my area, one of the areas hardest hit by gangland feuding, still waiting for it?
The focus of many politicians and commentators this week has been on the witness protection programme. While this programme has shown its importance, its scope is limited. The programme focuses on criminals turned informants but what protections are there for the good people of Limerick, and elsewhere, whose testimony may be needed to secure convictions? What practical steps are being undertaken to assure the safety and allay the fears of these good people? What is being done at a practical level to address intimidation or the equally damaging prospect of it? What progress has been made to protect witnesses in the context of identity parades? Simple steps have not been taken in this regard. Where are the two-way mirrors? What has been done to ensure that witnesses no longer find themselves using the same transport to court as accused persons? This matter was highlighted some years ago in a committee meeting.
I welcome the impending completion of the new criminal courts complex in Dublin but what is being done in Circuit Courts elsewhere? I know progress has been made on refurbishments but are there separate entrances, rest rooms and waiting areas for witnesses and accused persons' families and supporters? What protections are there during the pre-trial and post-trial period? Practical supports and effective protections must be introduced if good people are to engage confidently with the justice system, as we so desperately need them to.
To reiterate, I believe at this time the solution to gangland crime must be more resource-based than legislation-based. Despite the fact that we are in the grips of a recession, measures can be taken to deploy gardaí more effectively and efficiently within current funding provisions. The submission made by my party to the Garda policing plan for 2009 highlights the potential of prioritising policing missions and redirecting resources to match those priorities. The 2007 report of the Garda inspectorate deemed civilianisation is "the quickest and most effective means of putting extra trained gardaí on the streets". State-wide, civilian support staff make up approximately 17.5% of the staff of the Garda Síochána. I do not know the percentage in Limerick but I would imagine that it is in keeping with the national figure. By contrast, civilian staff levels in the police forces of England, Wales, Scotland, the United States and Sweden have risen to between 30% and 40%. This is what we must reach if we are to have properly trained crime fighters on the streets, rather than sitting behind desks dealing with dog licences and the like. The Garda should expedite a further extended process of civilianisation of administrative tasks. Much of the Garda traffic corps' duties could also be targeted in this way as this would free up fully trained gardaí to tackle the likes of the horrific crime we saw last week.
The Garda inspectorate is currently undertaking a study on the allocation of Garda resources. I hope this study will have far-reaching implications for policing in Ireland from 2009 onwards. Its findings must be afforded the appropriate urgency by the Government and the Garda Commissioner.
As I have said so many times before, gangland, guns and drugs go hand in hand. From a long-term perspective, the only sustainable solution to gangland crime will be one that properly and holistically responds to the national drugs crisis. This must entail well resourced preventative measures, treatment and rehabilitation opportunities, informed by and funded through a complete network of local drug task forces. My local drug task force, of which I am a member, has been operating for ten years, yet Limerick does not have one. From a law enforcement perspective, supply and demand reduction must also be a priority of the Garda Síochána. Resources and manpower for the Garda drugs units must be at least doubled and the frequent diversion of drugs unit members into other areas of policing must end.
More sniffer dog teams must be made available to the Garda Síochána. At the end of 2007, the Garda Síochána had just six dogs skilled in drugs and firearms residue detection. Gardaí must often rely on assistance from customs' detector dogs. However, the primary responsibility of those dogs is to detect drugs as they enter the State through ports and airports. The Garda would welcome dogs to work on intelligence-led seizures and raids, seeking hidden drugs that have entered the State. However, the scarcity of dogs means that it is rarely possible to deploy them on foot of more general objectives. For example, in other jurisdictions sniffer dogs accompany police officers on patrols of entertainment zones to assist in the detection of drugs on persons and to act as a deterrent to drug use. The number of sniffer dog and handler teams skilled in the detection of drugs and firearms should be increased in order that they will be available to every Garda division to undertake valuable demand and supply reduction work, including, but not limited to, intelligence-led operations.
The profits to be made from organised crime, in particular drugs, must be visibly eliminated and the work of the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB, is essential in this regard. It is vital that the activities of CAB are squarely focused on the proceeds of organised crime. The political exploitation of CAB must stop and cases that would be more appropriately dealt with by Revenue alone must be left to that agency. Steps must be taken to speed up the impact of CAB. A case that commenced in 1997, involving an order for €3.3 million, was concluded in the Supreme Court this week. That case took 11 years. Delays must be reduced and we need to get to the point where criminals, and the community, are made to see that crime does not pay because the State will promptly confiscate the proceeds. There must be a real and visible return to communities. Moneys confiscated by the CAB should be ring-fenced as additional funding for the communities worst affected by the drugs crisis. It would send a very powerful message if the Minister took this on board.
There is justifiable public anger at the number of crimes being committed while on bail. Lengthy delays in the justice system are a central problem. Resourcing the justice system, including the courts, the DPP and free legal aid so that justice can be administered promptly, would put the Judiciary in a better position to make the most appropriate decision on bail applications. Unfortunately, the Government is moving in the wrong direction resource-wise. The Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr. James Hamilton, has publicly confirmed that the 3% cut to the budget of his office will mean that the number of prosecutions it can undertake will be reduced. This will likely result in more delays and more crimes being committed while people are on bail.
I urge the Minister to listen to the practical points I have made — I have other points to make, which I will raise on other occasions. We can take practical steps and have a real effect on crime in our society, in particular drugs crime, which is fuelling gangland killings.
I will now take questions. We will proceed on the same basis as if it were ministerial question time.
I put it to the Minister that his principal response to the weekend atrocity was to have a meeting convened between himself, the Taoiseach — his boss — and the Garda Commissioner, after which all three parties said it was more or less business as usual and that there was no need for extra resources, a change in the law or any emergency action. This seemed to be the consistent Government response undertaken by his predecessors — a meeting and no further action.
With regard to the meeting, did the Minister discuss with the Garda Commissioner and the Taoiseach the consequences of the cut in the budget of the DPP that led to an unprecedented public appearance by the DPP in which he stated it would be impossible for his office to deal with State prosecutions in the manner in which he would like? Did he discuss with the Garda Commissioner and the Taoiseach that the intake of Garda trainees will be significantly cut from this month, giving rise to a situation where what the Minister has said in respect of Garda numbers is in the past and that from next year gardaí coming out of Templemore will be doing so in far lower numbers than has been the case because of a budgetary cutback? Would he agree that budgetary cutbacks will impact severely on the fight against crime at a time when resources were never more needed in the war against the drug barons?
I thank all the Members opposite for their comments. As I said earlier, I am open to all reasonable suggestions in regard to changes, particularly on legislation. While I do not believe it is an occasion to be political or to score political points in regard to statements about the awful death of Shane Geoghegan, at the same time I must respond to political accusations across the House. I do so——-
This happens to be the Dáil Chamber.
Deputy Flanagan asked a question in regard to our response. We brought forward the normal security meeting which I would have on a constant basis with the Garda Commissioner and included the Taoiseach so that he could be totally apprised of the situation.
The Deputy referred to the budget cut in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. When the DPP made his statement publicly, he had not raised the matter with me and I checked with my Department and found that at no stage had he raised it with the Department. It must be said that the Department to which he has reference — he made this point in the radio interview — is the Department of Finance. The Taoiseach answered validly on the issue regarding the 3% cut across the public sector and regarding the DPP. At no stage has the office of the DPP indicated to us or to the Garda Síochána that he is any difficulty or that there were any delays in regard to the processing of cases. There has been, particularly in the past three years, an increase in resources for the DPP.
With regard to the Garda cut, Deputy Rabbitte referred earlier to a post hoc explanation or justification for a cut in other areas of the Department. I want to answer Deputy Flanagan in this respect. There was a 1.7% overall cut in my Department, and that was the average in all Departments apart from the three main Departments of Health and Children, Education and Science and Social and Family Affairs, which had a gain, albeit lower than normal. There was a cut of approximately 1.7% to 1.8% in my Department. One week before the budget, Fine Gael in its document called for the existing departmental budgets for 2009 to be frozen at 2008 levels and, on top of that, a 3% cut, which in effect would have been a 5.5% cut in my Department. The actual cut was 1.7%.
Given the fact there was a cut in my Department, I was faced with the situation where I had to dedicate resources to areas where I considered there was a priority. It was not a post hoc decision or justification. I made a decision with regard to the softer elements of my Department which were not tackling crime, putting more gardaí on the street, keeping prisoners in prison or dealing with the prison issue, and I told my officials to concentrate on those key issues.
I must accept there has been a dramatic cut across the Department, not just with regard to human rights, equality and issues to do with gender equality. I did this because I made tackling crime the priority in my Department. The Garda Commissioner is taking a cut of €1.8 million in overtime this year and up to €80 million next year. I insisted to him that Operation Anvil would continue, with €20 million plus €1 million extra, and that this be ring-fenced in the overtime in order to ensure it would not be used for any overtime issue other than tackling organised crime and Operation Anvil.
Although I made these decisions three months ago, in the run-up to the budget I read in the newspapers that the Minister was to order a freeze in recruitment. I did not order a freeze in recruitment. Given that I was dedicating resources to extra gardaí on the street, as we all accept that the people want to see more gardaí on the street, between now and the end of 2009 there will be an increase in the number of gardaí on the street from 14,200 to 14,900, and 400 new gardaí will be taken on in addition to the 1,100 who are currently in training. This is so we do not reverse the very dramatic increase in garda numbers that has taken place. There was such a dramatic increase in the last two years that Templemore, which had been hugely built up, that it was not even big enough to take the numbers that were going through. The Government must be given some credit in that it has put in the resources.
With regard to Limerick specifically, apart from Dublin there are probably more gardaí per head of population in Limerick than elsewhere. There has been 24-hour covert and overt surveillance. The ERU has been present there on a constant basis. The new regional support unit, which was one of the first Garda units on the scene of the tragic death of Shane Geoghegan last week, is dedicated to the southern region, which includes Limerick. There is a myriad of other initiatives in the areas of juvenile justice liaison and youth services for Limerick. CCTV cameras are in the city centre and in all of the major estates——
They are not in all estates.
——such as Our Lady of Lourdes, St. Munchin's and Moyross.
They are not in many areas. The Minister, Deputy Willie O'Dea, should have informed the Minister about that.
CCTV cameras are already working as we speak. There are 29 mounted gardaí on bicycles. Huge resources have been put into Limerick, where there is significant difficulty. Deputy Ó Snodaigh's suggestion about digital radio is a matter for An Garda Síochána but I will raise it with its management.
The Government has introduced significant criminal justice legislation in the past two years. Deputy Noonan raised the issue about longer interrogation periods. Until July 2007, the period for detention was 12 to 24 hours. The House, through legislation, increased it to seven days for serious offences such as gangland murders, firearms possession and kidnapping. Deputy Rabbitte made a fine speech and all that but he must remember that his party objected to the seven-day period for detention, claiming it was excessive. We must all agree on the measures that we take.
Deputy Noonan's suggestion regarding the role of a chief superintendent's evidence is valid.
The Minister's time has expired.
However, we examined the suggestion in the 2007 legislation and it was found to be unconstitutional.
It was not found to be unconstitutional. It was never tested.
I must call on Deputy Rabbitte.
The strong advice is that, particularly in the context of a jury trial, a superintendent under cross-examination may not give adverse evidence against an accused who is still innocent until proven guilty.
The record should be corrected. That suggestion was not found to be unconstitutional.
The programme for Government contains a large number of proposals the Government would implement to deal with drugs, organised crime, sentencing policy and court procedure. For example, in the drugs areas it would increase search powers for the Garda and had nine different proposals for organised crime. Another example of a practical proposal on drugs states the Government would "require all mobile phones to be registered with name, address and proof of identity in order to stop drug-pushers using untraceable, unregistered phones". We know for every kind of serious criminality, pay-as-you-go mobile telephones are used for a day and then thrown away to thwart the police.
Why is the Minister not dealing with these and the other 27 proposals, none of which has yet been implemented? For example, another proposal states the Government will "introduce means to ensure that criminal trials can no longer be collapsed because of legal technicalities. This will include legislation...". When all is said and done after the meetings between the Taoiseach, the Garda Commissioner and all the rest, what practical changes and legislation does the Minister propose to make after the tragic murder of Shane Geoghegan in Limerick? Will he accept the Labour Party Bill on covert surveillance? His statement was not clear as to whether he is introducing such legislation. If he is, when will he do so?
The registration of mobile telephones is a difficult issue which I know from my time as Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. An important trial in combating mobile telephones in prisons took place at the Midlands Prison which has been successful. Recently on a visit to a prison in Italy, its authorities told me they were fascinated by the technology we will use.
The Minister is exaggerating.
The problem with blocking mobile telephone reception in prisons such as Mountjoy and Portlaoise is they have two hospitals adjacent to them. The latest technology used in the midlands has been successful and will be rolled out.
I asked about the registration of mobile telephones.
I accept that and it is a very difficult issue. What is to be done with existing mobile telephones?
That was a red herring.
The covert surveillance legislation will be brought to the Government next week. Deputy Rabbitte did introduce a Bill in this area but it had major flaws in it, particularly regarding its oversight provisions. His Bill proposed that the oversight of covert surveillance by the Garda Síochána would be a function of the Garda Ombudsman's office. That is objectionable as they are the very people supervising the Garda but, according to the Deputy's Bill, would also have oversight in covert surveillance matters.
The role of the Garda Ombudsman is not to supervise the Garda. Its function is to oversee complaints about the Garda.
I must allow the Minister to finish, as Deputy Rabbitte well knows.
Yes, its function is oversee complaints about the Garda. The Government's Bill will follow the same principle of judicial oversight as set out in the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act 1993. The Deputy's Bill proposed the Garda could not operate covert surveillance, which it is doing at the moment albeit on a non-statutory basis, until it was subject to the Freedom of Information Acts. If this were introduced into covert surveillance, particularly when we are trying to give the Garda all the powers we can within reasonableness——
That is not true. The Minister is misrepresenting my Bill.
It is true.
If that were the case, all the Minister had to do was amend our legislation.
While I accept putting covert surveillance on a statutory footing, the reality is that it has existed for some time. It may also be the case that the Garda does not want to bring covert surveillance in particular instances into evidence in the courts.
The Deputy may or may not know that as a result of the victims initiative I announced some months ago, I will soon be bringing to the Government legislation to assist victim impact statements and doing away with the double jeopardy rule, a substantial change to the legal process. I hope I get support from both sides of the House on this.
Another change will be in the practice where legal defence teams have been taking prosecution teams by surprise by bringing in evidence at the last minute. It will require them in future to give good notice of such evidence. The Government is always keeping criminal law under review. I do not say the Government has the surplus of knowledge in this area. Any reasonable suggestions from the other side of the House that will fly past the Attorney General will be accepted by us.
When will the covert surveillance Bill be published?
I have agreed the heads of the Bill and it will go to the Government next week. It will be introduced as soon as possible thereafter.
On a point of order, I propose questions are banked so that every Member will get a chance to contribute.
I call on Deputy Ó Snodaigh.
The Minister has already addressed the Tetra digital radio system. Is it possible to bring forward the roll-out of the dedicated non-Garda confidential telephone line to stop drug dealing? Will the Minister examine setting up a local drugs taskforce specifically for Limerick rather than the existing regional set-up which is not adequate? Will he ask the Garda Commissioner to establish more sniffer dog teams? Will he look again at ring-fencing the moneys CAB confiscates? Will he examine the DPP's budget to ensure prosecutions happen quicker and people are not on bail for a long time which often results in them committing further offences?
What progress has been made with regard to practical protections for witnesses in the court environment? As I have mentioned, witnesses and victims must often share the same waiting rooms or are forced into close proximity during a trial. I am not speaking necessarily of intimidation, but such circumstances make people uncomfortable and discourage them from becoming involved in the process.
With regard to the drugs task forces, ultimately the division of resources in the Garda Síochána is a matter for the Garda Commissioner, but I will raise with him the issues mentioned by the Deputy. There is a programme to increase the number of sniffer dog teams for drug enforcement duties. Deputy O'Sullivan mentioned the amounts of money involved in confiscation of assets by the CAB. The threshold operated by the CAB is €13,000, which is a reasonable amount of money but which means it is pursuing medium to high-level criminals.
Some of these people are on social welfare.
The budget of the Director of Public Prosecutions has been dramatically increased over the last number of years. I am not aware of any delays or difficulties other than the normal legal delays. With regard to practical steps for victims, I refer the Deputy to what I said a number of months ago about the Justice for Victims initiative. I am accepting many of the recommendations in the report of the group headed by Gerard Hogan. This report is very substantial and I suggest Members read it. It refers to achieving a balance in the criminal law system with the aim of assisting victims. It is to the credit of this House that as a result of a change in the law in 2007 — although some people abstained and had difficulties with what, in a democracy, could be said to constitute draconian legislation — a very successful conviction was obtained in which a serious criminal was given ten years even though 11 witnesses who made statements in writing at the time of the event recanted their statements or refused to give evidence in court. The judge, because of the change in the law, was able to ignore their change of evidence or their refusal to give evidence in court and to take the written statements into account. He convicted the person, who got ten years and is currently behind bars. Thus, we have taken practical steps in this regard.
A drug strategy is being prepared for 2009-12 and there will be provision for continuing treatment and prevention as well as enforcement. Deputy O'Sullivan raised the issue of treatment for people on drugs. Approximately 8,500 people are currently availing of methadone and other services in this country. There is a substantial response to the difficulties people have. It is incumbent on this House——
It is more than that.
——to send a strong message, particularly to the wider community.
We need to get to the cutting edge of it. We need to use it.
While my Department and the Garda Síochána are homing in on supply, the reality is that there is also a demand. It is incumbent on us, if we are to do any justice to Shane Geoghegan, to remind the people we represent that when they take cocaine, heroin or whatever, they are feeding the crime gangs — those people who are bringing about the awful deaths of Shane Geoghegan and others.
The Minister's responses are most unsatisfactory. He stated in his speech that the policing priorities for An Garda Síochána had been finalised for 2009. Has he included in that the provision of an assistant Garda commissioner to Limerick with specific responsibility for tackling gangland crime? He spoke about the emergency response unit. That is great, but it is not working 24 hours a day, which is the level of response now required in Limerick. Will he be providing for a properly resourced CAB in Limerick? When will he introduce the blocking of mobile phones in Limerick Prison? He spoke about doing this in Portlaoise but no date was given. Can I take it from what the Minister has said that he is unwilling to legislate specifically to make membership of a criminal gang a criminal offence?
That provision is already there.
That provision relates to involvement, not membership.
It is already there.
No, it is for involvement rather than for being a member.
We are taking Deputy McGrath now.
How many prosecutions have there been? How many convictions?
I will give the Deputy those figures too.
We have very little time.
The answer is zero.
I will give that figure too.
I know it. It is zero.
We can have a chat about it afterwards.
I wish to express my deepest sympathy with the family of Shane Geoghegan and all his friends. What has happened is a nightmare beyond comprehension.
Does the Minister agree that prevention must be the first priority in the fight against organised crime? It is too late when the innocents are slaughtered. I ask the Minister to develop and support projects such as Operation Anvil and target the small group of ruthless individuals. Targeting by direct policing, along with prevention, is the way forward and should be the first priority in any crime strategy. I also urge the Minister to target the wealthy individuals, and sometimes professional people, who are using drugs such as cocaine. They are part of the market and they are feeding and fuelling these gun crimes. I ask the Minister to make this a priority in his effort to combat gangland killings.
Finally, I ask the Minister to ensure there is investment in the most disadvantaged areas of the country and that there is early intervention to save dysfunctional children who are living with violent families fuelled by alcohol and cocaine. We cannot expect a four-year-old child who lives in such an environment to grow up into a peace-loving person at 15 or 16. I urge the Minister to use his resources within the Department to assist early intervention projects.
Deputy O'Donnell raised a number of issues earlier this week, some of which I had an opportunity to answer in the Seanad yesterday. The Criminal Justice Act 2006 specified new offences of membership of an organised criminal gang, carrying a penalty of five years, and committing an offence for a criminal gang, which carries a penalty of ten years. To answer Deputy Flanagan, who questioned whether proceedings had been brought, there have been a number of proceedings relating to conspiracy to commit a crime, Criminal Assets Bureau offences and criminal organisation offences or organised crime.
How many?
There is some difficulty in finding exact figures under the system.
It is zero.
However, we estimate that 23 proceedings were taken in 2006, 54 in 2007 and 10 in 2008.
It is unworkable.
The number of convictions for these offences was six in 2006 and 15 in 2007.
What about the assistant Garda commissioner?
I asked the Garda Commissioner about this. Ultimately it is a matter for him to decide and he is adamant that he has a proper management set-up in Limerick. The Deputy asked me about a branch of the CAB for Limerick. Already there are a number of CAB profilers in Limerick——
There are not enough resources.
Representatives of the CAB are always in Limerick, I can assure the Deputy.
There are not enough on the ground. I know there are not enough people involved.
They are concentrating on Limerick. When we were discussing the annual report of the CAB in the Seanad, I gave some figures in that respect.
It is intended as soon as possible to roll out the successful system for blocking mobile phones. It has only been a success in the last while. It will now be rolled out in other prisons, particularly in certain areas of those prisons.
When will it be introduced in Limerick Prison? The Minister has to give me a date.
I cannot answer that question offhand.
I agree wholeheartedly with the remarks of Deputy McGrath. In fairness to this House, it did bring in extremely tough legislation, particularly in 2007, and there were objections to some of the issues to which we have referred. We brought in tighter bail requirements relating to the opinion of the Chief Superintendent to refuse bail. We brought in new mandatory sentencing for repeat offenders — I am answering a question later about——
On a point of order, we have heard this before. Can we have an opportunity to ask questions?
I am answering questions in a couple of minutes.
I know.
We brought in new mandatory sentencing for repeat offenders and we restated the rules on the right to silence which, as was mentioned earlier on the other side of the House, was upheld in court just the other day. We introduced post-release monitoring orders and protection of persons orders to allow the Garda to supervise convicted persons and protect witnesses. We brought in laws to allow the use of reasonable force to take fingerprints. Again, these are extremely draconian laws in any democracy. We brought in laws to allow for indefinite retention of fingerprints. We have not done nothing.
Will the Minister mark the surveillance legislation as very urgent? Two weeks ago we were able to pass a Mental Health Bill in this House, with co-operation from the Opposition, in one afternoon. The Government will bring in legislation to remove the medical card from over 70s by 1 January. Regarding the CAB issue, some of these people are on social welfare and live in housing estates among people who cannot afford Christmas for their children, yet they have material goods that are obviously beyond their means. Will the Minister examine reducing the thresholds above which CAB can investigate?
I, too, convey my sympathy to Shane's parents, Tom and Mary Geoghegan, his brother, Anthony and his fiancée, Jenna Barry, following Shane's death. Sympathy for the family and the outrage felt about this event in the city is also felt in the county. Will the Minister ensure that the Deputy Commissioner and the new chief superintendent Gerry McMahon have whatever resources they require to deal with the situation in the city?
I assure Deputy Neville of that. In the past number of years, Limerick has been blanketed with gardaí. As I said earlier, there are more gardaí in Limerick per head of population than anywhere else in the country, except, perhaps, Dublin. The legislation on covert surveillance will be brought in as soon as possible, but it is very complex and that is probably why it has not been brought in previously. To a certain extent, it may tie the hands of gardaí when we put it in on a statutory footing. It is trying to balance the issue of privacy, which is enshrined in our Constitution, and allowing the gardaí a hand — I will not say a free hand — to fight crime. If we put it on a statutory footing, it may restrict gardaí to a certain extent in terms of what they can do. It will give gardaí no more powers than they have at present, but will put on a statutory footing their ability to go into private property, install bugging devices, use them and perhaps, if they so require, use them in evidence. From a policing point of view, gardaí are more than happy with their current ability. However, we have conventions on human rights with which we must comply and that is what the legislation will be about.
They cannot use the evidence in court.
It is not admissible evidence.
It is extremely complex legislation and we want to get it right.