From the Social Democrats, I call Deputy Catherine Murphy.
Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2022: Second Stage (Resumed)
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I welcome the Bill, which is largely technical and which makes overdue and important changes to how certain crimes are treated under Irish law. It is particularly welcome to see stalking as a standalone offence. A generation of Irish women are familiar with the realities of stalking and harassment. For too long, these cases and the perpetrators have been protected. The threat has been dismissed and, often, the victims themselves have been blamed or it is minimised. Street harassment in particular is often completely dismissed. Having a standalone offence for stalking is a very good first step but it is only a first step towards stamping out the incidence of stalking and harassment. There needs to be constant training of gardaí on how to handle these cases. While great strides have been made in recent years, it is still too common for women to have their fears dismissed when they bring accusations to gardaí. Indeed, it is not exclusively women and I have had occasion to advise a man in a situation where there was extreme and constant harassment. I told him that he needed to keep a diary and to notify gardaí. It is not knowing where it is going to go that is often part of the problem.
Of course, most people who experience stalking would never go to gardaí. This is not because they do not feel threatened but because they do not think anything can be done about it, which is why it is welcome see this change. In the past, I heard of one young woman who was repeatedly stalked by a young man where her social media presence was used to track her down, and she was tracked in public and also at home. The man in question lived on the west coast of Ireland and, on several occasions, he turned up on her doorstep. When friends encouraged her to report it to gardaí, she was told that nothing could be done because he had not done anything yet. The "yet" was a real concern because of what could happen.
That is the reality of the experience of many people with this kind of harassment, that is, the fear and expectation of stalking escalating into something more and the lack of power to prevent it because the stalking in and of itself was not taken seriously. I hope the Bill will help to change that attitude but training needs to be given to gardaí to ensure stalking is taken seriously. It is intimidating and it is harassment, so it is important that it is escalated.
While I support the introduction of this specific offence of stalking, I would raise one concern. I am not sure where the boundaries are in some situations. The Bill states:
(i) seriously interferes with another’s peace and privacy, or
(ii) causes alarm, distress or harm to the other[.]
It also refers to:
(a) following, watching, monitoring, tracking or spying upon a person;
(b) pestering a person...
(f) disclosing to other persons private information in respect of a person[.]
It strikes me that some of those descriptions could be applied, for example, to investigative journalism or to gardaí themselves. The Minister might address that in terms of the protections for particular professions. I know that would not be the intention and it is just to know where those boundaries are.
We need to provide education on several levels if we are looking to combat the issue of stalking and harassment, often against women but, I stress, not exclusively so. The Minister might address the issue of what training will be provided and what public messaging there will be to encourage people to report instances of stalking. There also needs to be fundamental reform of relationships and sexuality education in schools. Will the Minister let us know if this training will be provided to gardaí and also if her Department intends to have a public messaging campaign around this issue? Organisations that work to combat violence against women have been calling for this for years. We need comprehensive, age-appropriate education at all levels to really change the culture.
In November, the Government passed but delayed the progress of a Bill that we brought forward seeking to guarantee comprehensive and evidence-based relationships and sexuality education. The Government placed an amendment to the Bill that we put forward and it kicked it forward nine months. It is now 11 months on and I repeat the call that it needs to be dealt with. This idea of pushing something forward when it is never dealt with is very frustrating. We need proper consent and sex education to change the culture regarding how women and girls are treated and viewed in society. Very little will change without that and nothing will change without resourcing. I am acutely aware that my county and the Minister’s county are the two counties most impacted by the ratio of gardaí to population.
Every time the Minister is in the House, I use the opportunity to draw her attention to that. There is an inequality. While the deployment of resources can never be fully equal, we are not getting increases in services as our populations grow. It is just a reactive style of policing, but a proactive style and personnel will be required. It is not enough to say that the Garda Commissioner has responsibility for the deployment of resources when there is a clear issue of non-deployment of resources in areas whose populations have consistently been increasing rapidly for a long time. It changes the nature of the kind of policing that people receive.
In 2019, Ireland ratified the Istanbul Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence, recognising violence against women as a violation of human rights and a form of discrimination against women. It created a legal framework at European level to protect women from violence and to prevent, prosecute and eliminate violence against them. Despite that, there is a gap between the commitments we signed up to under the agreement and the policies and practices of the State. The standard set by the convention is one refuge space for every 10,000 people whereas Ireland only provides one space for every 10,000 women. That is a sizable difference and needs to change. It cuts the amount of refuge spaces that we should be providing in half and leaves male victims of domestic violence by the wayside. I have encountered people who have had boiling water thrown over them or have been stabbed. They are rare enough, but we do encounter such cases. People feel abandoned.
I will speak briefly on another aspect of the Bill. The maximum sentence of conspiracy to murder will increase to a life sentence. I welcome this change, which, I understand, is being done on foot of Garda investigations into organised crime, including the Kinahan cartel, in circumstances where the Garda has been frustrated by the maximum sentence of ten years that is currently available for conspiracy to murder. We are all aware that the higher-ups in criminal gangs do not often get their own hands dirty. Instead, they give the orders and let others take the hit with long sentences if caught. Without taking away from the agency of the people who were tasked or hired to commit the murders, there also has to be a recognition that the victims would be alive were it not for the orders. It is important that our laws recognise this reality and are capable of dealing with senior members of gangs and other criminal outfits.
I will endorse some of Deputy Mitchell's comments about what is often described as antisocial behaviour. It is not antisocial behaviour, but criminal behaviour. That is exactly what we saw recently in Gallanstown. That community has been subjected to it. What was different this time was that it was captured on camera. It is good to see a response. Too often, though, we hear people saying that someone is under 18 years of age, so they cannot do anything about it. That is frustrating. It is also unfair on those young people because it will only escalate into something more serious. When an issue down the food chain is not addressed, it tends to escalate. We should stop calling it antisocial behaviour when all too often it is criminal behaviour. Large numbers of young people, often only 12, 13 or 14 years of age, can intimidate others and ruin their quality of life. It is important that we get to grips with this. I receive more complaints about this issue than I do about more serious issues. It is important that we do something about it because it impacts badly on the quality of people's lives and they feel that it is not being taken seriously.
I welcome this timely legislation and I congratulate the Minister and her Department on the work they have done in respect of it, in particular the provisions on stalking. I will tell the House a sad but true story from my constituency. A perpetrator was convicted and did some jail time for stalking a particular female. Some time later, she woke up in the middle of the night to find the perpetrator in her room. She was horrified and raised the alarm. Members of her family alerted gardaí, who promptly came, arrested the person concerned and brought him before the courts. What I will say next is not a criticism of the judge, but the law allowed the person to apply for bail. Notwithstanding the fact that the gardaí in the case opposed the application, he was released on bail. The gardaí did their very best to keep him in custody. The family were in fear, so they contacted me. It is not easy to listen to a woman who is in extreme distress and her family saying that this person is loose and could come to visit her again. Sadly, she now sleeps with a hammer under her pillow because she fears that the person will return. The judicial system is dealing with the case, but there should be reform of the bail laws so that, if a person who is convicted of stalking is in the home or vicinity of his or her victim again and threatening him or her in the middle of the night, and if the gardaí form an opinion on the matter - I would ask that it be at the rank of superintendent or inspector - then bail should be refused. Stalkers like that should be put away until their court cases see them being put away for even longer.
The gardaí involved in this example are concerned about the family and are committed to supporting them. At a phone call, they will ensure that the person is contacted. I was involved as someone who was relaying messages to the gardaí, but I wish to stress their concern and how they believe it is important that changes happen.
I wish to bring to the Minister's attention a case of coercive control in my constituency. A person who entered this country legally overstayed her welcome and got into a coercive relationship with a male. She had two children. The problem was that the father of the children would not agree to their births being registered. The only way they could be registered was for the mother to make an application to the court. Since she was in a coercive situation, though, she was fearful for her safety and her life and she could not make such an application. She had no support and no children's allowance. She was able to escape from where she was being held against her will and is now in a refuge, which is supporting her financially and helping her in every way. I praise the work of women's refuges in County Louth and nationally for the fantastic work they are doing. The problem in this case is that the social welfare support services have a procedural difficulty in processing an exceptional needs payment for a second time. This person has no income and no financial support due to the regulations, although the Department is doing its best to meet her needs. In this case of coercive control, the victor is the father and the victims are the children and their mother. It is through legislation such as this Bill and Dáil debates on same that we can deal with these cases. While they are the exception, they are happening.
The Minister stated that the Government will be tough on gangland crime at all levels and that the Bill will increase the maximum sentence for conspiracy to murder from ten years to life. As the Minister well knows, Drogheda - I thank her for her attention and her visits to the town - is a priority for the Government as a result of drug crime. Significantly, more than 30 additional gardaí have been deployed to police the community.
More importantly, they will reassure the community by prosecuting the perpetrators of the terrible crimes mentioned. I refer to conspiracy to murder and murder itself.
Everywhere I go, the abuse of drugs is a significant, serious and a growing problem. This is the case North and South. I was in Belfast during the week and this is a serious problem in that city as well. An Garda Síochána is doing a fantastic job. I commend its actions, and those of the courts. The tougher they are, the better. We also need a parallel process, like the Guerin report. Deputies from other parties also referred to issues around drug abuse. The Guerin report was prepared for the Department of Justice. I refer to investment and the significant changes made in this regard. The Minister has led this process, and the resulting investment in places like Moneymore has supported additional childcare and healthcare facilities and the provision of more teachers to schools where there is significant disadvantage. This is also the way forward.
We must tackle the serious criminals and put them away for increased lengths of time. Equally, I refer to implementing the model of the Guerin report in the context of supporting communities and giving a voice to those people who have none and ensuring they have other options beyond going into crime. We all know that sometimes criminality runs from generation to generation. People must be given the option to get an education and secure employment and thereby to have a different life from that they and their families and relations may have led in the past.
Therefore, I welcome the significant attention this Government, and especially the Minister, her office and her Department, has given to fighting crime in Drogheda. It is very much appreciated. This continuing support and the associated ongoing visits are the way forward. Other Deputies should get copies of the Guerin report and give the priority this Government has given to Drogheda. Applications for funding are given priority, which is what is needed to tackle these significant problems.
I commend everyone involved with this Bill. I also commend the Sonas refuge in Dublin 15 on all its work in supporting women experiencing domestic violence. I welcome this legislation and all its elements. I refer in particular to the stand-alone offence of non-fatal strangulation causing harm, expanded harassment offences, a stand-alone offence of stalking, the provision of court orders restraining certain behaviour and the introduction of procedural protections for alleged victims during court proceedings.
The Istanbul Convention recognises violence against women as a violation of human rights and a form of discrimination against women. The convention states that it "creates a legal framework at pan-European level to protect women against all forms of violence, and prevent, prosecute and eliminate violence against women". Under the convention, state parties' obligations have been categorised into four pillars, namely, preventing violence against women, protecting victims, prosecuting perpetrators and implementing related comprehensive and co-ordinated policies.
I compliment the new Garda divisional protective service units. During my work with Tusla, I had first-hand experience of their work and I cannot speak highly enough of what they do. The ongoing support these units have provided to women and survivors of abuse has been excellent and this has given women confidence and belief that they are being supported. In turn, they felt somewhat safer, despite the high levels of threats against them. As usual, however, we do not have enough being done in this regard, given the high levels of domestic and sexual abuse being reported and, more importantly, not being reported. I say this because we know the vast majority of offences, particularly sexual violence offences, are not being reported. This means we have a long way to go.
Turning to the prosecution part of the convention, every time we read reports about the experience of women in courts it is absolutely dreadful. I sometimes wonder whether it is designed to wear people down and to get them to the stage where they just give up. The protection of women is happening despite the court system and not due to it. We must do much more in this regard. We must also do much more concerning the housing crisis. We know many women, and many people, experiencing domestic violence feel they are trapped because there is literally nowhere for them to go. They are unable to leave coercive and violent relationships.
Laws are not just words on a piece of paper. They get their power from being enforced, a well-resourced system of justice and a well-resourced policing system. Unfortunately, we have repeatedly heard that there is a crisis in confidence in communities regarding their protection. Gardaí have spoken to me about how unresourced they feel they are. The recent experience in Cherry Orchard has shown how dangerous the situations are in which gardaí get into and how young gardaí do not feel assured of back-up.
I also raise the issue of rosters. I spoke about this issue at a recent meeting of the joint policing committee, JPC, in Blanchardstown. The Garda firmly believes this will undermine the connection between the community and the force. It was stated that new recruits are being lost hand over fist to other organisations. The superintendent admitted this was a problem. In fact, it was stated that a report will be conducted into the loss of recruits who have joined the Garda in recent years. This issue needs to be addressed.
I commend the Minister on bringing this important and interesting legislation before the House. It contains a variety of measures that will be particularly helpful to those unfortunate enough to find themselves victims of crime. If we look at Part 2 of this Bill, I believe it introduces a measure I had sought previously that will impose a tougher sentence on those found guilty of conspiracy to murder.
In March 2019, I introduced legislation here entitled the Criminal Justice (Conspiracy to Murder) Bill 2019. This sought to amend section 71 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 and, more specifically, section 4 of the Offences Against The Person Act 1861. We had found ourselves in the anomalous position where people could find themselves convicted of conspiracy to murder and yet were only going to face a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment. This was notwithstanding the fact that the principal offence, that of murder, is punishable by a sentence of life imprisonment. Therefore, I welcome this legislation being brought forward.
I brought my Bill forward in 2019 because of the specific example of a man who had come to Ireland from eastern Europe to kill another individual living here. Fortunately, through the good work of An Garda Síochána, this man was apprehended when he had a gun and was on his way to shoot, and no doubt kill, this other person. He decided to plead guilty, and because he did so, he had to be given some credit by the court. This resulted in this person being given a sentence of six years. In effect, this meant he would be out of prison after four years. Therefore, somebody who had the clear intention of murdering another person got away with a sentence of four years. What the Minister has done in this legislation, in the context of what I sought to do in the legislation I proposed in 2019, is commendable. The law must be changed concerning this issue.
One issue I ask the Minister to examine is the requirement to introduce a series of consequential amendments. It is noted that one of these amendments is to section 77, which deals with double jeopardy. A new provision will be contained within paragraph (c) of that new section. I ask the Minister and her officials to consider a situation that may arise in this context. I refer to people who may find themselves being convicted in another jurisdiction of an offence committed in Ireland. Let us take the example where someone has been convicted of the serious offence of murder in absentia in another jurisdiction, as the law of that jurisdiction may allow. What impact would that have if the Director of Public Prosecution, DPP, decided to prosecute such an offence in Ireland? It may be the case that the new paragraph (c) will not have an effect, but this aspect must be closely examined.
Regarding Part 3 of the legislation, this deals with the amendment to Firearms Act 1925. I note that the reason for this is to ensure that the Forensic Science Ireland laboratory is able to use firearms for the purposes of its work and investigations. As the Minister is aware, I would have liked to have seen the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990 amended as well to ensure a tougher sentence was provided for in the case of those found in possession of a knife for the purpose of inflicting harm on another. Hopefully, this is something the Government may revisit at some stage in the future.
Part 4 of the Bill deals with the offences of harassment, stalking, non-fatal strangulation and non-fatal suffocation. I welcome the establishment of these new offences of non-fatal strangulation and-or non-fatal suffocation. More importantly, however, section 13 deals with the new offence of harassment or stalking.
To date, the offence of harassment is dealt with under section 10 of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997. In my opinion, that was a section, irrespective of the issue of stalking being brought in, that needed to be updated. It is very difficult to prosecute somebody for harassment. However, the way in which the new offences of harassment and of stalking have been drafted in this Bill will, I believe, make it easier for the prosecution of those offences. It is particularly welcome that the new section 10(3) of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997 will now set out examples of the type of behaviour that will result in somebody being found to have been guilty of committing the offences of harassment or stalking. When examples are set out, as has been done in this legislation, it makes it easier for a prosecutor. It also makes it easier for a jury to determine whether the offence has been committed.
That brings me on to Part 5 of the legislation. It is a Part that has not been given sufficient attention in our discussions or in the debate to date. As I mentioned, it is very difficult sometimes to get a person convicted of the offence of harassment or the new offence of stalking, but that does not mean efforts cannot be made within the civil courts to try to ensure orders are made restraining individuals from carrying out certain types of behaviour. What we have in Part 5 of this legislation is the establishment of civil orders that can be given by the District Court against what is referred to in the legislation as "relevant conduct". The type of conduct we see listed here in section 15(3) is conduct which everyone can see is harassing and is impactful on the quality of life of a person who is subjected to it. However, because of the lack of persistence of it, it probably does not rise to constitute a criminal offence, but I welcome the fact that individuals who are subjected to this type of behaviour and, indeed, members of An Garda Síochána who have identified that individuals are being subjected to this type of behaviour can bring an application before the District Court which can make a civil order restraining a person from following or communicating by any means with the affected individual or by engaging in the type of relevant conduct we have prohibited in this section.
Sometimes civil orders can be more effective, from the point of view of a victim, than the criminal sanction and the criminal process. The criminal process can be difficult for a victim. It sometimes also does not favour victims in terms of trying to stop the behaviour at a particular time. However, here we have a civil sanction that will be decided on the balance of probability as the civil standard of proof and I welcome the fact a District Court judge will be able to direct a person to stop engaging in what is referred to as relevant conduct for a period of five years. The only slight criticism I would have, and I would ask the Minister to look at it, is that under section 25 these hearings will be held in private. Hearings before our courts should be held in public. Individuals involved in this type of behaviour should be exposed to public scrutiny and the hearings should be available for public appraisal.
I thank the Acting Chairman, Deputy Devlin, and the Minister.
I wish the Minister "Good afternoon" and thank her for her detailed opening statement. I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2022 and I very much welcome it. It is long overdue. I am happy to support its passage through the Dáil and I do so for the following reasons.
First of all, it brings Irish domestic law in line with international best practice. Finally, we are becoming consistent with our obligations and commitments under the Istanbul Convention. I also agree with the four Ps of the national strategy: prevention, protection, prosecution and policy co-ordination. That is a good approach to have. While I appreciate the Bill focuses on the prosecution component, there is also a significant prevention and deterrent aspect to it as well. I very much welcome the fact there is a lot of clarity in this document that was not there heretofore.
There are three specific provisions I want to draw attention to, and I am very much in favour of them. First of all, codifying and enshrining stalking as a specific stand-alone offence is a very positive way forward. I take the Minister's point that it is already an illegal activity, which is a criminal activity, but it is always good to specify and codify it exactly because it is an insidious, sinister and intimidatory behaviour.
I also welcome the fact there is a non-fatal offence of strangulation and suffocation as well. I take the Minister's point that that is a precursor. It is a serious crime in its own right but it is a gateway crime as well for even more dangerous crimes thereafter. It is good that it is nailed down in a particular stand-alone way.
I liked the fact the Minister mentioned that the Garda Commissioner was the person who recommended this law be brought in. It is an important point to make that when the senior law enforcement professional in the country requests a particular law, this Legislature at least will review and see if it is appropriate that we bring it in and that we respond to requests from the senior management of An Garda Síochána. That is a good way to go.
The third point I want to raise is in relation to the increased sentencing for conspiracy to murder. That is an important provision. It was ridiculous that those who give the order for a murder were punished much less than the people who pulled the trigger. We are mindful of the transnational nature of organised crime now that these hit men and assassins are hired internationally and brought into the country to pull the trigger, but the people who give the instructions and people who give the orders get off with a much lesser sentence. It is important that is brought up to a life sentence. I very much commend the Minister on that.
I have two concerns. The first is about enforcement. I suspect the Minister would be of pretty much the same view. We need more gardaí. We need more patrol cars. We need greater opening hours, especially in rural Garda stations. It is a feature across both rural and urban Ireland. I appreciate there are staff retention and recruitment issues in An Garda Síochána, but anything the Minister can do to increase the number of uniformed personnel out there would make a significant difference. There is no point in having all this law if we cannot enforce it.
Finally, to double-line the good points of Deputy Catherine Murphy as well, who spoke of a public awareness campaign, this is a great opportunity to increase the level of awareness publicly. We now have specific stand-alone crimes and a public awareness campaign would be useful. Such a campaign would focus on the first "P", which is prevention, which is what we are all trying to achieve. We do not want to punish people for crimes. We want to prevent the crimes from happening in the first place.
I welcome the legislation. It is appropriate, proportionate and necessary. I note the Minister will bring some amendments forward. I am happy to review those and assess them on their own merits. However, as it stands, I am happy to support this Bill through the Dáil.
I welcome this important Bill, which is another part of the jigsaw the Minister has been bringing before us in reforming and updating the criminal justice system. I congratulate the Minister, Deputy McEntee, on bringing this important Bill before the House today.
I am aware this Bill comes before us as a result of the Minister’s determination to modernise this system, not only to reform the system but also to streamline the process and ensure that if you do the crime you do the time, and to deter others, particularly young people, from entering into criminal activity, especially those involving criminal gangs. Maybe in her next Bill the Minister might look at the sentencing policy for being a member of a criminal gang.
I recognise the issues the Minister is tackling in this Bill such as conspiracy to murder, criminal assault causing harm, criminal assault causing serious harm, non-fatal strangulation, stalking and harassment, and possible civil orders associated with this type of behaviour to prevent it and protect the victims.
In recent times we have seen, throughout the world in co-operation with other police forces in Europe and America, the arrest and detention of senior Irish gangland figures involved in some of the most serious crimes this country has ever seen. I compliment An Garda Síochána on its ongoing efforts to track and prosecute these gang leaders for their crimes. We must also thank the Garda for its intelligence work in preventing many serious gangland crimes, including murder, which often does not get any recognition.
The measures in the Bill will strengthen the resolve of the Garda and our communities to tackle gangland crime. They will also possibly deter others, particularly the young, from becoming involved in criminal activities with gangs.
The introduction of the Criminal Assets Bureau was one of the most successful pieces of legislation brought before the House to tackle criminal gangs but it needs to be tightened up to bring about quicker results in confiscating assets. The initial legislation was carefully drafted to prevent court challenge. It has now been well tested in the courts and as a result of these rulings we may be able to introduce a stronger Bill to confiscate these ill-gotten assets in a more timely manner.
I welcome the particular section of the Bill that increases penalties for all those involved in any way in conspiracy to murder someone and not only the person who pulls the trigger or uses a knife or other weapon to kill, maim or mutilate someone. The Bill will increase the maximum sentence for the offence of assault causing harm from five years to ten years. This is one of the most common charges. While a life sentence can be imposed for an assault causing serious harm it only covers a limited subset of the worst assaults. Most assaults can only be prosecuted at the lower levels, especially where the victim has fully or mostly recovered. Even where a judge considers the offence as among the more serious, he or she is limited in sentencing to five years and may have to reduce this further to reflect mitigating factors such as a guilty plea.
I understand the clauses in the Bill regarding non-fatal strangulation are a result of a direct request by the Garda Commissioner following quality research into this type of crime and the perpetrators of this type of assault, mainly on women. We can see from this research that by creating a greater deterrent we may prevent some of these assaults and the suitable authorities will be able to step in earlier to offer support and prevent a more tragic outcome.
Stalking and harassment are extremely serious and intrusive crimes. They can cause serious devastating psychological distress to the victims, sometimes for the rest of their lives. It is only right to introduce this new offence and bring in this new range of civil orders to protect victims. I understand this offence was recently introduced in the criminal code throughout the English-speaking world following research into this type of behaviour. I understand the introduction of this new crime has led to greater awareness of it and increased reporting and prosecution. This should lead to the prevention of this type of serious crime.
Stalking online and bullying online may be covered by other Acts but I believe that if a person is convicted of both the sentencing should be cumulative. The Bill reflects the public opinion that the seriousness of the crime must be reflected in the sentences that judges can impose.
I am not in favour of the practice that has occurred in our courts in recent years of delaying the sentencing of convicted persons for a few weeks. I understand the legal argument for the need for victim impact statements and assessment of the perpetrator's past history but the gap allows for a distancing between the horrific nature of a violent crime and the sentence received. We need to find a way to link the sentence received to the crime committed to deter other people from entering the criminal world.
The Bill introduces another element of the Government's commitment to zero tolerance and part of the Government's national strategy on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. I am proud to support the Bill.
I welcome the introduction of the legislation. It is very important. I compliment the Minister on the work she is doing in this area. I make particular reference to organised crime and other issues, including stalking, that have been raised by Members. I compliment my colleague, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, on the reference to the in camera rule where stalking is concerned. I do not see why somebody accused of stalking a woman and terrorising her and her family in the way that has been done should be allowed to have the crime examined in secret under the in camera rule. I do not see the reason for this.
It is in this regard that I want to draw attention to something else that is equally ominous and worrying. This is use of section 47 reports and the degree to which the courts take them into account. I have previously relayed this concern to the Minister. I have also relayed it to the House twice in recent times. A court messenger can, by virtue of his or her recommendation to the court, make it possible to take away children from a mother in order to ensure a particular outcome in a forthcoming case. This is what it amounts to. I have dealt with cases in recent times where mothers have been separated from their children and subjected to appalling indifference and callousness by the system. Their children are removed callously and put in a place determined by the court. This, in turn, can predetermine the outcome of a family law case.
I recognise that family law cases are held in camera also. There is a case for removing the in camera rule and letting the air into the system to such an extent that everybody knows what to expect there. I do not blame judges. I am simply saying these issues need to be dealt with. We need to deal with them in this House by way of legislation. I hope the Minister will introduce legislation in this regard.
For an awfully long time I campaigned to have the bail laws amended. They were amended to a certain extent. I am not so certain it is efficient. It has not deterred some people while on bail from committing further and more serious crimes. This should not be the case. We should not arrive at a situation of zero tolerance, as was applied in New York as a political claim. It was Ed Koch when he was mayor of New York who set the scene for what became zero tolerance eventually. He tackled the big crime barons in such a way as to put them out of business and put them behind bars. The Minister is hoping to do the same thing and we recognise this. It is a very important business. Drugs and violence that result in the kicking to death of an innocent individual outside a pub or anywhere else in the evening are totally and absolutely unacceptable. There is no use trying to make excuses for it and stating people were not really in control of their actions at the time and they had drugs or alcohol or whatever the case may be. There is no excuse for this.
I believe that during the lockdown people spent a lot of time studying videos of motor racing and the like. Of course we can do all kinds of things in a video and switch it back and forth and overtake from the left and the right. That is what is going on at present in a big way. Yesterday on a run to Belfast I witnessed two trucks occupying both lanes of the road with one trying to overtake the other, or pretending it was trying to overtake the other, for at least 20 miles. We want safety on the roads. This is certainly not a trip in that direction. I know it breaks the law but I want to bring it to the Minister's attention. What happens in a video is not as easily managed when it takes place in reality.
I could go on for a long time about how we should deal with these issues when they arise. It is important to bring them to the attention of the House and the Minister, whatever they may be, even if the House says it is a matter for the courts and it should be brought before the courts; that is not our function. Our function in this House is to raise matters that appear to be going wrong and are in need of attention and I presume this is done on the basis that right is right and two wrongs do not make a right. At some stage we should come to recognise, as I do, that there have been situations in the past when issues were raised in the House, against the rules as it were and with huge opposition, that ultimately ended up being the subject of major and serious inquiries involving a whole lot of people. It would been far better to have dealt with the issues originally. A case that comes to mind is one in which a woman complained about the sexual assault of her daughter and nothing was done about it. One cannot walk away from that, therefore, the question was put and answered in a particular way, but action was taken within a few days, which indicates something needed to be dealt with. I am sure the same has happened to every Member of the House on several occasions.
I finish by drawing attention to section 47, which needs to be dealt with soon, because there will be a tragedy. There is a level of emotion, trauma and coldness surrounding a mother when she is told that she does not matter in this business or that if she does matter, it is only in a way decided by somebody else. If the activities of Mr. Jim Sheehan in the courts are allowed to continue, there will be serious consequences.
I thank Deputies for their contributions and for the general support of the Bill; it is welcome. As I said earlier, it is a wide-ranging Bill and I appreciate there are many different elements to it, but that is the nature of a miscellaneous Bill. It contains many important measures and changes across many different aspects, not least organised crime, domestic violence, firearms and other areas. I acknowledge civil society, community and voluntary groups, victims, survivors, members of An Garda Síochána and many others who have been involved and engaged in the development of many of these areas. We have more work to do and further amendments will be brought forward on Committee Stage.
I refer to some issues raised about firearms, such as the semi-automatic centre-fire rifles that automatically reload. For a person who goes out hunting, I do not see a reason to have such ammunition or weapon. An expert committee has been established to advise on all aspects of licensing. This is something that has been looked at and advised upon, and the shooting and hunting groups are represented as part of that group. We can discuss it in further detail but based on what we have seen happen in other countries, we do not want to consider something like that being allowed to happen here, without preventing people from genuinely engaging in hunting or lawful acts.
As to the in camera provisions, this would only apply to civil orders and reflects how the domestic violence orders are operated, which are intended to protect the victim, not the perpetrator. It will not apply to the criminal side. We are trying to minimise the trauma and impact going to court can have on victims and how it can be re-traumatising. Therefore, it is intended to support the victim in that regard and to try to minimise the distress of the court proceedings.
On any potential implications around the stalking legislation, Deputy Catherine Murphy raised the potential implications for private investigators or gardaí. The new offences would not include conduct where there was lawful authority or reasonable intent, such as the gardaí or a person doing his or her job. It is similar to the current harassment legislation and I am not aware of any journalists who have raised concerns in that regard. I am open to discussing this further at a later stage.
A number of others were raised, one of which was resourcing. I have said a number of times, in particular in recent weeks, that when it comes to policing, providing resources is my top priority and making sure gardaí do not just have the laws, funding, IT, and all the things that they need, but that we have as many bodies on the ground doing the work they need to do. I am confident the most recent recruitment campaign will enable us to increase those numbers as quickly as we can to make sure, in the context of all the laws we are introducing and the resources we are providing, we have the front-line gardaí and civilian staff to carry out that important work.
I again thank colleagues for their support and I look forward to working with them on Committee Stage.
Question put and agreed to.