Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 23 Nov 1976

Vol. 294 No. 4

Private Members' Business. - Law and Order: Motion.

I move:

That Dáil Éireann condemns the Government for its failure to deal effectively with the breakdown in law and order.

I move this motion on behalf of my party. I would like, at this early stage in the debate, to have a look at the amendment to my motion by the Minister for Justice. I have no objection to parts of the amendment. I have no argument with the part of it which states: "That Dáil Éireann notes with concern an increase in the incidence of certain types of crime as revealed in the latest reports of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána." This is the situation as it is.

I agree that Dáil Éireann expresses its full confidence in the security forces of the State. There is no question whatsoever of a lack of confidence in the security forces of the State. There is no question whatsoever of any lack of confidence in the Garda force or any intimation of such in my motion. I have every confidence in our Garda force. I have every confidence in their loyalty to the State and its people. I have every confidence in their desire effectively to do their work in an efficient and proper way. I have not confidence, however, that everything possible is being done to protect old and young people and their property.

I cannot accept the part of the Minister's amendment which says: "expresses satisfaction at the continued maintenance of the rule of law". The rule of law has a twofold connotation. It means that accused people are dealt with speedily, effectively and fairly. It also means that the rule of the gangster and the vandal does not prevail. Can we be confident that either part of that concept is in a healthy state?

The Garda Commissioner, in his report for 1975, says that there has been an increase of 8,291 indictable crimes for 1975 over the number for 1974. Surely the Minister can see how the wording of his amendment is contradicted here by the Garda Commissioner in his report? The increase in indictable crimes I have just mentioned is an increase of approximately 21 per cent over 1974 and is most marked in the offences against property with violence crime group. It is unfortunate that the percentage detection rate for 1975 is down by about 5 per cent on that for 1974. It is very disturbing that approximately 27,337 crimes went undetected for the year in question.

During the course of this debate I will welcome a statement by the Minister on this because this is a very disturbing aspect in the Commissioner's report. It is frightening to learn that well over half the crimes recorded, 26,807, happened in the Dublin area. I was unable to find the percentage of this number of crimes that were detected. I hope the Minister will be able to get this figure and make it available to the House and the public. The increase in this particular type of crime in the Dublin area is unfortunately an increase of 20 per cent over the figure for 1974. This being so, how can the Minister say that he is satisfied with this situation? How can he honestly ask that Dáil Éireann expresses its satisfaction at the continued maintenance of the rule of law?

Surely the Minister can see in the offences against the property with violence group that there has been an increase of approximately 3,500 crimes, which represents a staggering increase of nearly 27 per cent, of which almost 54 per cent occurred in Dublin. The breaking and entering offences have increased considerably and are naturally a very great worry and a source of great concern to all of us. I am sorry that I cannot share the Minister's view of the situation as I see it outlined in his amendment. I am sorry that I cannot express my satisfaction at the situation.

It is unfortunate that larcenies, frauds and related crimes show a sharp increase. It is very regrettable that in this area, while we have had for 1975, 29,365 such offences approximately 18,000 of those offences remain undetected. The situation, as far as armed robberies and attempted armed robberies are concerned, is that we had 153 cases for 1975 and, regrettably in 99 cases out of that total no people were charged. Instead of expressing satisfaction at the continued maintenance of law and order, as the Minister does and wants Dáil Éireann to do, I find that the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána says: "that the overall crime picture can only be described as disturbing". I am sure the Commissioner is a very modest man and certainly a man who could never be accused of exaggerating the situation. From the facts given to us by the Garda Commissioner the situation to me is much worse than just disturbing. It is horrible.

The Commissioner of the Garda Síochána says that criminals are becoming more vicious and mean. He says that attacks on old and disabled people in their homes are now on the increase. This crime was unknown until very recently. This, in my view, is not just disturbing and certainly not something with which to express satisfaction. It is horrible. I respectfully request the Minister for Justice to make known, during his contribution to this debate, in an open and straightforward way what his views are on the situation, what his proposals are and what the proposals of the Government are to make sure that everything possible will be done to assist our Garda force in their efforts to combat crime.

I would like to express my satisfaction at the decrease in other offences, particularly indecent assaults on women, young and old. I gather there was a decrease of approximately 30 per cent in those crimes. I am also glad that the publication of the Commissioner's report for 1975 coincides with this debate this evening because it gives Members an opportunity to air their views on very certain and most important matters. I am sure that now, because of the publicity of the facts contained in the Commissioner's report, many people outside the House are confirmed in their views and are worried about the situation. I have had numerous incidents reported to me by people who were extremely dissatisfied and gravely upset and worried with the law and order situation at present. I ask the Minister to accept that this concern being expressed is a genuine concern. It is so genuine that something must be done about it immediately.

The ordinary lay person reading the report of the Commissioner for 1975 will, naturally, have important questions to ask. One purpose this debate will serve is that we may get answers to some of the questions from the Minister for Justice. One question I should like to ask is: Why are we losing the battle slowly but surely against crime? Are we reaching the situation where we may have to acknowledge that crime after all does pay? Why are crimes on the increase and the rate of detection on the decrease when more money than ever before is being made available to our police force? A question must be asked as to what the future holds for our people, not alone for those living in our cities but those living in rural areas also. Are those who believe that people are no longer safe in their homes to be confirmed in their belief by what can be seen in the report of the Commissioner? Must they fear for their lives at every hour of the day and night? The question that is always being asked is: What protection is available to them if they need help?

Unfortunately, many of those people in trouble when looking for help and protection were not able to get it when it was most required. It is a fact—the Minister knows this better than I— that help often arrived to some of these people many hours after it was sought and, in some cases, days after it was sought.

I assure the Minister, the House, and the public, that I get no pleasure in saying that I am convinced that ordinary people are genuinely terrified in their homes. It is unfortunate that there is nothing in the report of the Commissioner that will give such people any relief or any indication that they will have a safer future. The last time I had an opportunity of speaking on this subject was last May on an Adjournment Debate arising out of a parliamentary question to the Minister for Justice. On that occasion the Chair did not think it proper to allow me propose a Private Members' Motion. During the course of his contribution the Minister for Justice—it was only a 30-minute debate and, in fairness to the Minister, he had only ten minutes to say what he wanted to say—went to great pains to ensure that nothing was left unchallenged on the record which, as he said, might bring undue alarm and unease or might give the impression here, or further afield, that law and order had broken down. The Minister said then that nothing could be further from the truth. Since then we have had a declaration of a state of emergency and the introduction of an Emergency Powers Bill resulting in steps which necessitated derogation from the European Convention of Human Rights. On the occasion of that debate last May the Minister said, as reported at column 778 of the Official Report of that date:

There was an unfortunate rash of robberies some weeks ago but I am precluded, happily, from commenting on them because the vast majority are sub judice. They are sub judice because we have an active, intelligent, dedicated, loyal police force whose morale is of the highest. If the position were as Deputy Collins wants to present it to the House, of a dispirited force with no morale, the position which prevents us debating these matters would not have arisen.

At that time there was nothing to prevent the Minister from speaking about the 99 armed or attempted armed robberies during 1975 for which no person has still been charged. Surely the Minister knew last May that the rash of armed robberies he spoke of did not begin a few weeks prior to that debate or did not begin with the number of robberies from unarmed and unprotected trains about that time? Surely the Minister does not want the House to believe that he knew nothing about the 153 armed robberies of 1975 and the number of these cases for which nobody was charged? The Minister must be aware of the situation as it is.

During the course of his reply the Minister might tell us what the situation is for the 11 months of 1976 in relation to armed robberies or attempted armed robberies. It may be too early for the Minister to give the number of these cases for which persons were charged but if we go back to January we will find that in the Dublin area alone we had seven armed robberies. In February there were ten armed robberies in that city and 20 armed robberies in March. Four or five years ago if we had an armed robbery it occurred only once every six months and was given banner headlines in our national newspapers but they are happening with such regularity nowadays that one must look to the bottom of pages three, four or five to find a mention of them.

The whole question of security, and what is meant by security, must come under scrutiny. Any decision by the Government which resulted in the removing of gardaí from mail trains carrying large sums of money must come under scrutiny. Any decisions of a Government who allow post office vans carrying large sums of money to travel regularly throughout the country without security must come under scrutiny. If we cannot improve our security standards in this regard we are encouraging criminals to help themselves. In August, 1975, the Government, and the Minister for Justice, deliberately decided to cut back on the amount of overtime work being done by gardaí. The implementation by the Minister for Justice of these financial restrictions has prevented the Garda Síochána from doing the work they want to do, combating crime.

The Minister, being the astute politician he is, has tried on every occasion to deny that there have been cutbacks on overtime but, of course, that is not true. The Minister said he restricted the growth in overtime, as reported in column 779 of the Official Report of 5th May.

The Garda Representative Body, a body for whom we all have nothing but the highest respect and regard, have publicly contradicted the Minister and vehemently said the cutback in overtime is responsible, to a great extent, for the dramatic increase in crime and the noticeable decrease in crime detection. The Garda Representative Body say they have been angered by the Minister's denial. They say the Minister was in grave error. They say definitely the cutback exists. They say it is serious and sustained and is having a most serious effect on the level and quality of the service given by the Garda to the general public.

They say the cutback in overtime is responsible for a grave diminution of Garda presence on the streets. They say it is also responsible for the widespread grounding of squad cars and patrol cars, leaving the public unprotected in sensitive areas at sensitive times. The cutback in overtime naturally exposes members of the Garda to unnecessary dangers because of the lack of back-up services. The Garda have gone so far as publicly to contradict the Minister. They say the Minister earlier acknowledged the existence of a cutback when members of the representative body met him on September 4th, 1975.

It is reported that, on that occasion, the Minister told the members of the representative body that the scale of overtime was such as to make it impossible for him to argue with his colleagues in Government that there should not be a cutback in the light of the serious state of the economy. This is now seen by all as a grave error by the Minister in trying to achieve economy irrespective of the consequences. It was a false economy on the part of the Government and now its signs are clearly seen in the huge crime increase and in the non-availability of Garda properly to deal with it.

Prior to the introduction of the cutback, Garda patrol cars were kept on the roads even when it was necessary to employ gardaí on overtime to crew them. The Garda say a system of beat tolerance in Dublin and certain other areas ensured a minimum level of street patrolling. Emergency duties were undertaken by gardaí on overtime when no other members of the force were available. Immediately after the cutback was introduced by the Minister for Justice, at the behest of the Government, Garda cars were grounded, beat tolerance was discontinued, back-up services which are so vital to an effective police force were cut back and directions were issued changing previous policy towards the employment of gardaí on overtime in the investigation of crime.

The Garda said a strict system of financial control was introduced which made certain that the cutback was deep and effective. An examination of the overtime records in any police station would show how effective and how severe the cutback is in reality. The Garda Representative Body hold the view that the cutback has been implemented for its own sake and without any regard whatsoever for the effect it is having either on the crime rate or on the morale of the Garda, who now see duties previously regarded as essential being practically completely disregarded.

The Garda Representative Body say their members are especially worried because of the effect the cutback has on their safety. If this cutback continues to be applied, as it was in the earlier stages, to members of the force on Border duties, that will be dreadful and, to my mind, it will show a disregard for the safety of members of the Garda who have the very difficult task of police work in Border areas. Throughout the length and breadth of the country members of the Garda can only look in one way at the Minister's denial that there has been a cutback in overtime. They know best when they look at the Minister's denial. Unfortunately for the sake of our democracy and democratic institutions, they can only look at it with disbelief and with disillusionment.

Their comments on the consequences of the cutback in overtime imposed on them by the Minister at the behest of the Government were conveyed to the Garda Commissioner last March. They requested the Commissioner to convey their views to the Minister. The Minister has remained silent on the Garda comments and on their views as to how his actions, at the behest of the Government, are having such a disastrous effect on their operations and showing how false the economy is. Naturally the Minister should be worried about the truth of the situation as outlined to him by the Garda. Naturally when the Garda started talking about trade unions and the right to strike, this played on his mind, troubled his conscience and showed him the falseness of the economy he was effecting.

When the Minister spoke at a passing out parade at the Garda Training Centre in Templemore on Friday, July 16th, 1976, he said to the young new gardaí there that afternoon that loyalty means the ability to stay silent under the pressure of a grievance when its public expression could lead to unease and misunderstanding. In the interests of what is involved, the Garda Representative Body have the right, the duty and obligation to speak up when they see their best efforts to combat crime being thwarted by a Government whose prime consideration is to effect economies irrespective of the consequences. Now we can see the consequences in the report by the Commissioner for 1976. Now we can see the consequences which are listed for us in the crime report for 1975, mainly due to the cutback. The facts listed in this report prove without doubt that the Minister was wrong and the Garda were right. Unfortunately that is so.

The Minister is on record last May in this House trying to play down the level of violence and criminality. He did not accept that the crime situation was out of hand. He said we were relatively free of serious crime. Does the Minister still hold this view and, if so, who is supplying him with the information on which he is basing his view?

I believe that in holding this view the Minister could not be further from the truth of the situation. I believe it is not on the advice of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána that he is stating this view. The Commissioner has all the facts at his disposal and could not give advice to the Minister along those lines, because it would be contrary to the facts, and the Commissioner would not advise contrary to the facts. It is unfortunate that the Minister's head-in-the-sand attitude and his mentality have severely damaged the morale of the ordinary member of the force.

Spokesmen for the Garda are on record as saying that increasing disillusionment is clearly seen among its members, not alone in the crime problem but also in matters of welfare and force morale. They say that right across the board the Garda Síochána are faced with enormous and rapidly increasing problems. The gardaí believe that right up to Government level the official reaction operates on the principle that if you do not admit their existence they will disappear.

Representatives of the gardaí have publicly said that matters have recently come to a head with the emergence of problems which concern not only the Garda Síochána but the community as a whole. They say we are now facing a situation in which the criminal de facto rules our streets and our countryside and that the morale of a once proud police force now lies battered. They say this without any joy or satisfaction but they say it with honesty and conviction when they say the criminal is winning and that the public are losing.

The Garda Síochána, through their spokesmen, are speaking of the armed robber, the mugger, the burglar, the thief, for whom, unfortunately, in recent years our streets and our countryside are wide open because of the lack of Garda patrols. Does the Minister believe that our children are safe as they go about their ordinary day's activities, whether it be school, games, discos or dances? Does the Minister believe that our old people living alone are safe in their isolation, as it might be in rural Ireland, or seclusion, as it might be in an urban area?

The Minister is, I am sure, aware of the public invitation issued to him by spokesmen for the Garda Síochána to walk down O'Connell Street in Dublin or, indeed, O'Connell Street in Limerick, some night after dark alone, or an invitation to visit elderly, terrified residents of flats and houses around our cities and towns. I believe that if the Minister could only accept this five- or six-month-old invitation to see things for himself, then there would be a hope that he would convince his Government colleagues that they should ease the financial restrictions which are choking the very life out of the Garda Síochána.

The Garda themselves have been clamouring for additional strength to take on the growing menace of ordinary crime, much of which they say has to go uninvestigated at times, and of course, preventative policing disappeared into thin air about 15 months ago. The Garda say that the effect on their morale is disastrous. Yet last May the Minister is on public record as saying in this House that their morale is of the highest. With all due respect to the Minister as a person for whom I have a high regard, I must say in this case I believe the Garda.

There are two basic requirements if the Garda are to combat crime. First, I say even late in the day to the Minister for Justice, to let the existing gardaí back on the streets to do the job the public want them to do, the job the gardaí themselves are prepared to do. The gardaí, as citizens of this country, want to do their policing, the work they are trained for, in the most effective manner. I ask the Minister to please let them do it. Would he endeavour to convince his Government colleagues of their wrong judgment, of their mistake, in trying to effect economies here which have been proved to many as being false economies?

We urgently need many more gardaí. The 500 extra gardaí announced by the Minister as a result of a Government decision of June 18th last, and still not recruited, are not likely to be recruited before Christmas. This number will not be enough or anywhere near enough to do the job that has to be done. A conservative estimate of our additional requirements, in my view from what I have learned from my discussions, is between 2,000 and 3,000 extra recruits. This Government stand accused of deliberately slowing down trainee Garda recruiting. Templemore Garda training centre was virtually unoccupied with trainee gardaí in recent times, and I believe it is well below capacity. The Government did announce last June the recruitment of an extra 500 Garda recruits. That was six months ago, and the Government have done nothing about it since. I am sorry, I have wronged the Government here. They did do something about it. They changed the method of intake of recruits into the force, which will naturally slow down recruitment many more months. Certainly it will be many more months before these men, who are urgently required, will be on the streets.

The best recipe for putting down crime is the likelihood of detection and with detection, punishment. For too long the Minister allowed disputes about the legal aid system to drag on, involving first the solicitors and later the barristers. The result was that the trials of many accused could not take place. District justices and judges were obliged to release them on bail, often a very nominal bail. The result has been that even in the cases where crimes were detected they were not processed with the promptitude required. I understand that at present there is a great backlog of cases in all courts. I understand also that if the Special Criminal Court did not receive one new case it would take it approximately a year to process those in the pipeline already.

Is this the right basis for fighting crime? The two go together and let no one, the Minister or anybody else, accuse me of introducing knocking arguments. There should be a police force at full strength with proper equipment properly deployed, and once a crime is detected there should be a court system deployed and equipped to receive and process the cases.

The first thought I would offer, having listened to Deputy Collins, is that in endeavouring to paint a picture to justify his original motion the Deputy has endeavoured to paint a picture of rampant and endemic crime, of a place where people are afraid to go about their lawful business, where the police are ineffective and the courts no longer function properly. He endeavoured to paint a picture of a nation in a totally lawless condition. To any casual observer that must seem a gross exaggeration. It is so far removed from reality as to be incredible. The Deputy's contribution was made in tones of indignation. He might mislead some people but those of us who know Deputy Collins will not be misled by his tone of horrified indignation. We live in a state of emergency as a result of the existence of a subversive organisation dedicated to the overthrow of the State, an organisation being fanned by the conflagration that is taking place in the other part of this island. The rule of law is strong in this State. Our police and courts are effective and our citizens are at ease.

For the Deputy to say that the criminal is in possession of our country so defies facts that one would not believe he said it unless one had heard it. He endeavoured to bolster his case by the selective use of statistics from the latest Garda crime report. There are disturbing trends in that report which have been acknowledged in the amendment. It is a matter of concern that there are increases in certain categories of crime but to paint a picture of total lawlessness from certain increases is improper and is a misuse of the facts. The increases mainly relate to offences against property with or without violence. There was a substantial numerical increase in these offences, mainly in the last quarter of 1975. As a result the total increase in crime figures in the calendar year 1975, as compared with the 1974 figures, which relate to the year ended 30th September, 1974, was 20.7 per cent. This, however, is not comparing like with like and in fact a comparison between the two calendar years shows an increase of 15.3 per cent, which is a significant difference. Deputy Collins failed to pinpoint one significant and heartening figure in the report. He omitted to point out that offences against the person, which I consider to be the most serious offence, have decreased in the period in question by no less than 14.8 per cent. That figure was in the same column from which Deputy Collins quoted. It is a dishonest use of statistics to use them to bolster an unreal case.

Let us go deeper into the figures. In the category of offences against property, the offence of breaking and entering premises is a serious one. Housebreaking and breaking into shops, warehouses and so on showed a significant increase over the previous year. The biggest increase in this category is in the offence of larceny from unattended vehicles. This offence has been causing a considerable amount of concern and it will have to be combated, primarily by the owners of vehicles. They have a duty to make sure that their vehicles are securely locked and in safe parking places. When we examine this percentage increase on which Deputy Collins bases his claim, we find that the biggest input is the increase in the offence of larceny from unattended vehicles. So much for his case that fear stalks this land. Deputy Collins's exaggerated picture is not sustained by the report from which he quoted.

The provisional crime figures for 1976 show an estimated 36,950 indictable crimes during the first nine months of the year. If they are projected on a 12-month basis they work out at 49,200 crimes or an increase of less than 2 per cent on 1975. This indicates that the 1975 trends, bearing in mind that the main input relates to the offence of larceny from unattended vehicles, are not being maintained. These facts should be made known so that the gloomy analysis of Deputy Collins can be seen in its true light. To suggest that we are living in a State where the rule of law has broken down is false.

A comparison of figures with our neighbouring common law jurisdiction might be of interest. I propose to give the number of crimes per 100,000 of population. In the London metropolitan area the number is 6,000. In the rest of England and Wales the number is 4,000, and in Ireland it is 1,600. So much for the Deputy's suggestion that there has been a breakdown in law and order. I am entitled to say that he has done a disservice to the country and to the people who might be considering this country as a place of investment or for holidays. These matters should be put in perspective.

The most vicious type of crime is that of the offence against the person, and that in the year 1975 showed a decrease of 14.8 per cent over the preceding crime year. That is the most significant figure in the crime report under consideration. This is a figure that was staring Deputy Collins in the face when he was reading this crime report but for some unknown reason he chose to ignore that figure and, he having chosen to ignore it, I submit that his entire case was false and exaggerated. We are not happy or content with the present position but I will indicate some action that is being taken to ensure that the continuing battle to keep crime in control is being fought successfully and well. In 1972-73—I do not have to tell the Deputy what a watershed 1973 was in the life of this country—the provision for the Garda Síochána was £23.279 million whereas in 1976 that figure is £57.837 million, an increase of approximately 140 per cent. Garda strength on 28th February, 1973, was 7,525 and on 31st October, 1976, it was 8,477, an increase of 952. Notwithstanding the belittling efforts of Deputy Collins, a further 500 are being recruited—I am disappointed with the slow rate of recruitment—and that will bring the force to an all-time high of 9,002. The number of Garda cars has increased by 115 from 1973, and overall cars engaged on police work have travelled an extra million-and-a-quarter miles this year as compared with 1973.

These statistics show an active energetic Garda force doing its job in combating crime. This is a far cry from the time when Deputy Harte in Opposition was questioning my predecessor about the state of affairs in Buncrana—when the patrol car there met an emergency it could only contact the local station by hurrying to the nearest telephone kiosk to make a phone call because the radio of the car was antiquated and it did not work. Every car now is equipped with the most modern radio equipment. The use of computers has now been introduced into the Garda force and this is leading to increased efficiency.

It was sought to suggest that the restriction on the growth of overtime which I introduced in 1975 has been a contributing factor to the increase in the crime figures. The expenditure on overtime in 1975 was £8.441 million, the estimate for 1976 is £5 million, or a reduction of 40 per cent. The comparison of overtime expenditure and crime statistics for the first nine months of 1974, 1975 and 1976 is as follows—I take nine months because we have only nine months of 1976 with which to compare—1974 overtime expenditure was £5.104 million and the indictable crime was 31,436. Expenditure for the first nine months of 1975 was £6.826 million, indictable crime rose to 34,375. Expenditure for the first nine months of 1976 was £3.743 million, indictable crime was 36,950. These figures show that, despite an increase of £1.7 million or 34 per cent on expenditure in overtime in the first nine months of 1975 over the corresponding period of 1974, the crime statistic for that period increased by 9.3 per cent. Although the expenditure on overtime for the first nine months of 1976 showed a reduction of 45 per cent on the expenditure in the same period of 1975, the increase in crime was less, at 7.5 per cent. To attempt to show a mathematical equation between the volume of overtime and the volume of crime is nonsense. There is no relationship between the two. The total crime figures for 1976, as known for the first nine months and projected on a 12 months' basis, show that the level of increase this year over last year will be about 2 per cent. That is a gratifying sign that the rate of increase in 1975 over 1974 is not being maintained but is being slowed down. Hopefully in the following year the trend will be reversed and we may begin to show a reduction in the incidence of crime.

A number of other initiatives were taken to make the fight against crime more efficient. In 1973 a major crime investigation squad was set up to deal with major indictable offences such as bank robberies. This force originally was comprised of 13 men and in April of this year it was increased to 25 men —an inspector, four sergeants and 20 gardaí. The detection rate for major indictable crimes in the Dublin Metropolitan Area in July of this year was 82.1 per cent, in August 55.8 per cent, in September 64.8 per cent and in October 62.1 per cent. The detection rate for petty larcenies in the DMA for September was only 17.1 per cent, but Deputies and the public will agree that petty larcenies are notoriously difficult to detect. I would rather see a high and thereby deterrent detection rate for serious crime than have it the other way round. Ideally we should have a high detection rate for both types of crimes. A further initiative that was taken was the crime task force that was set up in 1971. That was a small force concentrating their efforts on vandalism and so on and that force has now been increased to 38 from its initial number of 27, and this is at a time when demands on the Garda for security duties along the Border are continually growing. They are two important initiatives that have been taken as regards the Dublin Metropolitan Area, an area which causes a lot of concern.

The increasing level of public co-operation has been gratifying to the Garda Síochána over the past year. Deputies on the other side, myself and my colleagues and the Garda authorities have been asking the public for their co-operation with the Garda. We have been making the point that the Garda can only be as effective as the public make them; we have been telling people to pass information to the Garda, that the old term "informer" must no longer be regarded as a dirty word and that it is a civic duty to give information to the Garda. I am glad to be able to tell the House that the Commissioner has reported that the level of co-operation, and the volume of information, from the public which has been coming in over the past year or more has been significantly greater than heretofore. I would urge that there be a continuation of that co-operation. The Garda can be only as effective as we make them.

I am sure that Deputies on all sides of the House will join with me in making the request to the public to co-operate in every way possible with the Garda. In addition, there is now at Garda headquarters a Public Relations Office. The Garda are very interested in community leaders contacting this office with a view to deciding how relations between the police and the community in particular areas might be improved and how there might be greater co-operation and liaison between them. This sort of situation can be particularly effective in respect of areas where there is a high degree of vandalism. As I have said here often in reply to questions, vandalism is essentially a social crime and is a problem for the community to solve but the Garda can give professional expertise to the community and can advise as to ways and means of solving that problem. I assure the public that the Garda are both anxious and willing to give this help. They would like to be approached by community leaders, tenants' associations and so on when help sought will be given.

Another area that has caused concern in relation to crime, not only this year but also particularly in very recent times, has been the effect of the O'Callaghan decision of 1966. I refer to the case in the Supreme Court in which it was held that it would be contrary to the Constitution for bail to be refused on the grounds that the accused, if left at liberty, would commit other offences. This is the case which, in effect, has meant the widespread and almost universal granting of bail in particular cases. I do not have up-to-date statistics regarding the number of persons committing crime while on bail. Because the compilation of those statistics was so time-consuming, the practice was discontinued in 1973 but for that year the number committing crimes while on bail was no less than 513, the number of crimes involved being 1,775. We may take it that there has been no lessening of those depressing figures.

It is common knowledge among certain criminal elements that having got bail they can have several crimes for the price of one when eventually they come to trial with the result that there has been a considerable increase in the number of crimes committed by persons on bail. Criminals when being sentenced are asking that offences committed by them while on bail be taken into account. As a result of all this the Government are of the view that they would be reflecting public opinion by asking the people in a referendum to amend the Constitution so as to overcome the constitutional disability found by the Supreme Court in the O'Callaghan case. Consequently it is our intention to take the opportunity of the referendum on adoption to ask the people at the same time to agree to an amending of the Constitution so that the position as found in the O'Callaghan case may be changed thereby allowing a restriction of the present universal right to bail. It is not my wish to anticipate the debate on that amendment but having regard to the volume of concern that has been expressed to me on this matter, I am confident that the people would respond to this public need.

To refuse bail on the ground that the accused might commit other offences while on bail is something which is recognised expressly in the European Convention on Human Rights. It is the practice in England and in other Commonwealth countries to refuse bail for this reason. Consequently, we could go to the people on this question quite satisfied that the reply to the amendment would be a resounding yes.

Regarding the overall crime situation I am concerned that there should be any increase in any category of crime but I do not share the view of Deputy Collins when he seeks to paint a picture of a lawless country in which people are afraid to go about their daily business, where the police force is ineffective and where the courts cannot cope with the number of criminals coming before them. That picture is not merely an exaggeration or a caricature, it is a gross distortion of the situation. The Deputy made selective use of the figures from the Report on Crime of the Commissioner of the Garda. The general public are satisfied that the rule of law prevails, that our courts and our police are effective. There is a general desire on the part of the vast majority of our citizens to obey the laws of the land. The people are satisfied, too, that the measures being taken to ensure that the rule of law is maintained are effective. The figures I have quoted for expenditure on men and equipment are proof of this but the success of all this depends on the human element. I am glad that that part of the report which expresses total confidence in our security forces finds full acceptance on the benches opposite. I should like to echo Deputy Collins in expressing thanks to the men of the Garda and of the Defence Forces as well as to those in a service sometimes forgotten—those in the prison service whose job is particularly difficult and against whom allegations are made frequently. However, these allegations should be treated with the contempt of silence because they are emanating from sources that are universally subversive.

I should like again to put on record that the picture of this country as a lawless state is far from accurate and represents a disservice to the nation.

The rule of law is strong here. This situation will continue to be maintained because we have a Government, a Parliament and a people dedicated to the maintenance of law, the enforcement of which will be carried out by the security forces who are loyal, efficient and of high morale.

I formally move the amendment in my name:

To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:

"while noting with concern an increase in the incidence of certain types of crime as revealed in the latest Reports of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána on Crime, expresses satisfaction at the continued maintenance of the rule of law and its full confidence in the security forces of the State".

When one cannot win an argument on the issues as presented, one presents other issues which may be capable of being defended while ignoring what has been said and by whom it has been said. In that sort of situation one ignores also the main issue under discussion which in this case is a matter that concerns all of us. Deputy Collins did not say that the rule of law has broken down in this country. Neither did he say that we are living in a state of lawlessness and in so far as the Deputy made any comment on the grave increase in crime he attributed almost all of that situation to the fact that the Garda who are our main protectors against increases in crime are not equipped either by way of personnel or otherwise to deal with this worsening situation. What Deputy Collins said had been said many months ago—and this is significant—not by any Member of this House but by a journal which represents the Garda.

The Minister, significantly, made no reference to the views of the Garda, although Deputy Collins quoted their views on many occasions. It is the Garda who have been saying whatever it is the Minister finds objectionable. It is they who have been saying whatever it is the Minister finds false and untrue. It is they who have been saying whatever it is the Minister finds irresponsible. We have not imagined this. It is the Garda who serve this nation and on whom we rely and for whom we have respect who have been saying this, but the Minister did not once refer to their concern as publicly expressed in the editorial of their publication, Garda Review.

I should like to quote from the editorial in the issue of the Garda Review June, 1976:

There is a certain irony in the fact that within days of the Representative's Body's decision to seek the right to strike, the Minister for Justice, Mr. Cooney, should stand up in the Dáil and play down the level of violence and criminality in the Ireland of today. He did not accept that the crime situation was out of hand. Compared with many other European countries, he said, Ireland was still relatively free of serious crime.

The Minister said the same this evening. The editorial continued:

The official reaction, right up to cabinet level, appears to operate on the principal that if you don't admit their existence they will disappear.

We say it with no joy or satisfaction, but we say it with honesty and conviction: the criminal is winning, the Garda—and the ordinary public—are losing. And we do not speak of the subversive criminal —the IRA—we speak of the ordinary, run of the mill, villain. We speak of the armed robber, the mugger, the burglar, the thief. Our streets are wide open for him. They are no longer patrolled. Our children are his defenceless victims as they go about the ordinary things of life, walking home from a dance or a cinema or from school. Our old folk, often living alone, both in the cities and the countryside, are his victims.

The Garda have said all these things, not our spokesman. It is the responsibility of the Minister to show that what the Garda have been saying is wrong; that our concern is unfounded and that the Garda are painting a false picture.

It is the Garda on whom we rely to ensure our peace in the true sense of their title, the guardians of the peace. When they express concern we, and particularly the Minister who is responsible for this area, must respond to ensure that the conditions about which they complain are improved. We must improve them so that they can discharge their responsibilities in the way they want to. Let the Minister acknowledge that every reference made by Deputy Collins in relation to the overall pattern of crime is confirmed in every detail by those who are charged with the responsibility of maintaining law and order, the Garda. Let him not suggest that we are trying to heighten tensions. If anybody in this House can be accused of that it is the Government who introduced a state of emergency. It is they who told the world at large that there is a threat to the survival of the State; not just a threat, but that we need to have a state of emergency to ensure the survival of the State. That is what the Government have said by asking to derogate from the Convention on Human Rights. All ordinary laws are not sufficient to protect us and now the Minister asks us to accept his amendment which states:

while noting with concern an increase in the incidence of certain types of crime as revealed in the latest Reports of the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána on Crime, expresses satisfaction at the continued maintenance of the rule of law and its full confidence in the security forces of the State.

Who introduced the emergency declaration? It was the Minister who is now talking about his satisfaction with the maintenance of the rule of law and order. If the rule of law was being maintained and upheld to the extent that he asks us to express our satisfaction with, surely that repudiates the case made by the Government in introducing the state of emergency. The Government cannot have it both ways. If anyone has painted a picture of lawlessness it is the Government, not us. If anyone has painted a picture of an increasing pattern of ordinary crime it is the Garda and not us. We believe the Garda. We believe our own experience when we see it and we believe the reactions of the people in the cities, where it is really serious, and in rural Ireland where it is on the increase. Apparently, we know what the Minister does not wish to know.

I should now like to deal with how the Government have been trying to deal with this matter, apart from hiding their heads in the sand and charging all of us with irresponsibility. Apparently, the Minister is satisfied that overtime has little or nothing to do with the level of crime detection. He produced figures to imply that the overtime cutback had nothing significant to do with the increase in crime in the period 1975-76. Everybody recognises that our Garda are not as available on our streets at night as we want them to be. The public overwhelmingly support that expression of their concern. They want to see the Garda patrolling our streets and securing our homes. They want to see evidence of the Garda doing the job they are best equipped to do. We recognise at the moment that can only be done by adequate overtime facilities while we are still waiting for the 500 men. However, instead of providing adequate overtime the Minister sees fit to cut back overtime to £5 million by comparison with the figure of £6.826 million for nine months in 1975. We all know that £5 million this year is very much a reduction on £6.826 million in the nine-month period for last year.

If the Minister is saying our position is such that we do not need this extra presence of the Garda, secured through overtime or otherwise, we totally and utterly reject it on behalf of the people who live alone and are concerned. Concern is not too strong a word because the Garda are very concerned about the people who walk our streets at night and about the people who live alone in rural Ireland.

The Minister and his Government, as they have done in other areas of social importance that are costly, because of financial stringency choose to look at the areas that cost most and cut back in those areas. It is almost the story of the children's allowances or the school tranport all over again. We all recognise that there are areas of government that cost a lot and inevitably will cost more. One of those areas, having regard to the reality of Irish life at the moment, is the maintenance of an adequate police force, adequate in numbers and in equipment. It is costing more and more each year and will cost more and more, but the people are prepared to recognise that. We have said in this House before to this Minister that this is a matter on which there can be real bipartisanship and that we will not play off one against the other. The extra money will need to be spent to guarantee an adequate police force and an adequate police presence at every time. We could not criticise any Government or Minister who would come in here to ensure that our streets were safe and our homes secure. Yet for some reason the Government have failed to respond to this need.

It is very strange to hear the Minister responsible coming in this evening and expressing disappointment at the delay in recruiting the 500 we have heard so much about for so long. If the Minister is not the one to be responsible for ensuring the speed of the recruitment after consultation with the Commissioners and those concerned, who is responsible? It is strange that the Minister should be expressing disappointment about a delay for which we hold him personally responsible in this House and, as Deputy G. Collins has said, all this at a time when it can hardly be stated that the Garda Training Centre at Templemore has been working at over capacity. Throughout this last year for many months it was working at very much less than full capacity. Nonetheless, the public recognise that there is a great need for extra young police to serve the security of this nation.

Incidentally, too, the public at large recognise that there is a great need for the young men of our nation who wish to join the Garda force and who are suitably equipped both in character and education, to be allowed to join the force. Instead, many of them are being forced at the moment to join the ranks of the inactive and unemployed, thereby perhaps instead of combating crime, for one reason or another, because of their inactivity or frustration, helping, unfortunately, to increase the incidence of crime. Where the young are inactive or frustrated, particularly the educated young who had expected more, obviously and inevitably it does lead to an expression of frustration, to criminal activity of one form or another. There is where the responsibility lies.

I would like the Minister to justify to us these decisions of the Government to cut back on either Garda recruitment, because that is in effect what is involved now, or the overtime necessary for the gardaí. When we talk in terms of the rule of law and the maintenance of the rule of law, we are not suggesting that the rule of law as it is applied through the courts is not being upheld or that the gardaí who bring cases before the courts are inadequate or are not capable of bringing these cases. We are saying that the Garda are not sufficiently supported by the Government in the job they have to do. That is the case Deputy G. Collins made right through his contribution this evening. We say to the Minister that the courts at the moment are not adequately equipped to deal with the number of cases before them. How many times have the Minister and the public heard of the need to introduce even a second Special Criminal Court? How many times has it been brought to their attention by representatives of the legal profession and others that the criminal courts in Dublin and elsewhere are working with a great delay? How many times have they been told that it is necessary to appoint an extra judge of the Circuit Court to deal with criminal matters? How many times has all this been brought to the attention of the Minister? The people who bring those things to the attention of the Minister are the people who are concerned for the maintenance of the rule of law. The Minister who ignores what they say in the same way as he ignores what the Garda say is the person who is in question. He and his Government have a commitment to the rule of law, to upholding the ordinary law of the land and not just to creating hysteria or fear by introducing emergency laws which would never be necessary if the ordinary laws were upheld and if there were sufficient gardaí to deal with the breaches of security that the Government mentioned as being justification for introducing emergency laws.

These are the issues about which we are concerned in this debate. These are the issues the Minister did not answer this evening. Let me say that if the Minister was to imply that we are irresponsible or painting a picture of something which does not exist, I am afraid he will have to ignore the fact that our concern is derived from the published statements of the men most directly concerned, namely the Gárda Siochána and their representatives. There is obvious concern that from time to time, in view of the clamp-down, which one can honestly call it, on overtime, officers of the Garda throughout the country sometimes are reluctant to do what may be necessary by way of road cordons or otherwise after the incidence of serious crime because of overtime restriction and regulation which have come through this Minister. I am sure it has been necessary from time to time for superintendents and chief superintendents to take decisions on the spot in relation to the deployment of Garda cordons in various areas which would involve overtime inevitably. Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that sometimes these superintendents and chief superintendents, as the case might be, did not take steps that they otherwise would have taken if the restrictions on overtime as now being applied were not being applied.

I want to conclude on the note that, if the Minister wants to distort the reality, let him not accuse us of distorting it. Let him look to those who are primarily concerned with the responsibility of ensuring our peace and security, the Garda. If the Minister and his Government want to do something about it, then let them recognise that the price of their economic mismanagement cannot be the peace and security of the citizens of this State. Wherever else they are going to save the money it cannot be in this area, because this is the area which will be essential to maintain the rule of law that the Minister and all of us are so concerned about. Let us at least have the issues debated accurately without the introduction of implications against us that do not square up to the facts.

Deputy Briscoe, we will be adjourning in a minute.

I am horrified at the reaction of the Minister this evening to Deputy G. Collins's contribution. This contribution was made with a real sense of urgency. As a city TD I can say that the citizens of Dublin are absolutely in a panic situation over the vandalism that is occurring in our streets at present and the lack of police enforcement. Unless the Minister realises the seriousness of this situation law and order are going to break down absolutely and completely.

Debate adjourned.
Barr
Roinn