asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware of the article on security firms in the February issue of Garda News; and, if so, the action he proposes to take in order to establish reasonable control over entry to the security industry.
22.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Security Firms.
21.
asked the Minister for Justice the proposals he has to regularise the security business and if he will indicate his plans to prepare a register of legitimate security firms operating in the country.
23.
(Dublin North-West): asked the Minister for Justice if a full investigation will be carried out into the background of all personnel operating and employed with security firms.
(Limerick East): A Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 21 to 23, inclusive, together.
I have seen the article in question — an article which does not, I would point out, purport to be more than a summary of the report of the Committee on Crime, Lawlessness and Vandalism published recently.
I outlined my attitude to this issue in reply to Parliamentary Question No. 17 of 8 March 1984 when I told the House that I was not satisfied that an answer to the problems posed by shortcomings in the operation of security firms was to be found in statutory controls. Since then the Committee on Crime, Lawlessness and Vandalism has reported on the matter and recommended a statutory system of control. In view of this, I will have the question looked at again but I think, in fairness, I should say that I am still not convinced that an answer to the problem necessarily lies in a system of statutory control.
In view of the growing number of security firms who are providing a valuable service for society, does the Minister not think that the public interest would be best served by eventually reaching a stage where these firms would be licensed and subject to some form of statutory control? Otherwise there is an inherent danger that property could be lost as a result of some irregular activities of these firms.
(Limerick East): One way of approaching it would be to encourage these groups to self-regulate and to have their own professional licensing system. That is the attitude I have been taking up to now. As I said, the Committee on Crime, Lawlessness and Vandalism recommended statutory control. The situation in Britain, as announced by the Home Secretary in answer to a parliamentary question in December 1980, is that he and the Secretary of State for Scotland had decided against legislation to regulate the private security industry and had concluded it was preferable to support and encourage self-regulation within the industry.
There is little doubt that the whole private security business gives cause for concern. Does the Minister not agree that there is need for some regulation as to the way these firms dress their personnel in uniforms, many of which are similar to Garda uniforms, and their activities in public places particularly in crowd control and so forth? There have been reports of private security personnel taking action and assaulting people at public functions. Does the Minister not feel there is a need to regulate in such a way that it is clear what their rights are and what their responsibilities are?
(Limerick East): We will have security firms with us as a part of modern life for a long time to come. There are two ways of approaching regulation. It can be done by statutory control or it can be done by self-regulation. I was of the opinion that it would be better to support and encourage self-regulation within the industry so that they would have higher professional standards. They do not enjoy any immunity from the law above and beyond the rights of any other citizen. If they operate within the law they are free to operate; and if they contravene any law, whether by wearing a facsimile of a Garda uniform or engage in the activities the Deputy suggests, they would have no protection under the law and they would be liable to prosecution like anybody else.
I accept that they, like the Garda are constrained by the law. Would the Minister not accept that in many circumstances where these personnel operate in places which are considered by the public to be public places, such as shopping centres, which in fact are private grounds, that the public in general are unclear as to what their rights are in relation to obeying instructions or being apparently arrested by those people? Does the Minister not feel that his Department have some responsibility in clarifying what these people are entitled to do?
(Limerick East): As I said, in view of the recommendations from the Committee on Crime, Lawlessness and Vandalism, I will look at the matter again. With regard to the question of security firms operating in shopping centres, it seems to me that if they are impolite and if they are harassing people the public have a choice to shop elsewhere.