Vol. 705 No. 3
6 Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Justice and Law Reform the number of juvenile liaison officers that have been appointed to date; his plans to increase the number of JLOs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13128/10]
The Deputy will be aware that it is the responsibility of the Garda Commissioner to decide on the prioritisation and allocation of resources in the Garda Síochána. The Garda Commissioner has informed me that, at present, there are 116 juvenile liaison officer, JLO, posts approved within the Garda Síochána and 111 of these are filled on a full-time basis. Five of the posts are vacant and the selection process for the new JLOs is well under way. The Commissioner has approved the appointment of seven additional JLOs each year for the past three years and a further seven posts will be added in accordance with the targets set out in the Garda Youth and Children Strategy 2009-2011. This will bring the total number of approved JLO posts to 123.
It is important to note that while these officers are specifically dedicated to this service, a significant number of other gardaí are engaged in working with young people on a regular basis. This applies, in particular, to community gardaí. The Commissioner has also pointed out that Garda personnel assigned throughout the country, together with overall policing arrangements and operational strategy, are continually monitored and reviewed. Such monitoring ensures that optimum use is made of Garda resources, and the best possible Garda service is provided to the general public. Decisions with regard to the deployment of JLOs take account of a number of factors, including the number of children referred to the diversion programme over the past three years; the number of JLOs currently employed in each division; the social background of the location under consideration; the geographical size of the area to be covered by existing JLO and demographic trends.
I am sure the Deputy will agree that the diversion programme, as operated by JLOs and the Garda office for children and youth affairs, has proven to be highly successful in diverting young persons away from crime by offering guidance and support to them and their families. The latest annual report from 2008 on the effectiveness of the diversion programme is available on the websites of the Garda Síochána and the Irish Youth Justice Service.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Will he agree there are far too few JLOs? I came across a parliamentary question from 1985 tabled by Deputy Alan Shatter to the then Minister for Justice, Deputy Michael Noonan. In his reply the then Minister stated there were 79 JLOs and that in 1982 they dealt with 4,743 offenders. We now have only 30 more JLOs but their workload is three times more than what it was in the 1980s. There are far too few JLOs, with probably only one in every county. We need more JLOs given the amount of offenders we have.
Where stands the proposal to introduce a third level qualification for JLOs? The need to establish such a qualification was identified in 2004.
It is ironic that it goes back to 1985. What has changed is the overall number of gardaí, which has increased very rapidly. In my opening comments I made reference to the fact that community gardaí also play a significant role in this area and since 2007 their number has increased by 68%. They supplement and support the work of juvenile liaison officers. While we concentrate on the figures and the numbers, it is the outcome that is the crucial reference point. The number of children detained because of juvenile offending has decreased significantly over the past five years. It is the widespread view of commentators in this area that this is attributable to the success of the Garda diversion programme and the various Garda youth diversion projects throughout the country. It is a core principle of the Children Act that detention should be used as a last resort.
We must look at all of the resources available to divert young people from crime. That includes the youth work sector, juvenile liaison officers, community gardaí and the probation service, which deals with step down. The juvenile courts have been expanded significantly and judges with specific knowledge and experience in this area have a much closer case management role. This has also helped to reduce the numbers in detention and the JLOs are able to do a more effective job. It is worth noting that while there might have been 79 JLOs in 1985, there will be 123 when the current round is completed in 2010.
In so far as it relates to young offenders, what happened to the Spent Convictions Bill?
I have a number of draft amendments on my desk to which I am trying to get. It is very active. It has passed Second Stage and it is a matter of deciding what Government amendments will be proposed on Committee Stage. We are working very hard on trying to absorb some of the comments made by Deputies Rabbitte and Charles Flanagan on Second Stage and in particular we are considering the period of time during which the spent conviction period would apply, the category of offences to be caught and all of the safeguards that the Attorney General has examined. It came from a Law Reform Commission paper and it will require some amendment but it is being worked on actively at present.
What about the third level qualification?
I cannot give that information at present and I will have to come back to the Deputy. I know many junior liaison officers are doing extra courses in places such as Maynooth outside of normal Garda training. I will get the Deputy specific figures and information on what developments have occurred with regard to the commitment made in 2004.
7 Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of gun murders that took place in 2007; the number of these that have resulted in prosecutions; the number of these that have resulted in convictions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13157/10]
8 Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of gun murders that took place in 2009; the number of these that have resulted in prosecutions; the number of these that have resulted in convictions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13149/10]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 8 together.
I am informed by the Garda authorities that in 2007 there were 18 murders involving a firearm recorded, in respect of three of which proceedings commenced. In 2009 there were 23 such murders recorded, in respect of eight of which proceedings commenced. I might add that up to 21 March this year, nine such murders have been recorded, in respect of four of which persons have been charged. No convictions have yet been recorded in respect of these murders but no significance can be attributed to that given the time period in question and the length of time which inevitably is taken for the judicial process to be completed.
It is important to emphasise that all of the cases in which proceedings have not yet been taken remain under active investigation. The detection rate for murders by its nature increases over time as Garda investigations progress. It is expected that the number of convictions obtained will also increase as Garda investigations are concluded and proceedings commenced are finalised by the courts.
I am, of course, deeply concerned about the incidence of gun murders and I deplore all such killings. All killings, regardless of the circumstances involved, are the subject of rigorous investigation by the Garda Síochána and will continue to be so. In setting the policing priorities for the Garda Síochána in 2010, I have asked the Commissioner to continue the focus of the force on serious crime and on organised crime in particular. This priority also is reflected in the Garda policing plan for this year and specific initiatives, including under Operation Anvil, have been introduced.
While the Garda Síochána has made significant progress in the investigation of a number of killings, there can be considerable difficulties for it in obtaining evidence pertaining to shootings which are the result of gangland activities from associates of a victim of a gangland killing or from gangland figures, even when they themselves are the victims of violence. It was against this background that I introduced greatly strengthened legislation in the area of gangland crime, which is being fully utilised by the Garda Síochána.
I have also introduced further significant legislative proposals, which are currently before the House, including the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill and the Criminal Procedure Bill and I will not hesitate to introduce further proposals if that becomes necessary.
Perhaps more than any other topic, this subject is a feature of questions to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. During the rushed passage through the Dáil last year of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act and the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act containing the anti-gangland measures, the Minister promised action. Regrettably however, as the Minister has admitted and accepted today, not a single person has been convicted by the criminal courts or by the non-jury courts because not a single case has been taken since last year. Whenever a gangland murder takes place, as it invariably does at weekends, the Minister's response is that he will meet the Garda Commissioner. The Minister should outline to the House, in so far as possible, what consequences arise from such meetings. Last year's response was legislation, which clearly has not worked because legislation of itself will not be sufficient. While the aforementioned legislation was going through the House, the Minister was warned that legislation of itself would not be sufficient to deal with this problem. How does he intend to deal with the regular occurrence of gangland cold-blooded gun murders in this city, eight of which already have taken place this year?
The Deputy is incorrect regarding the legislation passed by the Oireachtas in July 2009. I understand from the Garda Síochána that both the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, which pertained to the issue of gun culture and the licensing of guns and which also effected an increase in the penalties for knife crime and the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act are being actively used. As for the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act, which was the major legislation pertaining to gangland crime, the Deputy may be aware, because it has entered the public domain, that a number of significant cases have come before the Director of Public Prosecutions, who is independent and makes his decisions independently.
I note this law was contested as often as possible by outside interests. I acknowledge this was valid as people are entitled to make criticisms of legislation. In this case, a number of leading lawyers penned their name to a letter to make known their views on this legislation, albeit they were fewer in number than those lawyers who took the same action when the former Minister, Mr. McDowell, introduced a previous Bill in 2007. Obviously, the preparation of a Garda file in respect of such a matter takes a considerable amount of time. However, the Garda must be congratulated on its ability in this regard since the passage of this legislation. I know for a fact that in the run-up to the legislation, the Garda was well apprised of its possible implications and had done much preparatory work before the legislation was passed in anticipation of its passage. There were those in the House who stated that it should not pass before the summer but should be left over.
It did not make any difference.
Had it been left over, we would be far further from the use of that legislation.
That is not true at all.
This was the reason I sought its passage.
Hundreds of arrests were to have taken place in August. However, that did not happen. There was supposed to be a swoop.
Despite what Deputies Charles Flanagan or Rabbitte may have stated, at no stage did I or anyone on my behalf say anything of that same order.
The Minister and Willie were going to round them up personally.
I always say that Deputy Rabbitte is something of a court jester in this House. However, if he is supposed to be a spokesperson on justice, he must at least try to understand that when one passes legislation, one cannot simply round people up thereafter. Even the Labour Party, which opposed the legislation tooth and nail, would not wish to have people rounded up immediately after the legislation was passed.
It has not happened anyway.
I criticise Deputy Flanagan because he is familiar with the procedure and what is the reality regarding the independence of the Garda Síochána in the prosecution of cases and the putting together of files. Once Members of the Oireachtas decide on policy and on legislation, it is up to the Garda Síochána and the Director of Public Prosecutions to implement it. The Oireachtas has given the Garda Síochána the power, in particular under the 2005 legislation, to act independently of the Minister or the Government. It is up to the force to bring forward files. Thankfully, I understand it has brought forward a number of significant files to the DPP, who I understand will make decisions in due course this regard. I can put it no further.
As for resources, the Government must be given some credit for having increased the budget for Operation Anvil and for the Criminal Assets Bureau this year, when every other heading in every other Department was decreased.
I note that 800 gardaí retired last year, which is triple the number of the previous year. As the Minister referred to resources, how many of those 800 positions have been filled,?
The number of gardaí is at a record high——
That is not the question I asked. I did not ask the Minister that question.
——and stands at 14,000. Despite the retirement of a substantial number of gardaí, more gardaí are entering the force because of the Government's round of recruitment to the Garda Síochána.
Inexperienced new recruits.
How many retirees have been replaced?
The Deputy should give the Government at least some credit for increasing the level of gardaí to a record high. Similarly, the resources available to the Garda are at record high, despite the constrained financial circumstances in which the country finds itself.
The Minister has stated there were no convictions for the period he described. He cautioned Members not to read too much into that because the period is recent. However, according to the Minister's own figures, the number of gun murders for the decade subsequent to 1998 was 182, while the number of convictions was 23. Is this not a crisis in our criminal justice system that cannot be diverted by any talk of legislation or of what the Opposition did or did not do? Is it not a cause of concern that there have been 23 convictions and 182 gun murders?
The Garda does its absolute best to try to put a file together to convict people, but we live in a democracy. I speak for my party when I say that people are entitled to their innocence until they are proven guilty. It is often difficult to prove offences, particularly the commission of murder. People who might have been involved in those crimes have been convicted of other crimes and not necessarily the actual pulling of triggers.
Of course, we would like a 100% prosecution rate, but in no society will one get that level. I have full confidence in the Garda Síochána in its investigation of crimes. I must be careful in what I say, but four people have been charged and are before the courts in respect of the nine murders committed to date this year. Obviously, they are innocent until proven guilty, but the Garda has been active.
Despite what has been stated in a tongue-in-cheek fashion by people like the Deputies on the far side of the House about the most recent legislation passed by the Dáil, the legislation has helped the Garda Síochána. I hope the fruits of the legislation, in particular the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act, will be seen in the years to come.
It is not a question of anyone expecting a 100% success rate. There is not even a 20% success rate. The Minister referred to what people like myself and the Opposition say, but this Opposition has been remarkably temperate and moderate in this criminal justice environment. I am in the House long enough to remember what went on while the Minister's party was on this side of the House, a time when the situation was far less grave than it is now. Young gangsters are running around my part of Dublin shooting people because they do not like them. I accept the Minister's comments to the effect that the Garda has an extremely difficult task on hand, but it must be a matter of concern that we have secured 23 convictions over a decade in which there have been 182 gun murders.
The Minister tries to keep his fingerprints off stories planted in the media, but he and Deputy O'Dea were responsible for putting abroad the view that, if we only signed the July legislation, it would not be back from Áras an Uachtaráin before a number of leaders of the criminal fraternity would be arraigned before the juryless courts. We have not had a single such case. The Minister referred to July of this year, but he meant July of last year because we have not reached July of this year. The Act was passed last July and we are now at the end of March, but there has not been a single case. The Minister is jibing at the Opposition, but we have been remarkably responsible and temperate in our response, given what is occurring on the streets of this city, other cities and towns.
As I stated originally, even the victims of these types of crime, particularly those emanating from gangland crime, are sometimes unprepared to co-operate. This makes the conviction of those involved in crime more difficult and is one of the reasons the Government acted swiftly. It became clear to us after a number of serious events that removing the possibility and, as we were aware, the fact of witness and juror intimidation was necessary. Deputy Rabbitte's party vehemently objected to this proposal. I disagreed with the Labour Party, which was entitled to object, but the provision was necessary.
As to the issue of people running around various estates, I was accused of introducing a rough gun regime. At no stage did I claim I was doing so to tackle gangland crime, although it was suggested that the legislation was a response to gangland crime. I introduced that regime on the basis of my firm belief that people did not desire widespread gun ownership, particularly hand gun ownership.
It is the illegal guns.
I was working on the basis of the strong advice I received from every garda with whom I spoke around the country, from ordinary gardaí in stations to the highest garda in the land, to the effect that going down the road of a legalised hand gun culture would be a slippery slope.
That is a red herring.
I decided that a dual response on the basis of——
There have been no murders with legally certified guns. The Minister has made a complete hash of it.
The Minister without interruption, please.
Ask any superintendent about the firearms certificate application and he or she will tell one about how much of a shambles it is.
I assure the Deputy that——
We will discuss it next week.
Allow the Minister to continue, please.
It is not in a shambles.
It is a complete shambles.
There has been a substantial reduction in the level of gun ownership as a result. That was one response.
Sporting guns are not involved in gangland killings and the Minister knows it.
The other response related to gangland crime. Another element of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act was not only the targeting of the person who pulled the trigger, seeing as how some old eejit was sent out on the mission more times than not, but the targeting of those behind the trigger, those who put the eejit up to it. Of everything the Oireachtas could have done, we decided to take the organisers of the murders off the streets. They need not necessarily be anywhere near the commission of an offence. I did not get great support from either side of the House. Fine Gael supported the provision, but it wanted me to leave the legislation until after the summer. I believed correctly that it was important——
It made no difference. Not one person was arrested during August or September.
If we had waited to debate the Bill further during the summer and something had occurred——
It is a complete misrepresentation.
Had something occurred during the——
Something is occurring all of the time and the Government is doing nothing about it.
The Deputy should control himself.
The Minister without interruption.
It is occurring every weekend.
Let me answer. The Deputy is interrupting me.
The Minister is talking rubbish. It is why I am interrupting. He is provoking me.
Allow the Minister, please.
Had something occurred during the summer and we had delayed with the legislation, the Deputy would be the very one criticising me and doing his weekly PR——
There have been nine murders this year already. Do not mind last summer.
The Deputy can put out as much PR as he likes, but I have the responsibility to act legally as regards the laws passed by this House.
There have been poor results.
We must move on to another Deputy. We have spent much time on this question.
The question is in my name and I allowed my colleague to speak, but the Ceann Comhairle is allowing the Minister to talk over him. The question is in my name and I allowed my spokesperson to go ahead.
Yes, and I will allow the Deputy in.
The Minister has spoken at length. Some might interpret it as wittering on. In reality, there have been nine murders so far this year despite his legislation. Multiply that by four for the remainder of the year and we will end up with 36. Please God, that will not be the case. The Minister's comments vis-à-vis how leaving the legislation over the summer would not have prevented deaths are clearly not correct. The legislation has not resulted in anyone being arrested in the intervening period, as my colleague stated.
Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister a direct question on the number of gardaí who have retired because of Government policy and their fear that their lump sums would be taxed. Experienced gardaí are leaving to be replaced by whom? How many of those vacancies have been filled? That was a direct question which the Minister should answer.
The people of Dublin North, in particular, are concerned by gun crime. Lead pipe bombs were found in Swords last week and there was recently a tiger kidnapping in Lusk. I had the unpleasant experience of having the body of an unfortunate victim of gangland activity being dumped on my land. People are concerned. They want to know what the Minister will do to aid the gardaí, who very often know who the culprits are but whose ability to prosecute is frustrated by the law.
As Deputy Rabbitte has said, our ability to prosecute successfully, at less than 20%, is appallingly low. Strengthening of legislation, which was supported by this side of the House, has had no effect. Murder levels have gone up.
Is the Minister saying that as a consequence of this legislation murders have, in fact, increased but gun ownership has gone down? That is not what the people of Ireland wanted. The people who enjoy their sporting guns, not one of which has been proved to have been involved in a criminal act, have been deprived of their sporting activity on the basis that reduced ownership of safe licensed guns is a great thing. However, it has not had the effect the people are concerned about.
If anyone is whittering on it is Deputy Reilly because he is merely repeating what was said a couple of minutes ago. I sponsored the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill to ensure that we would not have a gun culture in this country. In such a culture guns would be available in houses where one might be used in haste in a domestic violence situation.
This is all ifs and ands.
In my view it was the correct legislation.
Reality, reality.
I faced down the vested interests which Deputy Reilly and others are representing. Gun clubs and others want to have what they call practical shooting. This is, in effect, running around and shooting at moving targets. In my view and in the view of the Garda Síochána this is akin to replicating the incidents which are happening, unfortunately, in certain areas of the country where people are running around urban areas and shooting people.
This is a red herring. It has nothing to do with the question.
A complete red herring.
I decided to bring in two elements of legislation——
Has a single person holding a legally held firearm been involved in one of these incidents? The Minister wants to rephrase the question and go off on a tangent.
——to deal with the gun culture that I saw was about to happen.
That is his answer to the Irish people who are concerned about gun crime.
A High Court judge clearly indicated that if the Oireachtas did not take some action in this regard we would have a gun culture. In view of Mr. Justice Peter Charlton's judgment in a seminal case that the matter should be looked at, I introduced the legislation.
And the Minister made a complete hash of it. He should ask any superintendent of the Garda now.
Despite the fact that Deputy Flanagan's posterior is sore from sitting on the fence on this issue, it is the right legislation.
The legislation is inoperable now. The Minister's backbenchers will tell him that.
That legislation had nothing to do with the response of the Government to gangland crime. That was a matter for the criminal justice legislation.
It had no effect either, according to the Minister's answers.
Deputy Reilly is a doctor. I will not tell him how to do his job. He knows as little about the law as the chair in front of him.
The Minister knows as little about logic as the chair in front of him.
The fact of the matter is that it takes a number of months for the Garda to put a case together.
It is very clear to me that we have had nine gun murders in the first quarter of this year despite his wonderful legislation.
If Deputy Reilly does not know that he is stupid.
Extraordinary arrogance of a type the House has not seen for many years.
The only one accusing the Minister of bringing in tough law is himself. No one on this side of the House is objecting to it.
Deputy Rabbitte did.
We are just pointing out that he made mistakes. He has made mistakes and errors of judgment. He came in with Deputy Willie O'Dea, who sniped at me from under his moustache like a pet hamster in a bathroom squinting over the toilet brush. The Minister and Deputy O'Dea, between them, were going to round up these guys before the end of July.
The Minister asked what would have happened over the summer if he had not passed the legislation? Where was he during the summer? Did he see what happened during the summer anyway? Did he see the gangland murders that took place over the summer, autumn, winter and spring?
Three in his own town.
For all this tough law we are not able to deal with gangland crime. What can the Minister do to ensure better enforcement and better equipment of the Garda Síochána to deal with a phenomenon that is causing widespread concern among ordinary law abiding citizens who are becoming enmeshed in what is going on in the drug dealing communities in this and other cities?
Deputy Rabbitte is always good with his words but action is better than words. The actions the Government and I, as Minister, took was to increase the budget to deal with organised crime. Funding of Operation Anvil has increased from €20 million to €21 million per year. Resources for the Criminal Assets Bureau have gone up by 15% year on year, despite the fact that other Votes have gone down. The level of the Garda Síochána is at an all-time high at 14,500.
The Minister did not even fill the vacancies and his results are a failure.
The number of gardaí dedicated to fighting organised crime has gone up to a record high. We also have passed significant legislation. Deputy Rabbitte's party opposed that legislation.
They are even gunning them down in the Minister's own town.
The Deputy need not say I am criticising myself. He criticised me time and time again. Criminal legislation is not retrospective. If it had been left until September it could not have been applied to anything that happened over the summer. That is why we brought it in sooner rather than later. I am proud we did. I have no doubt in the coming months and years that the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act will be used extensively by the Garda Síochána.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
