I wish to share my time with Deputy Kavanagh.
Private Members' Business. - National Bureau of Crime Statistics Bill, 1993: Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
That is satisfactory.
The measures I mentioned on the last occasion we debated this demonstrate the seriousness of the Government's approach to tackling criminals and are a major assault on the criminal classes who prey upon us. Those who abide by the law will throw their full weight behind the Garda in its endeavours to fight crime. I take this opportunity to give credit to the Garda who, through good policing, prevent crime. In such cases there are no statistics recorded for use afterwards. I particularly pay tribute to the gardaí of my own area, including Crumlin, Tallaght, Clondalkin and Terenure, on their good work in policing against the odds. If crime becomes a statistic we lose sight of the human tragedy behind each case. In the constituency of Dublin South-West there is an increasing use of knives in assaults, a worrying development.
Deputy Mitchell's Bill contains a number of flaws. No matter how good, no set of crime statistics can account for unreported crime. I do not see how this can be overcome. Deputy Mitchell's Bill is too ambitious in this regard and perhaps he should introduce one that takes account of such limitations. The system used for compilation of statistics should be first class and realistic.
Another drawback is that the Bill could lead to greater bureaucracy and the creation of another body to deal with and analyse crime trends. The correct course is to ensure that gardaí are on the beat. We will not solve a crime with a bar chart or a diagram. The most effective way to solve it with a strong police force. One area where that is the case is the use of community gardaí in Dublin South West and particularly in Tallaght.
The "Crimewatch" series on television is encouraging enormous public involvement in the fight against crime. This is making major inroads into the activities of criminals. The programme is attracting enormous interest and is a useful vehicle for demonstrating what information is required and possibly for producing statistics.
I agree that our police force should have the most modern technology at its disposal in the fight against crime but I do not agree with Deputy Mitchell that a new bureau should be created. We should instead make better use of existing statistics and improve the present system. I pay tribute to Deputy Mitchell for the work he has done in the area of crime which is well and truly recognised. However, a crime statistics Bill is not the answer to the problem he is genuinely trying to solve.
I thank my colleague, Deputy Walsh, for allowing me time to speak on this Bill. The level of crime has reached alarming proportions. Therefore I welcome the announcement by the Minister on 16 December about the crime packages he is introducing for this year and the next three or four years. The 13 initiatives she included in her Estimate for acceptance by us are welcome, any one of them would constitute an initiative in its own right. The total package which the public has been demanding will cost about £66 million. All Members of the House should bear in mind at budget time that an initiative like this costs 12 times the amount of money which will be yielded by the property tax. It must be paid for and the people who own houses, particularly the more wealthy, will reap the greatest benefit.
My good friend Mr. Gay Byrne, with whom I crossed swords on another matter lately, had a very interesting discussion on his programme this morning. I compliment him on getting back to reality when he interviewed the Governor of Mountjoy Prison. If the Minister wanted a PRO for her Department she could not do better than to appoint a man like that who explained the difficulties he faces and the work done in the prison service to try to rehabilitate and educate the wrongdoers of both sexes. One statistic was that 66 per cent of all prisoners in Mountjoy have drug-related problems. I was astounded by that statistic, as were most people listening to the programme. It demonstrates the root cause of most of the crime we are enduring. If I had a comment to make about the 13 initiatives it would be that I see no particular initiative on drug-related crime and drug problems beyond what has already been done.
Several Ministers have responsibility in this area — the Minister for Health, the Minister for Education and the Minister for Justice — and much work has been done. However, such crime is not confined to major cities but is now reaching even the smaller towns and villages in our constituencies. It is an escalating problem that deserves a great deal of attention and a concerted effort to try to hold the position and possibly reduce it in the future.
Drug related crime is a major problem in the developed world. All members of the European Union are affected by it and America suffers from an advanced level of that type of crime which emanates mainly from drug dealing with Third World countries. The debate this morning on this matter brought home to all of us the seriousness of such crime.
The Minister has accepted that there is a serious crime problem in Dublin city and an initiative has been taken in that regard. The Garda force was strengthened by the establishment of a mobile task force which has proved successful. Criminals in the city are being harassed and pursued by members of that task force with beneficial effects for communities in the city of Dublin. However, while the city of Dublin may have benefited from that initiative, criminals are mobile people and a number of them now operate in counties bordering Dublin, especially since our road network from the city to neighbouring counties has been improved. County Wicklow has been badly affected because of the attention given to crime in Dublin city. I am not proud of the fact that County Wicklow has had the highest number of burglaries and bank and post office raids in the past two years. It is traumatic for the staffs of banks and post offices when criminals walk in with guns and using violent language demand that the staff lie on the floor. It is unfair that staff and customers should be subjected to such trauma. The Minister should consider giving some relief to counties such as Wicklow, from where it is possible for criminals to make quick getaways because of an improved road network.
In the past number of years there has been a policy to close down Garda stations manned by only one or two gardaí and that trend has not been reversed. The Minister should consider reversing that policy decision because places such as Carnew, Aughrim, Ashford and Barnadarrig, where Garda man-power has been reduced or stations closed, have been badly affected by crime not only from criminals who visit the constituency but by local problems in the area. The "green man" button on the wall of closed Garda station is not a substitute for one or two gardaí in a small rural area. Thousands of people visit Wicklow every year in the summer time. On a nice weekend in the summer there can be up to 10,000 people in Brittas Bay. Such large numbers of people attract criminals to the area who break into cars but there are no local gardaí in that area. Gardaí in patrol cars must come from Wicklow town, Arklow or Bray to pursue such criminals, by which time, in most cases, the criminal has disappeared with whatever he or she robbed.
The Minister should ensure that peripheral counties around the city of Dublin are considered in conjunction with policies for the city. The figure for violent crime is increasing. That is particularly worrying for those who live in isolated areas, such as the elderly, who traditionally did not lock their doors when going to the shop. Those people are now terrified because it is assumed that money is secreted away under the bed or in a drawer. Vicious criminals are operating in those isolated areas. I hope the Minister takes into account the statistics for crime in those areas and I plead with her to allocate some of the new recruits which will be taken on in the next few years to the Wexford division, which covers half of County Wicklow, and the Metropolitan division, which covers the Bray area. I have approached the chief superintendents in both those areas and was informed that there is an embargo on the number of gardaí which can be recruited to those areas. There has been a small increase in the number recruited to the Bray area, but the Minister should consider reopening the small rural Garda stations which were closed. The garda on the beat is very capable of reporting on the happenings in his area. It is regrettable that a policy which has seen the deterioration of surveillance in an area should continue to operate. I hope the Minister will reverse that decision.
This Bill gives us an opportunity to highlight problems in rural areas. I welcome the initiatives the Minister proposes to adopt, but I would add a few more which, with relatively small cost, could add to the security of all areas. I hope the Minister will note my comments. She is one of the most successful Ministers for Justice we have had in recent years and her interest in her portfolio since taking up office has been commended by people both inside and outside this House. A person who is willing to work will obviously be asked to do more and I am asking her to examine this matter further.
I compliment Deputy Mitchell on retaining his portfolio and I hope he remains in that position.
I am still there.
For good behaviour.
He is a terrier in this area and his intentions in introducing this Bill were worthwhile. Some of my colleagues have been critical of it, but he is well able to take advice not only from his own benches but from the benches opposite as well. I am sure the Minister will heed the objectives he is trying to achieve in this Bill.
I wish the Minister success in her portfolio and encourage her not only to continue her good work in this area but to consider with special interest the areas to which I referred.
I compliment Deputy Mitchell on presenting this worthwhile Bill to the House. We have had a long day today dealing with many aspects of the problem of crime and justice. We dealt earlier with the Extradition Bill and the Public Order Bill and we are now dealing with Deputy Mitchell's Private Members' Bill on crime statistics. This gives us an opportunity to address the serious problem of crime and justice in our community.
There is concern among the public about the rise in the levels of crime and the lack of security they feel in their homes and communities as they go about their normal business. The public look to this House and the Government to address this problem and provide them with answers to the complex problems associated with crime in modern society which threaten their security.
It is a basic civil right for a citizen to live in peace in his or her home, to move about without fear and not have to suffer a virtual curfew that many elderly people and women and children experience in their communities. In my constituency many people live alongside a fine public transport service, the DART service. Repeatedly, I hear complaints from parents who are reluctant to allow their children to use that facility, particularly late in the evening because of fear of molestation or some type of attack. It is not acceptable that peoples' rights and freedom are being curtailed.
The task we must address is not just about punishing crime and being vindictive towards criminals, but about protecting the freedom and rights of the citizen to move about and live a normal life. If talk could guarantee that and produce greater security for the public, better policing and a reduction in crime, crime would have been eliminated a long time ago having regard to all the talk in this House and outside through the medium of radio and television.
It is time we considered more critically than we have to date our approach to crime and justice. We are concentrating and spending too much money on the punishment of crime and not enough on its prevention. I accept that being soft with criminals does not work, but neither does the so-called law and order approach. If we are serious about ensuring that citizens are safe and secure in their homes, streets and communities, we will have to adopt new policies based on a sensible analysis of crime, its causes and consequences.
The recent crime package announced by the Minister for Justice provides an additional £66 million for the fight against crime. The provision of additional resources to tackle crime is welcome. However, we need to critically examine how this extra money is being spent and whether the public is getting the protection it deserves from the approximately £620 million the State now spends in the various forms of the administration of justice, namely, in respect of the Garda, prisons and courts. Of the extra £66 million being provided to fight crime this year, £25 million will be allocated for the provision of an additional 210 prison places. It works out that it will cost approximately £120,000 per prison place. As against that, only £100,000 extra will be provided to fund community-based projects to divert young people from crime. In other words, the Government in its new package on crime will now spend less in communities trying to keep young people out of trouble than it will spend on providing just one extra prison cell. Surely this approach is nonsensical. It is time we began to question the fundamentals of our spending on crime and justice.
Crime must be punished and the only way in which the average citizen can be saved from some criminals is to take those criminals out of society and place them in secure detention. In the interest of rehabilitating offenders we need to make greater use of alternatives to prison, but I cannot as yet envisage a society in which we will not need prisons. However, it is foolish to believe that crime will be solved by building more prisons, spending more on the prison service and attempting to lock away crime. We are now spending almost £110 million per annum on the prison service. That is roughly the equivalent of the entire budget for the Office of Public Works, or the entire amount spent on environmental protection, or the entire amount spent on the provision of public housing.
The Minister of State with responsibility for public housing is present. We have not seen him in the House since his announcement of the inadequate housing allocations to local authorities, but that is a matter we can deal with on another day. It may be of some assistance to the Minister in his battle for additional resources to know that it is an absurd society that annually spends as much on locking people away as it does on providing them with basic housing needs. It is time to ask if taxpayers' money would not be better spent in helping communities to keep young people out of trouble.
In every community there are public spirited people who give their time and energy freely and enthusiastically to organise sports clubs, youth clubs, community groups, adult education courses and a wide range of voluntary activity aimed at keeping their communities together and, in the process, provide constructive recreation for young people. It is often the same handful of people who run sports clubs, organise residents' associations and co-ordinate the neighbourhood watch scheme. They are people who do not need degrees in sociology or criminology to understand that, despite Margaret Thatcher's dictum, there is such a thing as society, individuals do not exist in isolation from each other, community is essential to our quality of life and cannot be bought in the supermarket, and that young hands and minds will stray if not directed to constructive activity.
Those people and those communities are being denied support from the Government and from official quarters. For example, there is no proper regular funding for community-based sport and leisure activity. The national lottery which was set up to provide that funding has been hijacked by the Government and its proceeds are now used as a type of tax on the dreams of the poor. The last allocation of lottery funds for community activity was made in 1991, just before the local elections. I expect the next allocation will be made before the European elections in June. That is cynical political abuse of people's money intended to help communities and if so applied would assist in dealing with the rising problem of crime.
Surely every pound spent on helping people trying to keep young people out of trouble is well spent. I meet such people in my constituency. The organiser of a football team came to see me last week and told me he would have to drop one of his teams because he cannot raise, through normal fund raising, the £40 or £50 per week needed to hire a bus to take young people to matches. The Government does not understand the difficulty experienced by people involved in community, youth and sporting activities, particularly in deprived communities, in raising funds to keep the show on the road. Those people who are trying to buy jerseys for football teams and to keep youth projects going receive no help from the Government or official sources and whatever limited access they had to fund raising has dried up now because people spend whatever discretionary income they have in attempting to win the lotto on Wednesdays or Saturdays.
It is time we stopped the abuse of national lottery money and that the money was spent on the areas for which it was intended. Every pound that would be spent in communities trying to help people to build a sense of respect and dignity in local communities, would save the Government £100.
In its approach to crime and justice the Government is spending money when it is too late, when the damage is done and the crime has been committed, when the young person is a criminal. The answer is more prison places, at enormous cost. There is no end to the money available to provide prison places and too little money to provide community facilities which might prevent the problem in the first instance. This is not simply a question of political ethics; it is at the core of the crime crisis we are discussing. Because the Government is so stingy in its support for communities it has to pour money into undoing the consequences by providing prisons.
The idea that communities are bound up with the problem of crime is not a new one. A very interesting article by Jeremy Seabrook in the 26 February 1993 issue of the New Statesman & Society addresses the sense of outrage that occurred in Britain after the killing of Jamie Bulger. The article examines what has happened to the ideology spawned by Margaret Thatcher, which many people here were quick to take up in an uncritical way, the idea that everything was about the individual, that there was no such thing as society, that individuals would interact in the marketplace and whoever had enough money to buy goods would buy them but whoever did not have enough money, that was tough luck for them — as Margaret Thatcher's psychic, Norman Tebitt, said, they could get on their bicycle and cycle south. That approach to society ends up in tragic events such as the Jamie Bulger case.
This article wonders at the idea that crime can be dealt with by various mechanical means such as security cameras. It points to the irony that in a shopping centre with security cameras, these cameras did not prevent the appalling crime — admittedly they helped in identifying those responsible for it. The writer of the article asks a very fundamental question. He states:
Security video cameras. What kind of security do cameras provide? Surely, if Bootle really were a close-knit community, as it has been portrayed, it would have no need of cameras. Security, if it comes from anywhere, must arise from the tenderness and vigilance of people committed to the daily protection of one another.
Fortunately, in most of this country there still exists that sense of tenderness and community spirit which this article says was missing in Bootle. However, we are in danger of losing it because the people maintaining it at local level are becoming increasingly frustrated and isolated by lack of support.
Radical new thinking is required to effectively tackle the rising crime problem in Ireland. For far too long the Government's approach has been dominated by a crime control philosophy which believes that crime must always be with us and that the answer is to police it, arrest it and lock it away. This approach is clearly not working, is costing too much and needs to be radically changed. Crime is on the increase. Offenders who have been imprisoned come out of prison to repeat the same kind of crime or commit new ones. Increasingly, the rights of the individual citizen are being curtailed by the menancing activities of a growing number of criminals.
New policies which understand the relationship between crime and society are necessary. These new policies can only be evolved if we have accurate information on crime and its causes, on which we can have an informed debate. Up to now, the debate on crime has been too much dominated by sound-bite and quick-fix solutions and not enough on analysis and informed discussion. This is why we need crime statistics and analysis.
Democratic Left will be supporting this Bill as we fully acknowledge the need for much more detailed information to measure and analyse the levels of crime. Whether the way to tackle the problem is the bureau suggested by Fine Gael in this Bill, or whether it should be done in some other way is a matter of debate; the important thing is that there should be an acknowledgment of the need for more information if we are to successfully tackle the crime problem.
Our record in regard to statistics on crime is not good. Some information is available from the annual report of the Garda Commissioner and there is quite an amount of detail in the annual report on prisons and places of detention — when they are eventually produced. Until a few months ago the most recent report on prisons was for 1988 — six years old. While the reports for 1989, 1990 and 1991 have since been published, this record does not suggest any sense of urgency with reports which are generally regarded as being the most important source of statistical and other information of the penal system.
The distinguished criminologist, Dr. Paul O'Mahony, author of Crime and Punishment in Ireland and a former servant of the Department of Justice, has been strongly critical of the lack of priority given to the compilation of statistical information on crime. Writing in The Irish Times late last year he said:
The only solution to our present confusion and ignorance concerning crime and punishment is a greatly increased investment in scientific inquiry into crime, by which is meant both the gathering of new information and the careful analysis and rational synthesis of all available evidence.
Dr. O'Mahony was critical of what he described as the culture of secrecy surrounding the Department of Justice and noted that the Government was almost unique among developed nations in devoting next to nothing to research into criminal justice. He noted that there was no university department of criminology and that there was no research unit attached to the Department of Justice.
Clearly these shortcomings in the system will have to be addressed if we are to successfully tackle the crime problem. However, even the limited information available, and the unfortunate personal experiences of many of our citizens, give an indication of the scale of the crime problem.
What we need is an informed debate on crime and we can have that only on the basis of up to date data. Everybody has an opinion on crime and these opinions are frequently expressed in strident terms, very often in extreme terms. We need to transfer discussion on crime from the notion as to who has the latest bright idea that is likely to capture a headline in an evening paper to the area of serious debate. We live in a very complex society. There is no point reminiscing, as Deputy McGahon did last week, about the twenties and thirties, pointing out that people were poor, hungry, honest and decent at that time, I am sure they were, but the past always looks better in hindsight. We often forget that even in those days society was not free from crime. However, what society was free from then, and is not now, is the extent to which people are inundated through television programmes with messages about the quality of life, standards of life, material goods and possessions of one kind or another, the kind of normal lifestyle to which we should all aspire. In between the television programmes this type of lifestyle is advertised in a very aggressive way.
It is all very well to look back at the 1920s and 1930s and say people were poor and honest. However, many poor people now can never aspire to buy the commodities suggested to them in their living rooms day in, day out that they should have. If we have an arrangement whereby people are told through the media that this is the lifestyle to which they should aspire and these are the kinds of goods they should have and we cannot then provide them with the income with which to buy these goods through our employment, social welfare and income policies, we should not be surprised when some people end up concluding that the only way to get these goods is through some form of smash and grab. This does not justify crime, but we have to understand that this is the case.
The vast majority of people who find themselves in poor circumstances are law abiding and, unfortunately, are very often the first victims of crime. We have to understand that crime does not take place in a vacuum: aspects of our society and the way in which we organise our society contribute to the climate in which crime of one kind or another thrives. This matter has to be addressed.
The problem in Dublin needs special attention. The recently published crime figures show that the number of reported crimes in Dublin rose by 8 per cent in 1993, twice the rate of the increase in the rest of the country. This emphasises the need for additional Garda personnel and resources in Dublin. These official figures merely confirm what most people in Dublin know, that Dublin is experiencing a very serious crime wave. Dublin, which has just one third of the country's population, suffers more than half of all the crime. The crime rate in parts of Dublin is almost ten times that in some rural Garda divisions. What is of even more concern is that the detection rate in Dublin is generally the lowest in the country. What all this means is that if you live in or visit Dublin you are far more likely to be a victim of crime and the perpetrator has a much greater chance of getting away with the offence.
The people of Dublin are not getting a fair deal in the fight against crime, and the Minister must confront this problem. Dublin is seriously under-policed, and this is clearly adding to the problem. More than half of all reported crimes take place in Dublin, yet less than 4,000 gardaí, approximately one third of the Garda force, are deployed here. Many Dublin based gardaí are deployed on special duties such as providing protection for VIPs, embassies, public buildings, etc., and are, therefore, not available for routine policing duties.
Such as apprehending those who rob the hubcaps off the car of an Opposition spokesperson.
More gardaí and resources must be allocated to fighting the unacceptable level of crime in Dublin. The most effective way of combating crime is to put more gardaí on the streets to deal with the problems people in Dublin are experiencing. Juvenile crime is a major part of the problem in Dublin and this clearly emphasises the need for more resources for the juvenile liaison scheme. I am stressing the particular problems in Dublin because it does not take a genius to work out that the level of crime is related to the number of gardaí. On the basis of the figures supplied by the Minister for Justice some months ago, the numbers of gardaí per head of population in Dublin is approximately half what it is in the rest of the country.
There is a need to look at the level of policing in Dublin and in doing so — this comes back to my earlier point about the need for new approaches to the crime problem — to try to strengthen the concept of community policing and the involvement of the community in the entire policing exercise. The neighbourhood watch scheme has been in operation for many years. There was a great deal of enthusiasm, particularly among those involved in co-ordinating schemes, the community gardaí and so on when the neighbourhood watch scheme started. People had very high expectations that the scheme would contribute significantly to a reduction in the level of crime.
There is no doubt that there has been a significant reduction in the level of crime in areas with good neighbourhood watch schemes, but it is a pity that the community policing pilot schemes under the neighbourhood watch scheme, have not been built upon. One cannot simply establish a neighbourhood watch scheme and hope it will solve the problem or set up a community policing scheme when in one large station there is one community garda to cover a big area.
The concept of community policing needs to be taken a step further. I have often wondered about the wisdom of concentrating all Garda resources, particularly in Dublin, in large modern Garda stations where contact with the public is mainly through a fleet of cars, motorcycles, etc. While I appreciate and support the need for good modern working conditions for the Garda and for economies of scale in terms of centralising modern technology and police and detection methods in large Garda stations it has meant that gardaí have been moved further from the community.
While I would like to see more gardaí deployed in Dublin, I would not like to see them deployed in existing stations. The community Garda strength needs to be increased, and gardaí deployed in local communities and housing estates and based in smaller stations. Consideration should be given to a system tried out successfully by some Church Orders of deploying priests and nuns in the community when people no longer visited the big convents, monasteries or presbyteries. The Minister should look at the problems of under-policing in Dublin and consider appointing more community police.
I wish to share my time with Deputy Kemmy. I compliment Deputy Mitchell on retaining his Front Bench position. He was not one of those purged today, so obviously he has been rewarded for backing the winner in the latest power struggle.
And for his excellent performances.
This Bill fails to address the fundamental causes of crime which are economic and social. Factors such as high unemployment, social deprivation, poor housing and the lack of adequate educational opportunities contribute to increased levels of crime. It has been shown there is a definite correlation between social conditions and crime levels.
The Programme for a Partnership Government and this year's budget address the causes of crime. This year £129 million, and an additional £12 million, have been allocated for local authority housing. Between 1993 and 1994 a total of 1,000 local authority houses will be built in Dublin which will provide modern accommodation for people who lack these facilities. There is also an increase in the amount allocated for refurbishment of flat complexes in the inner cities. This work is now being done. There are also urban renewal projects underway in Dublin city and throughout the country. All these measures contribute to tackling the problem of crime by providing people with a better community, improved housing conditions, better social conditions and improved living standards. The injection of funds into house building, refurbishment and renewal will create an additional 14,000 jobs in the construction industry which will also help to tackle the problem of unemployment and the related problems of social discontent.
This year £98 million has been allocated for the school building programme. In providing the nation's children with improved educational opportunities, training and skills we will equip them for the future so that they will be able to take up employment and not turn to a life of crime. Studies have shown that children who drop out of school at an early age and who do not complete their primary education invariably end up in a life of crime. It is important to provide the best education opportunities possible for our children.
In the area of health care, additional funds have been provided to tackle the problem of hospital waiting lists and problems in the health services generally.
I particularly welcome the Government's crime package which is delivering on the commitment in the Programme for a Partnership Government to tackling crime. I compliment the Minister for Justice, Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn, on this imaginative initiative which in the future will show benefits. I also welcome the decision to recruit an additional 407 gardaí in 1994. There are two Garda Districts in my constituency, Raheny and Coolock, and for the past four or five years gardaí who have been promoted, transferred or retired have not been replaced. The gardaí are undermanned and this was having an effect on their capability to tackle the increasing crime problem. This new intake of gardaí will help them return to a situation where they can effectively police our community. The decision to recruit an additional 350 gardaí over the next three to four years will maintain the Garda force at this year's level. That is necessary because studies have shown that over the coming years, quite a number of gardaí will retire due to garda intake 25 or 30 years ago.
The initiative to recruit an additional 200 clerical and administrative staff will release the same number of gardaí into the community to police our streets and do the job for which they have been trained. This is an important initiative. Many of the duties which the Garda have been undertaking such as clerical work, typing etc., should have been done by civilians. I also welcome the proposal to recruit civilians with experience in personnel, human resources, financial control, organisation and development and public relations. Any modern police force must recruit specialists who have experience in other areas of the economy and enterprise and use that experience to modernise and streamline the Garda Síochána who have given a valuable service.
The provision of increased resources for information technology is important. We live in an age where everything is done by computer. Even criminals have access to the most sophisticated communications devices and the Garda must be equipped to deal with that. It needs a modern managment information system which computers can provide to provide up-to-date information. The computerisation of fingerprints would allow the Garda to make on the spot checks of persons who have been arrested and give them access to vital information which would enable them deal effectively with crime in a modern society.
I welcome the upgrading of technology. I understand gardaí are using handset radios and equipment introduced in the mid-1980s and which will soon be obsolete. The introduction of new, modern communications equipment will enable gardaí to respond effectively to the problems of crime.
I also welcome the community based initiatives contained in the Government's programme. One or two pilot schemes in the Tallaght area have been successful and it is intended to set up an additional four or five projects. Last night I attended a meeting in my constituency in Kilbarrack where a local group of tenants met corporation officials to discuss management of the refurbishment of their flat complex. Earlier in the day they visited Ballymun to see how the refurbishment was progressing. The corporation official who had taken them there had no transport so they travelled in a Garda minibus. That is an indication of the level of co-operation between the Garda and local communities. It is not uncommon for a local community group who wish to visit some other part of the city to be provided with transport by the Garda. It is important to have that kind of co-operation in areas of disadvantage where the communities are lacking in resources and where the various agencies, local authorities, health boards and Garda, can assist each other to improve the fabric of life. It is important that the Garda break down barriers of alienation that may exist between communities in areas of our city and in the country generally. These type of initiatives are important in tackling crime and in bringing communities into contact with the Garda.
The measures to combat fraud, in particular white collar fraud, are welcome. We are all aware of the person who goes into a bank wearing a mask and using a gun and who robs £10,000. As a result of white collar crime, vast sums of money can be transferred electronically almost without notice. It does not involve a holdup and there is little trace of these transactions. It is important that the Garda have the expertise, equipment and facilities to audit and check these transactions where fraud takes place using modern technology. The commitment to provide information technology equipment and other expertise to the Garda to combat this serious problem is welcome.
I welcome the provision of 210 additional prison places. We are all well aware that often there was not sufficient prison space to detain those sentenced. I welcome the provision of the extra 50 probation and welfare officers and support staff. Such staff are important to assist those released from prison early into the community under the supervision of probation and welfare officers to ensure that they do not revert to a life of crime. Any investment in that area is money well spent particularly if it ensures that when first offenders are released there will be some liaison between them and the probation and welfare services.
The extra resources for the Judiciary to ensure that the perpetrators of crime are brought before the courts and dealt with quickly are welcome. For too long people who were released on bail awaiting a court hearing committed further crimes. Any measures which speed that process are to be welcomed. These Government initiatives will address the causes of crime in our society.
I join Deputy Seán Kenny in saying "well done" to Deputy Mitchell on surviving the big upheaval in the Fine Gael Front Bench, and coming through unscathed, almost enhanced, which is no mean feat. I congratulate Deputy Jim Mitchell who perhaps did go for the wrong option on this occasion but who received a consolation prize of being asked by his party leader to stand in the European Elections in the Dublin constituency. It was a day of celebration for both Deputies who, though they backed two different horses, came out on top, which was no mean achievement. It would be churlish of me to allow this occasion pass without saying "well done" to Deputy Gay Mitchell.
This debate is timely and useful. There should be regular debates in this House on crime because the public often comment how irrelevant are such debates to the real issues within our society. Crime is at the very heart of problems in Irish society today. Society will gain from this debate. However, we do need accurate figures to inform us, and the public, on how crime continues to increase in our society. Assumptions, myths, guesswork and speculation serve no purpose unless arguments and discussions are based on facts. There have been more than 100,000 indictable crime here in the past year — a big number of crimes in any society — despite the fact that per capita we have the highest number of police officers of any other OECD member state. When one thinks about them, they are chilling figures.
Crimes are committed against people and against property, especially public property. Indeed, we are facing a wave of crime and vandalism in our society, with the destruction of public property to be witnessed everywhere, especially of public housing. It is a sad reflection on and indictment of our society that we damage property, public parks, public housing and amenities provided for the public. Such property has been vandalised, destroyed and pulled apart. At a time of scarce public resources it is a sad indictment of all of us that so much public property is destroyed and wasted in this manner.
The Minister of State at the Department of justice, Deputy O'Dea, is well aware of the incidence of crime in Limerick also. I wish to relate a brief story for the benefit of the House about a young person who stole a car from the southern part of our city and set fire to it close to a public leisure complex. Not only did the car burn out, but the leisure complex also causing almost £1 million worth of damage, depriving a whole society of recreational and leisure facilities, in addition to communities, business concerns, sports teams and so on. The Minister will also be aware of the vandalism that takes place in cemeteries which were sacrosanct at one time. There have been attacks on people, especially the elderly, and damage caused to railway lines and public parks also in our city. As far as I am concerned, it is mindless crime but we cannot run away from it; it has to be admitted, confronted and dealt with.
We have all been perturbed about the growth of violent crime in our society, with armed robberies, kidnappings, blackmail, protection rackets. Almost on the doorstep of this House, there are protection rackets and money is demanded from business people weekly. At one time we only saw such activity on the Hollywood movies. Now it is in Dublin. House breaking and attacks on old people were totally unacceptable in our society at one time, but are a regular occurrence in all our cities and towns. More and varied types of petty crimes are being committed.
I agree with some of the points made in the debate such as that unemployment in urban areas is a contributory factor. In two large housing estates in Limerick, approximately 7,000 people live in each and up to 85 per cent of those eligible for work are unemployed. They have no stake in society and no meaningful participation in the world around them. That is wrong. Young people who grow up in such marginalised societies must be given better example, leadership, be involved in that society and must be brought in from the margins. The FÁS training and retaining programmes offer enormous opportunity in that respect. FÁS programmes rather than being held in a centre away from such areas would be more meaningful if held within those communities. They would do something tangible for the people to whom they could relate. We have lost a great opportunity in that respect but it is not too late to change.
Education, especially adult education, has much to offer. For far too long, adult education has been the Cinderella of Irish education. It is time it was fully exploited to benefit the people who live in those areas. We must experiment, endeavour to find a better way forward with better policing. I heard Deputy Gilmore plead for more gardaí. In that respect the fact that we have more gardaí per capita than any other OECD member state is worthy of consideration. Indeed, quality policing is more important than quantity. We can also benefit and learn from experiences in other countries since prevention is better than cure. For example, Garda training must be upgraded.
I was impressed recently by a North Tipperary film made by Gerry Gregg and his production crew on the training of gardaí in Templemore. I was impressed by the standard of the recruits and the quality of the training. The film was broad-based, modern, good and offered much hope in our society in that those young men and women portrayed in the film were embarking on a career in the Garda Síochána. We need such people in the force since gardaí have a major role to play in the fight against crime. While we might not have fully realised it, the gardaí are the ambassadors not alone of the Minister and her Department but also of our society and must play a manyfaceted role. They should never underestimate their task or think they are invisible; sometimes public officials think they are invisible; they are not and are observed by all of us.
I am also in favour of providing adequate equipment and facilities for the Garda, giving them the very best we can offer, even if it comes from other countries, so that they do not have to complain about lack of equipment in fulfilling their task. In addition, we should provide them with fair laws, with a balance struck between fighting crime and maintaining civil liberties. More civilians should be recruited to work in Garda stations; it is wrong to have gardaí undertaking tasks that could be done by others. The task of the Garda is fighting crime out on the streets, not engaging in tasks for which they may not be suited and which could be undertaken just as easily, if not better, by others.
The attitude of the Garda can influence us all, especially criminals who can be discouraged by their serious, professional, determined attitude in facing them. That would do much in the prevention of crime. There is need for a more enlightened attitude in our prisons and we must not be deflected from endeavouring to rehabilitate criminals. People might laugh and say I am naive but we must always try to change people. Cynicism and despair have no place in fighting crime. We must face up to the problem in an open, honest way. The courts must also respond fairly. The Department of Justice has overall responsibility for laying down guidelines and regulations. We cannot turn back the clock, we must face reality and learn from other countries.
I welcome the debate. Deputies are well aware of how people view crime. The saddest fact is that old people live in fear of attack, their homes are violated when they are broken into by people wearing balaclavas and carrying arms. To read about crime in a newspaper is one thing but to confront it in your own home is another.
We must ensure there is a civilised framework within which people can live and we must lock evil people away. We must face the fact that people fear for their lives and examine how we can prevent and combat crime. Young unemployed people in large housing estates turn to drinking cider, wine and glue sniffing. They have opted out of the life but they must be brought back to the fold and given some kind of future. If we do that the level of crime will fall. In the meantime it is important that the matter be raised on a regular basis in the House and that Deputies speak out on behalf of the electorate.
People sometimes feel their voices are not heard. A colleague of mine in Limerick retired from the corporation after a lifetime's work and was given a bungalow in the city. It was broken into 12 times, that may sound strange but it is true. Every item was taken, including the clock he received as a retirement present, eventually his tools and bedclothes were taken. In the end, I sought a transfer for him to another part of the city. That is totally unacceptable and we must set our face against such behaviour. We must guarantee people the right to live in their homes in peace and security.
I thank those who contributed to the debate and who were good enough to say kind things about me. I was disappointed with the protective attitude of some Government contributors. Where are the Charlie McCreevys and the backbenchers who are prepared to speak their mind rather than read a script? I understand Ministers with collective responsibility sticking together but others should have the courage of their convictions and not be like sheep behind the Government.
This is an important Bill. Last week the Minister said that my proposal could imply that crime statistics are not measured accurately and she strongly refutes any inference that the Garda suppress reports of crime to make the figures smaller. I did not make any such allegation. It is typical of the closed mind attitude of the Department of Justice that it would try to turn things around. The statistics do not reflect the true level of crime, they reflect the level of reported crime. There is almost a hope that people will stop reporting crime so that the statistics could be shown to be lower than they are.
The Minister also said it would be unrealistic to separate the functions of recording and reporting crime from the investigation of crime. Who said that? The person who wrote her speech? I speak for 66 Members of Parliament, criminologists, the Whitaker Commission and the Law Reform Commission who all made similar points.
The Minister said she had a reliable guide to the needs of the public and public representatives through the regular requests for information received in her Department and through the continuous demands by Members of the House via the parliamentary question system. If one were to telephone the Department of Justice and ask them the time they would check it in triplicate before replying. It is the most secretive of all Departments. Why not identify the true level of crime and deal with it in a professional way instead of pretending there is no problem? The Minister said the people who fail to report crime may have good reasons for doing so. They may be prepared to inform a third party while remaining opposed to reporting the crime to the Garda. People have stopped reporting crime because they have no confidence in the system. If one reports the theft of a bicycle or hub-cap the chances of getting a positive response are slim.
Under section 30 (2) of the National Statistics Act the Central Statistics Office will not have a statutory right of access to records pertaining to a court, the Garda Síochána or the prisons administration. The Minister said that under the Statistics Act, 1993, there is provision for Government Departments, including her own, to invite the CSO to inspect and analyse official statistics along the lines envisaged by me. She said that following the recent meeting with the Director of the CSO it was decided to set up a special study group to consider how best to co-ordinate statistical data. That meeting took place almost immediately after I produced this Bill and brought it into the House. Every time I press for something to be done the Minister sets up a committee or a commission or somehow pushes it further down the road while pretending to do something about the problem. She goes on to say:
It would be wasteful if it were to operate in parallel to, and duplicate everything already done by the gardaí . . .
I have not suggested duplicating anything being done by the Garda Síochána. I have suggested that an assistant commissioner of the Garda Síochána should be on this bureau. Every member of that bureau is already on the public service pay roll and it would not cost the taxpayer one extra penny. This speech is not worth commenting on further but I want to reply to those points which the Minister made because I would not like to leave them on the record unanswered.
I agree with Deputy Eamon Walsh who said graphs would not solve crime problems. If we had some idea of the true level of crime, the categories of crime and the levels of crime in those categories from period to period we would have some chance of dealing with the problem. At present statistics do not exist. My proposal is supported by both Whitaker and the Law Reform Commission. In 1985 the Whitaker report on the penal system concluded that given the state of the criminal justice statistics, the frequency of complex crimes cannot be adequately measured. It says:
This lack of information is not merely a nuisance which hinders research, it is a feature of the criminal justice system that decisions are taken at one stage in ignorance of what is occuring elsewhere in the system.
The recent Law Reform Commission report on sentencing states:
Unfortunately, this situation remains unchanged. Any provisional recommendations in this paper or recommendations ultimately made in our report will be rendered comparatively ineffective by the absence of proper information. Details of every sentence imposed in every court and of every instance of election for trial venue by judge, prosecution or accused should be recorded and speedily retrievable.
Pointing out that it would not be possible to attain this by relying on occasional research the commission recommends the setting up of a distinct national office or agency, staffed by experts, to conduct the necessary research and provide statistics.
Fine Gael is concerned at the lack of adequate research, the lack of this independent body and the lack of statistics. There is no research unit attached to the Department of Justice. The proposed national bureau of crime statistics would be that unit. The bureau would be made up of people whose integrity cannot be called into question—the Director of the Central Statistics Office, the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Accounting Officer of the Director of Public Prosecutions Office, an Assistant Garda Commissioner, a governor of the prisons, a judge of the High Court and a representative of the probation service of the Department of Justice.
They are the people to bring together the court statistics, prison statistics and crime statistics in one bureau so that we, the legislators, the Garda Síochána, as protectors of the law, and the Judiciary, those who hand down sentences, will have available to them the sentences which work and are efficient. Does anybody know the effectiveness of community court orders? Does anybody know how effective or otherwise is the procedure of suspending part of a sentence and bringing people back to court after three or four months to see how they are getting on? If some judges knew how effective sentences imposed by others are they could base their sentence on something more scientific than the ritual six months or £1,000.
Much has been made of the Minister's so-called crime package of £66 million which apparently will come out of the next five years' Government spending on the Justice Vote. The vote for the Department of Justice this year is £550 million. I presume that because of inflation it will increase by 2 per cent or 3 per cent during the next few years. This sum of £66 million is more realistic and easier to sell than the £100 million which a former Minister for Justice, Deputy Collins, announced. All we got from that £100 million was £1,000 provided as a Token Estimate for the Department of Justice Vote for aeroplanes and helicopters which have never flown, have never been seen and never will be seen. I wish to quote from an article in The Irish Times of 19 January 1994, written jointly by Mr. Tom O'Malley, a lecturer in law at UCG, and Mr. Ian O'Donnell, research officer, University of Oxford Centre for Criminological Research, which states:
Briefly and simply stated, the Government's attitude appears to be that the optimum strategy for the criminal justice system is one of "crime control"— that crime is likely to increase inexorably, and the best that can be done is to detect it with the maximum efficiency and lock up as many offenders as possible. Few governments in Europe are in a worse position to make such assumptions and predictions because few governments, if any, have devoted such inadequate resources to basic research on crime and delinquency.
I wish to quote from Dr. Paul O'Mahony in his book Crime and Punishment, page 207, on the mysterious criminal justice process, which states:
At this point a complete and fully elaborated understanding of the reality of crime and punishment in Ireland is at best a distant and elusive goal. There are a number of reasons for this. First, we lack much basic information about the criminal justice process in all its phases from the commission of crime to release from prison. Such information is a prerequisite of a full and proper understanding and appraisal of the Irish criminal justice process.
Second, much of the information we do have is inconsistent and even selfcontradictory to a level which makes drawing confident conclusions impossible or, at any rate, unwise.
All those sound, independent sources support every argument I have made for the creation of a national bureau of crime statistics. The only thing wrong is that it did not come from a Fianna Fáil Deputy, it came from a member of the Opposition. This is one of a number of very worthwhile proposals we have put forward. How can we propose to deal with the drugs problem — drugs which are being sold openly on the streets — and the associated problems of handbag snatching, burglary and beatings which are taking place in order to feed that habit? How can we deal with the problems of car stealing, the need for car locks, car alarms, house alarms, shutters and so on?
The elderly in rural areas, who never experienced such a problem, are frightened and intimidated, because the younger population who were there to protect them have emigrated and they are being preyed on. People in rural areas are moving to towns and villages due to fear. What is to be done about the muggings? There was the case of the man in Dublin 8 who is in his mid-seventies and who, having been hit with a hammer, will close his shop and move into a home? There is also the case of the 88-year old lady in Drimnagh who is terrified by the groups who congregate outside her house every night forming an audience for those in stolen cars? What about the question of burglary? What about the ease with which people can obtain guns for crime and the violence which is commonplace in the community?
How can we start the fight back against crime if all we have are public relations exercises? Every time a half ounce of drugs is found the Minister is being photographed with it, yet the city is awash with drugs. We will never know the true extent of the problem unless we measure it accurately; we will never tackle that problem unless we know precisely the level of the problem. We will never establish the level of that problem without a national bureau of crime statistics. In any plan we put together to deal with crime we must know precisely the level of the problem and whether we are having success in tackling it under the various headings. We must have procedures for reporting from time to time precisely what our success has been in tackling the problem. We spend £550 million a year on the criminal justice system and that money will not be targeted adequately until we have the facts and figures to deal with the problem. I commend this Bill to the House.
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 43; Níl, 72.
Tá
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Boylan, Andrew.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Carey, Donal.
- Clohessy, Peadar.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Connor, John.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Creed, Michael.
- Currie, Austin.
- Deasy, Austin.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Dukes, Alan M.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Finucane, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Harney, Mary.
- Harte, Paddy.
- Higgins, Jim.
- Hogan, Philip.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Lowry, Michael.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McGrath, Paul.
- Mitchell, Gay.
- Mitchell, Jim.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Nealon, Ted.
- O'Donnell, Liz.
- O'Keeffe, Jim.
- O'Malley, Desmond J.
- Owen, Nora.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Sheehan, P.J.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
Níl
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Blaney, Neil T.
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Broughan, Tommy.
- Browne, John (Wexford).
- Burke, Raphael P.
- Burton, Joan.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Costello, Joe.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Davern, Noel.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Ellis, John.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Brian.
- Fitzgerald, Eithne.
- Fitzgerald, Liam.
- Flood, Chris.
- Foley, Denis.
- Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
- Gallagher, Pat.
- Pattison, Séamus.
- Penrose, William.
- Power, Seán.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
- Hughes, Séamus.
- Hyland, Liam.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Kemmy, Jim.
- Kenneally, Brendan.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Lenoard, Jimmy.
- Martin, Micheál.
- McDwell, Derek.
- Moffatt, Tom.
- Morely, P.J.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Moynihan-Cronnin, Breeda.
- Mulvihill, John.
- Nolan, M.J.
- O'Dea, Willie.
- O'Donoghue, John.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Keeffe, Ned.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- O'Shea, Brian.
- O'Sullivan, Todday.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Spring, Dick.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Taylor, Mervyn.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Walsh, Eamon.
- Walsh, Joe.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies E. Kenny and Boylan; Níl, Deputies Dempsey and Ferris.
Question declared lost.