JOINT COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE, EQUALITY, DEFENCE AND WOMEN’S RIGHTS debate -
Tuesday, 30 Nov 2004

Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996: Motion.

Chairman

I welcome the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, and his officials to the meeting, the purpose of which is to consider a motion referred by both Houses to this committee. It reads:

That Dáil Éireann resolves that sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996 (No. 29 of 1996) shall continue in operation for the period ending on 31st December 2006.

Analogous wording has been used for the Seanad motion. Members have been circulated with a copy of the sixth report by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on the operation of sections 2 to 6, inclusive, of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996 covering the period 23 November 2002 to 11 November 2004, inclusive, pursuant to section 11(3) of the Act. Some additional details were received from the Department on amendments to section 8 concerning the number of persons detained under section 2 of the Act. The version circulated is the new section under paragraph 8.

I invite the Minister to make a brief presentation on the operation of the Act.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy McDowell)

The resolution before the committee seeks approval for the retention of those sections of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996 which relate to the detention of suspected drug traffickers. As members will be aware, section 11 of the Act requires the Minister to prepare a report on the operation of the provisions in question in conjunction with the moving of a resolution to provide for their renewal. The necessary report covering the period 23 November 2002 to 11 November 2004 has been laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas.

Our primary focus this afternoon is on the renewal of the detention provisions in the Act and I am pleased to be here to discuss the matter with members of the committee. However, before elaborating on the various sections of the Act at issue, it would be useful to place our discussions in the context of the overall drugs problem and the Government's response to it. My Department's role in drug policy is primarily, although not exclusively, in the area of drug supply control, just one of the elements of the Government's overall holistic approach to tackling the drugs issue.

We are all aware of the ongoing challenge which drug misuse, including the very nature of addiction, presents for all societies in the modern world. In recent decades drug misuse has increasingly become an integral part of societal culture in virtually every country in the developed world. Ireland is no exception to this global phenomenon. The Government remains very conscious that drug misuse continues to be one of the most pressing social problems being experienced in our communities today. The harm and misery brought about as a consequence of drug abuse at the level of the individual, family and society demand our ongoing attention and firm resolve to tackle the problem head on. For this reason, addressing drug misuse continues to be a major priority for the Government as reflected in the programme for Government. The Government knows a focused, integrated and co-ordinated approach to this multi-faceted and difficult problem is required. It is precisely for this reason the national drugs strategy has been put in place. As members will be aware, it sets out a policy framework for dealing with the drugs issue for the period 2001-08 and contains 100 individual actions to be implemented by a range of Departments and agencies. The seven-year strategy is ongoing work. Departments and agencies involved in its implementation have made welcome progress to date in delivering or progressing many of the actions.

The strategy is being delivered across the four pillars of supply reduction, prevention, treatment and research. Central to the approach is the bringing together of the work of the key Departments and agencies in a co-ordinated manner, working with the communities most affected by the drug problem. This latter dimension is a key element in our approach. The experience and expertise of people dealing with the issue at ground level within local communities must continue to be recognised and utilised in real ways in a collective effort. The encouraging progress made in recent years via real partnership approaches between the State agencies, the community and the voluntary sector in tackling the drugs problem, through for example the work programme and projects of the local drug task force and the work of the national drug strategy team and the national advisory committee on drugs, all with cross-sectoral representation, must be built upon to ensure significant and real improvements.

Over 500 community-based projects have been established in local areas, through which a range of different drug-related responses are in place. The number of heroin abusers seems to have stabilised. The number of places in treatment services has increased considerably, as has the availability of methodone treatment. The Department of Education and Science implemented a drugs misuse prevention programme in all schools in the local drug task force areas during the academic year 2001-02. Guidelines to assist schools in the development of a drug policy have also been developed and were issued to primary and post-primary schools in May 2000. The national advisory committee on drugs continues to implement the very important research mandate given to it by the Government. That mandate has recently been renewed for a further period to coincide with the second half of the national drugs strategy.

In terms of resources, it is worthwhile pointing out that approximately €80 million has been allocated to date to assist in the region of 500 projects under the two rounds of the plan of the local drug task force. Approximately €12.8 million has been allocated under the premises initiative which is designed to meet the accommodation of community-based drug projects, the majority of which are in the task force areas, and approximately €75 million has been provided for in the region of 450 facilities and services under the young persons' facilities and services fund. That is in addition to the ongoing funding for agencies which deal with drug issues as part of their ordinary business.

The Government knows it cannot be complacent in relation to the work it still faces in tackling the drug problem. My colleague, the Minister of State with responsibility for co-ordinating the strategy, announced that a significant increase in funding will be provided for drug programmes next year. Overall a total of €31.5 million is being provided in next year's Estimates for the various drug initiatives under the remit of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. That represents an 18% increase over the 2004 figure. The increased funding will be used to support and resource important new drug initiatives which the task forces will develop as their action plans come on stream next year. The Government is also committed to building on the progress made by the young people's facilities and services fund. I supplied material in my script in relation to that.

The second round of funding of more than €13 million which the Government announced for the fund last year will enable a number of new dedicated youth and community centres to be built in such places as Darndale, Knockmitten in Clondalkin, Brookfield in Tallaght, Ballywaltrim in Bray and Knocknaheany in Cork city. Funding will also be made available towards the staffing and operational costs of a number of centres built under the first round of the fund. The 33% increase in funding for the RAPID programme, in addition to the €6 million increase in the community and voluntary local development services funding for 2005 which will fund 15 new development projects in disadvantaged areas, will further assist in tackling the drug problem in the areas where it is most felt. All this is evidence of the Government's continued commitment to addressing the drug problem in a targeted way.

My Department's submission to the review indicated that our focus over the next four years of the strategy will be aimed at ensuring that a robust legislative response remains in place to tackle the drug problem, continued policy development in the area of drug arrest referral schemes and the drugs court, the development of community policing fora on a statutory basis in the context of the Garda Síochána Bill which is currently before the Seanad that will build on the success of the drug task force originated fora which already exist, the building of inter-agency collaboration and collaboration with the community and voluntary treatment sectors.

I now turn to the question of supply reduction. The proposal to renew detention provision under this Act for a further two years is particularly relevant in that context. Members of the committee will be aware of the concerted action of the law enforcement agencies to tackle the drug problem. The Garda Síochána enforcement response to reducing the supply of drugs centres around a number of key principles, one of which is conducting intelligence driven operations at an international, national and local level against the criminal networks involved in the trade. Such major operations continue to result in many significant drug seizures being made in this country and in the disruption of supply networks. In addition, more locally focused operations targeted at street dealers and dealers operating in licensed premises continue to yield positive results.

The ongoing success of the Criminal Assets Bureau in implementing the Government strategy to pursue and recover the proceeds of crime, including assets accrued through drug trafficking, is also to be applauded. Obviously we are very pleased every time there is a successful drugs operation, but we are not naive enough to imagine that the organised drug traffickers would just give up when their assets are seized or their supply is interdicted. As well as ensuring that our law enforcement agencies get the ongoing resources that they need to tackle drug trafficking, it is crucial that our legislative response at all times provides the necessary platform from which our agencies can effectively operate.

That brings me to the business of today. Section 11 of the Act provides that each of sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 will cease to be in operation 12 months after the date of the commencement unless they are extended in the manner provided under the Act. On a number of occasions they have been extended. Resolutions were most recently passed in December 2002 and they bring the life of the sections up to 31 December 2004. It is now proposed to renew them for a further two-year period to 2006. I reiterate my comment on the last occasion I brought this matter before the committee when I said that Members of the Oireachtas get the opportunity to examine at appropriate intervals strong legislative provisions such as these in order to determine the need to retain them. I think the drugs problem is such now that the notion that this is temporary legislation is beginning to diminish. I think it will have to be a permanent aspect of our law. That is not to say that I resent in any way coming in and having to report on it, but I do not think the life of these provisions should depend on continual renewal. We should face up to the fact that the provisions set out in my statement are permanent features of the response to drugs for the foreseeable future. Obviously it is a question of balance as to how these powers are used. The report before the committee shows that they are not used on an indiscriminate basis, but they have to be used in an effective way. While drug supply controls are only one element of the Government's overall drug response, the passing of this resolution allows us to demonstrate that we are determined as a Parliament to deal with drug traffickers and sends the right message to the law enforcement agencies to get on with the task.

As Minister, I propose to introduce in the near future prison rules which will introduce mandatory drug testing in prisons. I hope those rules will be ready in the coming weeks. It is very important that when we find people who are both drug addicts and drug suppliers and commit them to prison, they should not be left in an environment where drug availability is condoned or regarded as inevitable. That is in my view a counsel of despair. If we believe in rehabilitation, we have to follow through on the logic of that to stop prisons being places where drugs are easily available to people sent there for punishment and rehabilitation.

Deputy Costello

I welcome the Minister. Do I take it that the only report we have is here in front of us, this rather brief three pages? It is not really a report. There are a couple of statistics at the end. We were critical of the extent of the report two years ago.

There is need for a proper breakdown. The Minister says 1,228 people were detained under section 2 in the two-year period. Does he have any idea of what the offences were? There is no information to show whether the numbers have been declining or increasing since 1996. They are lumped together as one single lot of figures, without any indication of the nature of the offences or the number in each month or year. We need a much more precise statistical breakdown, which would be very valuable. We have no idea what happened to these people, other than that some were convicted. We do not know how many were convicted or subject to the mandatory ten-year sentence for drug possession and trafficking. We would like to know what happened there. The Minister has been critical of judges not imposing that sentence. Only a handful of sentences have been executed in a mandatory fashion. We would appreciate a breakdown of what has been happening in that respect.

The figures indicate that the seven day detention was never used in the period, zilch from 120 hours to 168 hours. The vast majority — 580 — were in the first six hours. The second largest number — 489 — was in the six to 24 hours. There were 147 up to 48 hours, two days. The second last category was 12. There were none from 120 hours to 168 hours. Is there any explanation for the extra period if it is not being used? I am not sure if it was used at all. We need information as to the nature of the offences for which the detention periods were short or long. It is important.

I have no problem in giving substantial powers to deal with drug trafficking. We have already given it to the Criminal Assets Bureau. We certainly need to deal with this huge issue in Irish society but we also need to get the best information available so that we can detect how things are going. We do not even know the extent to which cocaine has displaced heroin. The Minister states in the report that there seems to be a stabilisation of heroin. If so, the reason is that people have moved to cocaine. There is no reference to that.

Similarly there is no reference to the fact that hard drugs are being supplied in country areas. There was no trafficking of drugs out of Dublin until about 1996. A problem now exists nationwide. We saw the figures from the health authorities outside Dublin which showed that in the five-year period up to 2003 there was a trebling of the number of people who presented with drug addiction. That clearly indicates the nature of the problem. You do not present with drug addiction unless you have a problem. Drug networks are being established throughout the country.

We saw the "Prime Time" programme last night in which it was categorically stated by very respectable figures in Limerick, elected representatives and the State solicitor, that what was going on there was a cancer in our society, and that it was a combination of drugs and guns. It was said that it was widespread and fast moving towards a stage where they would come together and establish a Mafia-type operation. Drugs are pushing this. It was clearly stated that drugs are the engine of this activity in Limerick and that people are fighting for their drug patches. The guns come in with the drugs. They are part and parcel of the criminal activity that is widespread there. The same thing is true in west Dublin where there was an assassination last week. It is not good enough for the Minister to say it is the dying sting of a wasp. We cannot live in denial. There is a serious problem of hard drug use and abuse throughout the country and it is not being dealt with.

The Minister in his introduction spoke about the mid-term review and the national drug strategy. The strategy has been a failure and virtually all the submissions which have been made by people dealing with it, from the local task forces down, have made a similar type of criticism, that the resources were not put in place, assistance was not given, budgets were not put in place, they could not plan, facilities were not there, the RAPID money was withdrawn. They were left in limbo. There has been no national drug strategy for four years. There has been only lip service. As a result, hard drugs have spread throughout the country. There was no policy to target a new hard drug coming on stream. Cocaine is now becoming the drug of choice rather than heroin. That is not being properly tackled.

We have a serious problem and we are dealing only with a couple of aspects. This is the crime prevention aspect, the detection, detention and sentencing. We need a lot more information about what is happening, the changing character of drug use and misuse, not the bare statistical detail without a useful breakdown. It is not much use to say that mandatory drug testing will be introduced in prisons sometime in the future. The Minister is in an ongoing row with the governor of Mountjoy on that issue. The prison will explode because drugs are widely available in Mountjoy. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has ever been prosecuted or convicted for use or possession of drugs in that prison, although there have been seizures of drugs there. People are put into the prison because they are in possession of drugs, perhaps given a mandatory ten-year sentence, but drugs are widely used in the prison. Nothing is ever done about it. If there is mandatory drug testing, the majority of prisoners will fail the test. What does the Minister propose to do with them? He has not thought out anything in relation to these policies.

There is no coherent approach to dealing with criminality. There is no point in the Minister saying on radio or television that there is such an approach when it is not the reality. We who are on the ground know this. I know the level of drug pushing outside my office in Seán McDermott Street, in Sheriff Street, and the level of frustration among the community in the area that the problem has reached a level which did not exist a number of years ago. It was terrible in the 1980s and part of the 1990s and then it came almost to an end. Now it is getting out of hand again and it is being done with relative impunity. We want more than a nice words; we want a decent report. We want to be of assistance to the Minister on the issue because the last thing any of us wants to see is drug trafficking in our communities because of the damage it causes and the fact that people's lives are ruined by it. I will not oppose the continuation of the powers outlined but to give the Minister a mandate to continue them, we need a much fuller report rather than the bare statistical information before us.

Senator Cummins

My party will not oppose any provision that would assist the law enforcement agencies in tackling the drug trafficking problem but, as Deputy Costello said, we are not winning the war. At this stage we are not even winning the battle because drugs are freely available in communities countrywide, not just in Dublin. While we will support whatever provisions are necessary, we need more resources for the agencies tackling the drugs problem which is causing great hardship and destroying communities. Community spirit is gone. As a consequence, people are fearful in their own communities as a result of drug trafficking and abuse.

I am not sure these provisions are sufficient. The Minister has said they are in place on a temporary basis but, in fact, they are permanent. Will he bring forward further legislation or permanent laws to tackle drug trafficking? Will he put more resources into communities? He said in his report that he had allocated more resources for drug abuse prevention measures. The €60 million seized by the Criminal Assets Bureau from drug traffickers and criminals should be used to provide additional funding for those communities which have suffered from drug trafficking.

I do not know what the position is on mandatory sentences. What can we do to ensure there are more mandatory sentences and that judges enforce the laws already in place? We can only make laws. I do not know how we can make the Judiciary enforce them. While the Minister will have our support in retaining these provisions, more action must be taken and more resources must be made available because the drugs problem affects the entire country and destroys communities.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh

Like Deputy Costello, I find the information contained in the report is minimal. The statistics have not been worked out and it is not clear why we should extend the legislation for a further two years. Even with the laws in place prior to this legislation, 87% of those referred to in the report — the 1,228 people arrested and held — could have been held and questioned for 24 hours. By extending the period allowed, a further 12% could have been so held. It is clear from the figures, therefore, that only 12 people were covered by the new extended holding period allowed for in the legislation, while nobody qualified to be held for a period of 120 to 168 hours.

We are not told holding certain people for more than 48 hours resulted in additional gain. Did holding them for that period lead to certain charges or were they already subject to those charges when arrested? Did holding them lead to conviction or drug seizures? Figures are presented without explanation. With regard to those convicted, the report does not state how many were charged with possessing small or large amounts of drugs, or what they were charged with. They could have been charged with entirely different offences. The same holds for those whose cases are pending.

It would be good to have such information because at the end of the report the Minister says these regulations made a substantial contribution to the fight against drugs. If they did, they are to be welcomed but the information before us does not offer proof of the supposed contribution. All it proves is quite a number have been arrested. It does not indicate of what they were convicted. The Minister might provide more specific details, although not necessarily on a case by case basis.

I do not have my notes on the previous discussion on the issue but as far as I recall, section 4 had not been used in the period under discussion. We are now four years into the operation of the legislation. If the section is not being used because this is emergency or temporary legislation, it should be allowed to lapse. If the Minister intends to make it permanent, we need to see the necessary legislation as soon as possible in order that we can discuss it with the issue raised by other Deputies, namely, that we are not winning the fight against drugs.

The geographical spread is increasing and despite what the Minister said, he has not faced up to the scale of the drugs problem. Deputy Costello is correct in saying the scale of the heroin problem may have been stabilised but as a society, we have not faced up to the cocaine problem. We need to tackle this scourge head on before it reaches the scale of the heroin problem before we tackled it.

Those are my main concerns, although I will not oppose the motion. However, the report on the legislation has arrived so late that we are at the wire. If the motion is not passed by tomorrow, the Government will be in breach of its own regulations. We all knew it was coming. I made the point two years ago that we needed to deal with this issue as quickly as possible when the report was published rather than wait until the last minute when we would face time constraints.

Senator J. Walsh

Like other speakers, I welcome the extension of these powers. The question is whether they are sufficient to counter what is a serious drugs problem. I, too, saw the relevant programme on television last night. Other programmes have also considered the associated problems, as have newspaper articles. I am sure we all share the Minister's concerns about crime, much of which is drugs related. It is not a new or an Irish phenomenon but an international issue. In this regard, I wonder if there could be a stronger EU focus and initiative as we have been dealing with the issue for at least three or four decades. The problem is increasing all over the world. Quite violent criminals are becoming involved in that scene. A friend of mine makes the argument that there was much criminal activity in the US during the prohibition period until alcohol was legalised again. I am not sure if that is the answer in the case of drugs, but my friend would argue strenuously that it is. While I dismissed his argument, I believe we need to look at the matter in a more open-minded way than in the past. Policing is not containing the issue.

In July I was in Shanghai and met a person from Carlow who had been living there for a number of years. He left Shanghai about three years ago but had to go back because he had a strong attachment to the quality of life and security there. There is no tolerance of serious crime there and capital punishment is used. Nobody here would advocate that, but we should recognise that the degree of civil liberties built into the current legislation in the criminal area should perhaps be reviewed. Nobody wants a police state, with abuses on the other side. On the other hand, we cannot countenance a continuation of the growth in violent crime on our streets and across Europe and elsewhere. We must achieve a position between the extremes.

We see on television programmes criminals involved in murder and violent crime who are known to the Garda and the community, yet they are free to walk the streets. It raises the question of what needs to be done in rebalancing where we stand. I hope the people around this table will be supportive of the Minister in any initiative he takes. In other fora I have heard people argue that legislation is oppressive and takes away civil liberties. Many reasonable people would sacrifice some civil liberties to live in a safer environment.

Deputy Hoctor

I am a firm believer that the effectiveness of the Garda is largely reliant on the intelligence available from the local community. We should not underestimate the knowledge of people in the community who recognise the movement of people who are involved in drug trafficking. There is clearly a difficulty for people with that knowledge. Many of them are young people who are terrified of reporting because of what may happen if it becomes known that they went to the Garda. I have previously raised the possibility of advertising in public media to encourage people to assist the Garda by reporting that kind of information. The Garda can only be as effective as the people who assist them. That means all of us within our own communities.

We are renewing the provisions in the legislation before us but we have not mentioned alcohol. I do not wish to take from the seriousness of what we have been discussing, but we know there is illegal trafficking of alcohol from off-licences by irresponsible adults or licence-holders to young people who are under age. This is another example of drug trafficking which is not addressed in this legislation. Nevertheless it is very serious. Alcohol is still the most widely abused drug. Where other drugs are used, alcohol is never too far away. Lethal concoctions are made when people are involved in both.

Greater powers should be given to the Garda. We support the Minister in this provision but I believe we will be back sooner rather than later to consider giving powers to the Garda in other areas. Many gardaí are doing a great job, even with limited resources, and often they do not get credit. I hope that with the deployment of the extra 2,000 gardaí the small towns and villages where drug trafficking is going on at a steady pace, as well as the cities, will be looked after.

Deputy McDowell

A number of points have been made. We are here to consider whether these powers should be extended. That is the net issue. The statute requires that before I move that the powers should be extended I should account for how they have been used. I am not required to set before the House a White Paper on drug abuse, but simply a report of whether these powers are or are not being abused or used at all. It is very clear from the figures set out in the report I have tabled that the powers are not being used excessively and that nobody could claim that.

Reference was made to section 4, which contains a prohibition on re-arrest of people, except where a warrant is issued by a judge for re-arrest and questioning under the terms of the Act. It is not a matter of section 4 being redundant if it is not used. It is a civil liberty section providing that people cannot be repeatedly arrested and questioned and detained under the Act without judicial intervention. The number of times it may have been used is not in any sense a measure of the effectiveness or non-effectiveness of section 4. The purpose is to prevent repeated detention of people for lengthy periods unless there is judicial intervention in aid of arresting members of the Garda Síochána.

Research was conducted by the national advisory committee on drugs in 2003 which found that there were 14,500 opiate users in Ireland, of whom 12,300 resided in the Dublin area and 2,200 outside that area. The great majority of the 2,200 are in what is now the greater Dublin area — Wicklow, Kildare and adjoining counties. This was based on statistics provided by three data sources, the central drug treatment list, the national Garda study on drugs and crime and related criminal activities, and the hospital inpatient inquiry database. That was the best estimate of the national advisory committee. The number of drug users they found in Dublin had decreased marginally since a previous comparable study in 1996. That was a drop of approximately 1,000. That looked at the situation in Dublin only. In areas outside the ERHA there was a fourfold increase not in the numbers of abusers but in the number of people receiving treatment in the period 1998-2002. There are now 7,100 people on methodone, which compares with 5,000 receiving such treatment at the end of 2,000. In the context of the overall number of heroin users, we have a high methodone treatment rate by European standards.

I wish to give the committee some figures relating to cocaine. I share the views of the committee that this is a worrying area and we discussed it at Government today. Figures from the general population drug survey which were conducted by the NDAC in 2003 showed that 3.1% of the population have at some time used cocaine, a very high figure, that 1.1% used it in the previous 12 months and that three in a thousand people had used it in the past month. Lifetime prevalence was highest among 15 to 24 years olds. Compared with other similar comprehensive surveys conducted in European countries, cocaine use in Ireland is average and, therefore, we have nothing to be happy about in this regard. While the numbers presenting for treatment for cocaine use remain low and they represent a small percentage of the number in drug treatment, the Government has become aware of an increase in the use of the drug. Blood samples analysed by the medical bureau of road safety show an alarming presence of cocaine. This coincides with a general increase in availability and use of cocaine in Europe generally as a result of increased production, particularly in Colombia, which has resulted in a consequential drop in the street price. The Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs recently approved additional funding of €400,000 to support a series of pilot projects targeted at cocaine abuse.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh will not be pleased with my comments. His party sent a group of people to interact with FARC, a communist terrorist organisation in Colombia, which funds its entire campaign by exporting cocaine from the regions it controls. I hope in future they will be more careful about whom they talk to because the cocaine problem in Ireland is driven largely by two groups in Colombia — the right wing death squads and the cartels they operate and the Marxist FARC group, which meets its needs by exporting cocaine to the rest of the world.

The Garda authorities reported that in the period since the introduction of this provision a total of 229 persons have been prosecuted, of whom 22 received a sentence of more than ten years. When this issue was debated recently, I noticed a change in the pattern of sentencing among the Judiciary. It is important that all political parties send a message to the Judiciary that they are supportive of the minimum sentence. I was interrogated about this on television recently as if it were wrong to have it in place and it was counterproductive. The great majority of people support the minimum mandatory sentence. The Judiciary is frequently urged by barristers defending their clients to the best of their ability that their clients are small cogs in a big machine. They are a small and deliberate cog in almost every case in a machine of death. It is about as realistic to refer to small cogs in a machine in the context of the holocaust as to refer to small cogs in a machine in the distribution of drugs in Ireland. People who deal in drugs deal in death because they make death the inevitable consequence for many addicts. They also use killing to enforce their patches and to collect their debts. There is a strong correlation between the use of firearms and killing in the drugs business.

The Garda has broken up many activities of criminal gangs in Dublin. Some of the more recent events that have been witnessed are consequences of the break up and collapse of the gangs and the seizure of their arsenals. Let us not fool ourselves. I agree with Deputy Costello and other members that a serious effort is being made by a number of criminals to dominate the drugs business and they will stop at nothing to enforce their dominance. The Garda is taking the matter seriously. The Criminal Assets Bureau is doing its bit to confiscate the assets of drug dealers but the majority of assets recovered are connected to tax evasion, smuggling and so on, and not to drugs.

I acknowledge the comments about the spread of drugs beyond Dublin and that soft drugs are available in most provincial towns and villages, which is a serious development. I have asked the Garda Commissioner to come to the Department to explain the strategic thinking and activities of the force in regard to the supply of drugs. If we are serious about this problem, we must be strategic in our response to it. The Garda, using modern management techniques, is addressing the issue in a way that is more strategic than reactive because that is the only way to crack this problem.

I refer to the prisons issue. I do not have rows with governors. I am implementing the Government's policy, which is that prisons should be drugs free. Anybody who cannot live with that policy has a simple choice. There is no question of tolerating drugs in prisons and I intend to ensure mandatory testing of prisoners for drugs is introduced because that is part of the programme for Government. I also intend to ensure all the steps that are being taken to minimise the supply of drugs in prisons such as nets over exercise yards in urban locations and so on are intensified and screened visits become the order of the day. A number of prisons are relatively drug free but if a prison is a harbour of considerable drug abuse, it is failing in its role in society because criminal offences are being committed in the prison, the system is corrupted, prisoners' lives are at risk both in terms of health and the dangers posed to other prisoners, there is no rehabilitation for prisoners who take intravenous drugs and when they are released they will have accumulated debt to others and developed a florid habit of drug abuse, which can be satisfied only through continued criminal activity or prostitution.

It is a duty of Government to make our prisons drug free and those who seek sterilising fluid and needle exchanges in prisons are arguing for the abdication of a primary duty of government.

Deputy Costello

What about the Minister of State?

Deputy McDowell

The Minister of State is in charge of the drugs strategy outside prisons. I have a Government mandate to run prisons and to make them drug free. I want a Member who disagrees with my stance on this subject to stand up publicly and say I am wrong and argue that it would be correct for prison officers to hand out syringes, sterilising fluid and needles——

Deputy Ó Snodaigh

I will.

Deputy McDowell

I am glad the Deputy would. That is consistent with sending people to FARC.

Deputy Costello

The Minister of State has said it should be done.

Deputy McDowell

It is probably the most irresponsible policy I have heard and it will not happen.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh

Maybe not on the Minister's watch.

Deputy Costello

The Minister of State with responsibility for this area has argued for it.

Deputy McDowell

There is one Minister responsible for this area and it is me. I am implementing the Government's policy which is that prisons should be drug free.

Deputy Costello

The Minister of State with responsibility for the national drugs strategy has argued for changes in prisons.

Chairman

We are not discussing the issue.

In accordance with Standing Orders, the joint committee will report back to Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann to the effect that it has completed its consideration of the motion. A formal message in the manner prescribed in Standing Orders will be sent separately to the Clerks of the Dáil and Seanad confirming that the joint committee has completed its consideration of the motion. Is it agreed there should be no further debate on the matter in both Houses?

Deputy Costello

We have been through this previously and it was agreed a different formula of words would be drafted. There is every reason for further debate on such an issue. It is not up to us to tell both Houses there should be no further debate.

Chairman

The agenda has been agreed by the Whips and I must put the question to the committee.

Deputy Costello

It is up to the committee to agree.

Chairman

The Deputy has the option of disagreeing.

Deputy McDowell

I do not agree. Every Member is free to participate in the debate. The statement means this forum is the place for every Member to participate in the debate.

Deputy Costello

This is a hotly debated issue and a report was supposed to be presented to Members but it has not been forthcoming. It needs to be circulated in advance before the motion is returned to the Dáil in order that Members will have an opportunity to examine it.

Deputy McDowell

That is a matter for the Whips.

Chairman

There was general agreement that decisions of the committee would be circulated to both Houses. Is the message agreed to? Agreed. Is the draft report agreed to, subject to the insertion of the documents supplied by the Department and details regarding the attendance and contributions to the discussion? Agreed. I thank the Minister and his officials for their attendance and the committee looks forward to seeing him again.