Vol. 493 No. 2
7 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to introduce legislation for the proposed licensing of the security industry as promised in the Dáil debate in Private Members' time on 24 and 25 March 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15428/98]
9 Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to introduce legislation for the proposed licensing of the security industry as promised in the Dáil debate in Private Members' time on 24 and 25 March 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15424/98]
23 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to introduce legislation for the proposed licensing of the security industry as promised in the Dáil debate in Private Members' time on 24 and 25 March 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15429/98]
36 Mr. L. Burke asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to introduce legislation for the proposed licensing of the security industry as promised in the Dáil debate in Private Members' time on 24 and 25 March 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15427/98]
37 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to introduce legislation for the proposed licensing of the security industry as promised in the Dáil debate in Private Members' time on 24 and 25 March 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15431/98]
88 Mr. Currie asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to introduce legislation for the proposed licensing of the security industry as promised in the Dáil debate in Private Members' time on 24 and 25 March 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15430/98]
96 Mr. Flanagan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans, if any, he has to introduce legislation for the proposed licensing of the security industry as promised in the Dáil debate in Private Members' time on 24 and 25 March 1998; and if he will make a statement on the matter [15426/98].
I porpose to take Questions Nos. 7, 9, 23, 36, 37, 88 and 96 together.
As I have indicated previously in the House, I am examining, in consultation with my Government colleagues, the report of the Consultative Group on the Private Security Industry. The consultative group considered a broad range of issues across the private security industry and the report recognised that there are complex problems to be addressed in any proposals to regulate the industry.
It recommended that no single solution will prevent, alleviate or solve the problems and proposed that the best way forward is through a combination of measures which have significant implications for a broad range of Government Departments, as well as for the Garda Síochána. In addition, the group made a number of recommendations which raised issues of a legal nature.
The process of consultation with my Government colleagues, and my examination of their views, is almost complete. When I have completed my examination in the near future, it is my intention to bring proposals to Government which will recommend an appropriate course of action.
The consultative group and the group appointed by the previous Minister reported last December. We are midway through the year and we are still at the consultation stage. In the past we have seen urgent legislation being speedily introduced. Has the Minister recently met the Irish Security Federation? Is the federation in favour of dealing with door supervisors or bouncers in the context of legislation? Has the Minister decided on the heads of a Bill and, if so, has he decided to bring them to Cabinet?
There is no question of a delay in addressing this issue. However, there are significant implications for a range of Government agencies arising from the report. Also, there are complex legal issues which have not been previously addressed. We have consulted a number of other Departments and have received the views, conclusions and recommendations of the report. My intention, following completion of a detailed consideration of the report, is to bring proposals to Government, I hope, in the very near future. I agreed to a request for a meeting from the private security industry. We discussed the matter in detail and I explained the position. I also explained why I was not in a position to accept the Deputy's Private Members' Bill: there is no need to go over those reasons again.
I favour regulation of the security industry and it is my intention in the near future to bring proposals to Government and ensure legislation is drafted once the Government agrees certain proposals. I will then not be found wanting in pushing ahead with the publication of legislation.
Is the Irish Security Federation in favour of licensing door supervisors in the context of the proposed legislation? Has the Minister received approval from the Government and the Departments — I would appreciate information on the Departments concerned — for the introduction of legislation which will incorporate different aspects of their views? From previous experience we know that when more than one Department is involved, officials may say a particular route cannot be pursued. Do the relevant Ministers agree the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform may introduce and implement legislation with the backing of the other Departments?
No disquiet was expressed to me by the representatives of the security industry whom I met concerning Deputy Farrelly's Bill. I explained why I wanted to introduce a comprehensive security Bill. The Departments with responsibility in these areas are in favour of the proposals in the report of the consultative group in the context of bringing certain elements of the industry out of the black economy.
There are significant issues relating to health and safety in the industry which must be tackled with a view to improving the conditions of employment in it. I assure the Deputy that there has been extensive consultation and the views expressed have been deeply considered. It is my intention to proceed, in the not too distant future, to bring proposals to Government in order that the issue may be further progressed.
Does the Minister intend establishing through the legislation a separate inspectorate to deal with applications for licences? Every day we wait for the legislation to be brought forward there is huge pressure being put on young people by a small number working in the industry in the context of peddling drugs, something which is known throughout the country. Will the Minister give a commitment that the legislation will come before the House in autumn to avoid and reduce the pressure on young people? This pressure is being brought to bear in night clubs in many parts of the country.
This is a growing industry and it operates in a very sensitive area. Regarding an inspectorate, the scope for self regulation, which is effectively what currently exists, is somewhat limited. I am also conscious that should the Government agree to legislation — I hope it will and anticipate this happening — it will take time for the provisions to take effect. I will continue to explore the potential for progress on a cross departmental basis. However, it would not be possible to give a precise deadline to the Deputy regarding when the legislation will be ready. It would be wrong for me to do so as it would tie me to a date and it may not be possible to adhere to it due to the raft of legislation being processed by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Resources can only stretch so far, and the Deputy will appreciate the Department carries a very significant legislative programme. However, I will continue to do everything possible to expedite the matter.
The Minister must remember that this affects young people.
(Mayo): Does the Minister acknowledge that, of all industries, the security industry is wide open to exploitation? People are involved in the protection and so-called securing of large volumes of money. Yet, there is no regulation, supervision, standards or character references. The entire industry is wide open in the context of allowing criminal elements enter it and organise a major heist. I ask the Minister to try to prioritise the legislation, particularly in view of the number of decommissioned paramilitaries. This matter should be a priority for the next term.
In the interim, does the Garda carry out its own checks in relation to the bona fides of those operating in the private security industry?
Self regulation exists which I said is limited in scope. In the past there have allegations that criminal elements have infiltrated the security industry to assist in organising and orchestrating robberies. It is for this reason that there is a real need to regulate the industry as quickly as possible. Developments are also ongoing at European level with regard to the publication of standards for the various aspects of the industry. It is very important that we do not lose sight of the fact that many reputable companies operate within the industry and provide a valuable and professional service. They comprise a majority of those involved in the security industry.
Does the Minister expect that training will be provided for through the legislation?
That is a matter for discussion on another day. I would not like to anticipate the level of training which might be required. For example, if we proceed on the basis that the regulations which will be put in place on a statutory basis will provide for the establishment of a self-regulatory body, I anticipate that such a body would decide what standards and qualifications should be put in place.
